DOCSLIB.ORG

Urban Stream Restoration Practices: an Initial Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Urban Stream Restoration Practices: an Initial Assessment Urban Stream Restoration Practices: An Initial Assessment Final Report Kenneth Brown Center for Watershed Protection 8391 Main Street Ellicott City, MD 21043 For: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds and Region V October, 2000 URBAN STREAM RESTORATION PRACTICES Acknowledgments This assessment was made possible through a grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The project team would like to extend our gratitude to Don Brady with the U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds and Tom Davenport with U.S. EPA, Region V, for their support of this project. The project team would like to extend our appreciation to the many individuals who contributed information, time and resources to make this project possible. Specifically, the project team would like to acknowledge Dave Knorr of Environmental Systems Analysis, Chin Lin of the Baltimore County Department of Environmental Resources and Management, Shane Brooks of the University of Maryland, Todd Jeneski of the City of Rockville, Tom Price of the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Don Roseboom of the Illinois State Water Survey, Susan Jacobs and Robert Shreeve of the Maryland State Highway Administration, Steve Nelson of the Carrol County Bureau of Planning, John Galli of the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments, Tim Schueler of Environmental Quality Resources, and Charles Hegburg of KCI, Inc. The author would also like to thank the staff of the Center for Watershed Protection for their help in collecting field data, with special thanks to Heather Holland for her help in preparing this document: Donna Boring Ted Brown Deb Caraco Rich Claytor Karen Cappiella Hye Yeong Kwon Tom Schueler Paul Sturm Laura Thomson Rebecca Winer Alex Yeboah Jennifer Zielinski 1 URBAN STREAM RESTORATION PRACTICES 2 URBAN STREAM RESTORATION PRACTICES Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Limitations of the Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Report Organization ....................................................................................................................................... 12 2.0 Background ..................................................................................................................... 13 2.1 The Effects of Urbanization on Stream Channels .......................................................................................... 13 2.2 Past Management of Urban Streams .............................................................................................................. 15 3.0 Study Design ................................................................................................................... 17 3.1 Project Selection ........................................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.1 Project Selection Criteria ................................................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Final Project Selection ..................................................................................................................... 18 3.2 Assessment Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 18 3.2.1 Stream Restoration Practice Design Groups ........................................................................................ 18 3.2.2 Assessment Protocol and Rationale .................................................................................................... 23 3.2.3 Data Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 26 4.0 Results and Discussion .................................................................................................. 27 4.1 Bank Protection Practices ............................................................................................................................ 27 4.1.1 Rootwad Revetments .......................................................................................................................... 31 4.1.2 Imbricated Rip-Rap .............................................................................................................................. 32 4.1.3 Boulder Revetments ............................................................................................................................ 35 4.1.4 Lunkers ................................................................................................................................................ 37 4.1.5 A-Jacks ................................................................................................................................................ 39 4.2 Grade Control Practices ............................................................................................................................... 40 4.2.1 Rock Vortex Weirs ................................................................................................................................42 4.2.2 Rock Cross Vane .................................................................................................................................. 43 4.2.3 Rock Weirs .......................................................................................................................................... 44 4.2.4 Step Pools ........................................................................................................................................... 44 4.2.5 Log Drops and V-Log Drops ............................................................................................................... 47 4.3 Flow Deflection/Concentration Practices .................................................................................................... 49 4.3.1 Wing Deflectors - Single and Double .................................................................................................. 49 4.3.2 Log Vanes ............................................................................................................................................ 52 4.3.3 Rock Vanes - Straight Vanes and J-vanes............................................................................................ 52 4.3.4 Cut-off Sills .......................................................................................................................................... 54 4.3.5 Linear Deflectors ................................................................................................................................. 54 4.4 Bank Stabilization Practices ......................................................................................................................... 56 4.4.1 Coir Fiber Logs .................................................................................................................................... 56 4.4.2 Live Fascines ....................................................................................................................................... 58 4.4.3 Brush Mattresses ................................................................................................................................ 61 4.4.4 Bank Regrading and Vegetative Stabilization ...................................................................................... 61 5.0 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 64 5.1 Bank Protection Practice Recommendations ............................................................................................... 64 5.1.1 Rootwad Revetment Recommendations .............................................................................................. 65 5.1.2 Imbricated Rip-rap Recommendations ................................................................................................. 66 5.1.3 Boulder Revetments Recommendations .............................................................................................. 67 5.1.4 Lunker Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 69 5.1.5 A-jacks Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 69 5.2 Grade Control Practice Recommendations ................................................................................................... 69 5.2.1 Rock Vortex Weir Recommendations ................................................................................................... 70 5.2.2 Rock Cross Vane Recommendations ................................................................................................... 70 3 URBAN STREAM RESTORATION PRACTICES 5.2.3 Rock Weir Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 73 5.2.4 Step Pool Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 73 5.2.5 Log Drop and V-Log Drop
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Hyporheic Handbook a Handbook on the Groundwater–Surface Water Interface and Hyporheic Zone for Environment Managers
    The Hyporheic Handbook A handbook on the groundwater–surface water interface and hyporheic zone for environment managers Integrated catchment science programme Science report: SC050070 The Environment Agency is the leading public body protecting and improving the environment in England and Wales. It’s our job to make sure that air, land and water are looked after by everyone in today’s society, so that tomorrow’s generations inherit a cleaner, healthier world. Our work includes tackling flooding and pollution incidents, reducing industry’s impacts on the environment, cleaning up rivers, coastal waters and contaminated land, and improving wildlife habitats. This report is the result of research funded by NERC and supported by the Environment Agency’s Science Programme. Published by: Dissemination Status: Environment Agency, Rio House, Waterside Drive, Released to all regions Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol, BS32 4UD Publicly available Tel: 01454 624400 Fax: 01454 624409 www.environment-agency.gov.uk Keywords: hyporheic zone, groundwater-surface water ISBN: 978-1-84911-131-7 interactions © Environment Agency – October, 2009 Environment Agency’s Project Manager: Joanne Briddock, Yorkshire and North East Region All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. Science Project Number: SC050070 The views and statements expressed in this report are those of the author alone. The views or statements Product Code: expressed in this publication do not necessarily SCHO1009BRDX-E-P represent the views of the Environment Agency and the Environment Agency cannot accept any responsibility for such views or statements. This report is printed on Cyclus Print, a 100% recycled stock, which is 100% post consumer waste and is totally chlorine free.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Screening Of
    Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Avenue 54 to Thermal Drop Structure Draft Environmental Impact Report / State Clearinghouse No. 2015111067 Appendices APPENDIX C Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report City of Coachella and Unincorporated Community of Thermal Submitted to: Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3120 Chicago Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, CA 92507 3 February 2016 Coachella Valley Water District C-1 Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report City of Coachella and Unincorporated Community of Thermal Riverside County, California Submitted to: Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Contact: John Criste (760) 341-4800 [email protected] Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3120 Chicago Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, CA 92507 Contact: John F. Green Senior Biologist (951) 369-8060 [email protected] 3 February 2016 Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & MSHCP Compliance Report February 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For the purposes of this assessment, analysis of the proposed Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC) Improvement Project, Phase I (project) could include the following: Extension of existing and construction of new concrete-lined channel/levee banks, a fully concrete-lined channel from Airport Boulevard to the Thermal Drop Structure near Avenue 58, and construction of a bypass channel or combinations thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 Open Channels
    Chapter 10 Open Channels Chapter 10 Open Channels Table of Contents 10-1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 10-1-1 Chapter Overview ............................................................................................................. 1 10-1-2 Design Flows .................................................................................................................... 1 10-1-3 Channel Types .................................................................................................................. 2 10-1-4 Sediment Loads ................................................................................................................ 5 10-1-5 Permitting and Regulations ............................................................................................... 6 10-2 Natural Stream Corridors ............................................................................................................... 7 10-2-1 Functions and Benefits of Natural Streams ...................................................................... 8 10-2-2 Effects of Urbanization ..................................................................................................... 9 10-2-3 Preserving Natural Stream Corridors .............................................................................. 11 10-3 Stream Restoration Principles .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage and Erosion Control Design Manual
    City of West Lake Hills Drainage and Erosion Control Design Manual May 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Applicability .................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Waivers ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Amending the Manual .................................................................................................. 1 1.5 References and Definition of Terms ............................................................................ 1 Chapter 2 Drainage Criteria .............................................................................................. 3 2.1 Permit Submittal Components ..................................................................................... 3 2.1.1 Preliminary Drainage Plan ......................................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Type I Development Submittal ................................................................................. 4 2.1.3 Type II Development Submittal ................................................................................ 4 2.1.4 Type III Development Submittal ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Streams in an Urbanizing World
    Freshwater Biology (2007) 52, 738–751 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01718.x Restoring streams in an urbanizing world EMILY S. BERNHARDT* AND MARGARET A. PALMER† *Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, U.S.A. †Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Solomons, MD, U.S.A. SUMMARY 1. The world’s population is increasingly urban, and streams and rivers, as the low lying points of the landscape, are especially sensitive to and profoundly impacted by the changes associated with urbanization and suburbanization of catchments. 2. River restoration is an increasingly popular management strategy for improving the physical and ecological conditions of degraded urban streams. In urban catchments, management activities as diverse as stormwater management, bank stabilisation, channel reconfiguration and riparian replanting may be described as river restoration projects. 3. Restoration in urban streams is both more expensive and more difficult than restoration in less densely populated catchments. High property values and finely subdivided land and dense human infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewer lines) limit the spatial extent of urban river restoration options, while stormwaters and the associated sediment and pollutant loads may limit the potential for restoration projects to reverse degradation. 4. To be effective, urban stream restoration efforts must be integrated within broader catchment management strategies. A key scientific and management challenge is to establish criteria for determining when the design options for urban river restoration are so constrained that a return towards reference or pre-urbanization conditions is not realistic or feasible and when river restoration presents a viable and effective strategy for improving the ecological condition of these degraded ecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER-6 Cross-Drainage and Drop Structures 6.1 Aqueducts and Canal Inlets and Outlets 6.1.1 Introduction
    Cross-Drainage and Drop Structures CHAPTER-6 Cross-Drainage and Drop Structures 6.1 Aqueducts and canal inlets and outlets 6.1.1 Introduction The alignment of a canal invariably meets a number of natural streams (drains) and other structures such as roads and railways, and may sometimes have to cross valleys. Cross drainage works are the structures which make such crossings possible. They are generally very costly, and should be avoided if possible by changing the canal alignment and/or by diverting the drains. 6.1.2 Aqueducts An aqueduct is a cross-drainage structure constructed where the drainage flood level is below the bed of the canal. Small drains may be taken under the canal and banks by a concrete or masonry barrel (culvert), whereas in the case of stream crossings it may be economical to flume the canal over the stream (e.g. using a concrete trough, Fig. 6.1(a)). When both canal and drain meet more or less at the same level the drain may be passed through an inverted siphon aqueduct (Fig. 6.1(d)) underneath the canal; the flow through the aqueduct here is always under pressure. If the drainage discharge is heavily silt laden a silt ejector should be provided at the upstream end of the siphon aqueduct; a trash rack is also essential if the stream carries floating debris which may otherwise choke the entrance to the aqueduct. 6.1.3 Superpassage In this type of cross-drainage work, the natural drain runs above the canal, the canal under the drain always having a free surface flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Long Tom River Haibtat Improvement Project
    Lower Long Tom River Habitat Improvement Plan 2018 Developed by: Confluence Consulting, LLC and Long Tom Watershed Council Lower Long Tom River Habitat Improvement Plan January 2018 1 | P a g e Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Study Goals and Opportunities ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Stakeholders and Contributors ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Background on the Lower Long Tom River .................................................................................................................................... 9 Long Tom Fisheries ............................................................................................................................................................................ 11 Fishery Background (excerpted from the US Army Corps of Engineers report “Long Term on the Long Tom,” February 2014) ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Isaac River Condition, Condition Trajectory and Management
    Memo Subject Response to information request from DEHP From Rohan Lucas Distribution BMA Date 12 February 2016 Project Broadmeadow EA amendment – Watercourse Subsidence 1 Isaac River condition, condition trajectory and management 1.1 Request The administering authority requires more information relating to the proactive management strategies that BMA will adopt to ensure the condition trajectory of the diversion is not negatively impacted by subsidence. 1.2 Response Understanding the incremental risk posed by subsidence The Isaac River diversion, constructed in the mid 1980’s was undertaken to a different standard to that which would be adopted today. The diversion underwent major erosional adjustment in the 1980’s and 1990’s (see Figure 2). Following some management intervention in the mid-late 1990’s (including timber pile fields) and a period without any major flow events from 1991 to 2007 (refer to Figure 1), the diversion underwent substantial recovery. This recovery included the deposition of benches against toe of bank and colonisation of those benches with riparian vegetation, providing a near continuous coverage along the diversion. These vegetated benches protect the near vertical, erodible upper banks from erosion in the majority of flow events (refer Figure 3). The diversion, which reduced river length by several kilometres, was constructed with two drop structures to compensate for the increase in gradient. One of these structures is now largely redundant and the other has been subject to damage from flow events and repair on numerous occasions. The remaining functional structure performs its design intent during smaller flows but is ineffective in larger flows in reducing energy conditions sufficiently.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovative Urban Stream Restoration and Flood Protection with Principles of Natural Channel Design and Fluvial Geomorphology
    2nd Joint Federal Interagency Conference, Las Vegas, NV, June 27 - July 1, 2010 Innovative Urban Stream Restoration and Flood Protection with Principles of Natural Channel Design and Fluvial Geomorphology David Bidelspach PE, MS MEng, [email protected], 919-218-0864 754 Mount Mahogany Livermore, CO 80536 Stable streams are defined to be in a state of dynamic equilibrium. The natural processes of a stream will result in a channel that is not set in place but has a natural adjustment, bank migration rates, erosion and deposition. Changes is the flow regime, sediment supply, slope and substrate can cause local channel instabilities that can lead to systematic reach wide instability and possible channel evolutions. Many urban stream restoration projects can be good examples and experimentations of the effect of changes in flow regimes that affect sedimentation and erosion rates. Urban Streams are always being adjusted by backwater, changes in sediment supply, increased runoff, canalization, removal of vegetation and bed armoring. Any stream restoration should evaluate the causes of channel instability and the potential for the channel to recover and return to a dynamic equilibrium. Urban streams systems typically have channel instability and enlargement that can result in risk to structures, lose of land, and increase flood stage. Urban channels have also been widened with the goal of increased flood conveyance, which can lead to long term aggradation and channel instability. The major goal of urban stream restoration projects are usually trying to create a stable restored channel with unstable and conflicting boundary conditions. Other goals of urban stream restoration projects include limiting flood risk, increase public use, increase habitat, property protection, mitigation and aesthetics.
    [Show full text]
  • SEEDS) Sustainability Program Student Research Report
    UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Sustainability Program Student Research Report Replacement of the Spiral Drain at the North End of UBC Campus Mona Dahir, Jas Gill, Danny Hsieh, Rachel Jackson, Michael Louws, Chris Vibe University of British Columbia CIVL 446 April 7th, 2017 Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS Sustainability Program provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student research project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore, readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Sustainability Program representative about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”. UBC NORTH CAMPUS SPIRAL DRAIN REPLACEMENT Final Design Report PREPARED FOR: Client Representative: Mr. Doug Doyle, P.Eng Associate Director, Infrastructure and Planning Client: UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Project Team 24: Rachel Jackson Danny Hsieh Mona Dahir Michael Louws Jasninder Gill Chris Vibe April 7th, 2017 Executive Summary Vortex Consulting has prepared a detailed design report, as requested by UBC Social, Ecological, Economic Development Studies (SEEDS), for the replacement of UBC's current North Campus Stormwater Management facility, the spiral drain. This report intends to provide UBC SEEDS with an understanding of the design components, technical analysis and design, and project costs and construction sequencing, that are required to mitigate a 1 in 200 year storm event.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Point Source Pollution on an Urban River, the River
    The impact of point source pollution on an urban river, the River Medlock, Greater Manchester A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Science and Engineering 2016 Cecilia Medupin 1 Table of Contents The impact of point source pollution on an urban river, the River Medlock, Greater Manchester ...... 1 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ....................................................................................................... 1 2016 .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Cecilia Medupin ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Words and meanings ................................................................................................................................. 5 Declaration ...............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drop Structures
    DROP STRUCTURES 1 DESCRIPTION OF TECHNIQUE Drop structures (also known as grade controls, sills, or weirs) are low-elevation structures that span the entire width of the channel, creating an abrupt drop in channel bed and water surface elevation in a downstream direction. Drop structures have been used extensively in Washington State to stabilize channel grades, improve fish passage, and to reduce erosion. Generally speaking, in fish bearing waters, vertical drops must not exceed 1 foot [WAC 220-110-070]; lesser drops are often required to accommodate certain species and age classes of fish. Drop Structures are designed to spill and direct flow such that there is a distinct drop in water surface elevation at normal low flows. The purpose of drop structures may include but is not limited to: • redistribute or dissipate energy; • stabilize the channel bed; • restore a step pool morphology to an altered channel • limit channel incision; • limit bank erosion by directing flow away from an eroding bank; • modify the channel bed profile and form by promoting collection, sorting and deposition of sediment; • create structural and hydraulic diversity in uniform channels; • improve fish passage over natural and artificial barriers by backwatering the upstream reach; • scour the channel bed, creating holding pools for fish and other aquatic life; • provide backwater (depth) in groundwater fed side channels; or • raise the bed of an incised stream to reconnect it with its floodplain. Drop structures may resemble porous weirs in appearance. But while drop structures direct water over the structure and are applied primarily to modify the profile of a channel, porous weirs allow water to flow through the structure and are applied primarily to redirect or concentrate flow.
    [Show full text]