A Stream Restoration Case Study in the California Central Coast



Similar documents
The Teton Creek Restoration Project Summary:

Assessing Rivers for Restoration Purposes. Ann L. Riley Waterways Restoration Institute

Floodplain Connectivity in Restoration Design

1.7.0 Floodplain Modification Criteria

Mission Creek Flood Control & Restoration Project. City of Fremont, Alameda County

Stream Rehabilitation Concepts, Guidelines and Examples. Objectives. Pierre Y. Julien. Three Laws of Stream Restoration

ROSE CREEK WATERSHED HYDROLOGIC, HYDRAULIC, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND GEOMORPHIC ANALYSES TASK 1 EXISTING DATA AND INFORMATION SUMMARY REPORT BACKGROUND

COMPLIANCE REPORT MUDDY HOLLOW CULVERT REMOVAL FILE NUMBER 25358N

Riprap-lined Swale (RS)

Final Report. Dixie Creek Restoration Project. Funded by Plumas Watershed Forum

Neversink River East Branch

Prattsville Berm Removal Project. 1.0 Project Location

CITY UTILITIES DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL

Prepared By: Tom Parker Geum Environmental Consulting, Inc.

How To Check For Scour At A Bridge

General Permit for Activities Promoting Waterway - Floodplain Connectivity [working title]

Flood Hazard Area Technical Manual Section 8 Bank Stabilization and Stream Restoration

DRAFT SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH RIVER

CHAD R. GOURLEY SPECIALTY EMPLOYMENT

Chapter 3 CULVERTS. Description. Importance to Maintenance & Water Quality. Culvert Profile

The Basics of Chapter 105 Waterways and Wetlands Permitting in PA

RIPRAP From Massachusetts Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban and Suburban Areas

DANIELS RUN STREAM RESTORATION, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA: FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS REPORT


March Prepared by: Irvine Ranch Water District Sand Canyon Avenue. Irvine, CA Contact: Natalie Likens (949)

Outlet stabilization structure

Miquon Creek STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT WHO WE ARE

CHAPTER 3A Environmental Guidelines for STREAM CROSSING BY ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLES

Quality Assurance Reviews of Hydraulic Models Developed for the Central Valley Floodplain Evaluation and Delineation Program

Tres Rios del Norte Feasibility Study

EFFECTS OF ARUNDO DONAX ON RIVER HYDRAULICS, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND GEOMORPHOLOGY, SANTA MARGARITA RIVER, CALIFORNIA

PUBLIC NOTICE Application for Permit

Steelhead Recovery in San Juan and Trabuco Creeks Watershed

3. Design Procedures. Design Procedures. Introduction

30-DAY PUBLIC NOTICE CHELSEA RIVER, EAST BOSTON MASSACHUSETTS EMERGENCY STREAMBANK PROTECTION PROJECT

Interim Technical Guidelines for the Development of Environmental Management Plans for Underground Infrastructure Revised - July 2013.

Evaluation of Open Channel Flow Equations. Introduction :

Emergency Spillways (Sediment basins)

Rhode Island NRCS received approximately $2.4 million in ARRA funds to implement four floodplain easement projects.

Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory

Wildfire & Flash Flood Recovery Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Flood Mitigation Efforts April Fall 2013

Risk Analysis, GIS and Arc Schematics: California Delta Levees

Guo, James C.Y. (2004). Design of Urban Channel Drop Structure, J. of Flood Hazards News, December,

Various options are discussed below.these low cost, low impact interventions can also be applied as general erosion control methods.

Sims Bayou Federal Flood Damage Reduction Project

REFERENCE. All National Grid personnel who plan and perform work involving protected water resources are responsible for:

Gold Ray Dam Interagency Technical Team Meeting

SIMULATION OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT AND CHANNEL MORPHOLOGY CHANGE IN LARGE RIVER SYSTEMS. Stephen H. Scott 1 and Yafei Jia 2

WETLAND RESTORATION PROGRAM WATER ACT APPROVAL ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDE

GLOSSARY OF TERMS CHAPTER 11 WORD DEFINITION SOURCE. Leopold

4.2 Buena Vista Creek Watershed

Earth Science. River Systems and Landforms GEOGRAPHY The Hydrologic Cycle. Introduction. Running Water. Chapter 14.

Community Workshop 5. Overarching Goals for Machado Lake Ecosystem and Wilmington Drain Multi-Use Projects

Thank you to all of our 2015 sponsors: Media Partner

A. Flood Management in Nevada

CHAPTER 11 ENERGY DISSIPATORS

Flood Risk Management

Flood Risk Management

Post-Flood Emergency Stream Intervention. After repairs. Training Manual

INFORMATION SHEET ORDER NO. R XXXX TRIANGLE ROCK PRODUCTS, INC. FLORIN ROAD AGGREGATE PLANT SACRAMENTO COUNTY

COMMUNITY CERTIFICATIONS

RE: Docket # COE ; ZRIN 0710 ZA05 Submitted via to NWP2012@usace.army.mil and Rulemaking Portal at

Restoring Ecosystems. Ecosystem Restoration Services

Appendix A. Lists of Accomplishments and Project Costs. UMRWD 10 Year Plan Update. Appendix A UPPER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT

Land Disturbance, Erosion Control and Stormwater Management Checklist. Walworth County Land Conservation Department

Small Dam Hazard Assessment Inventory

A Developer s Guide: Watershed-Wise Development

CLACKAMAS COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

Stream Restoration Post-Implementation Annual Monitoring Report Year 2: 2013 Covering the Period of July 2012 to July 2013

Carlton Fields Memorandum

Napa River Restoration Projects

Restoring and Managing Riparian Areas

The answers to some of the following questions are separated into two major categories:

Living on the Fox River

How To Plan A Buffer Zone

Topic 8: Open Channel Flow

5.0 OVERVIEW OF FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION MEASURES

Index. protection. excavated drop inlet protection (Temporary) Block and gravel inlet Protection (Temporary)

Environmental Case Study Decatur, Georgia, DeKalb County A Suburban Creek Resists Channelization

Mission Reach Self-Guided Tour Mission Concepción Portal Loop and Mission Reach Phase II Embayment Loop

Catchment Scale Processes and River Restoration. Dr Jenny Mant The River Restoration Centre therrc.co.uk

Restoring Anadromous Fish Habitat in Big Canyon Creek Watershed. Summary Report 2002

CHAPTER 5 OPEN CHANNEL HYDROLOGY

Determination of NEPA Adequacy (DNA)

2.0 BASIC CONCEPTS OF OPEN CHANNEL FLOW MEASUREMENT

SCHNEIDER CREEK REMEDIATION CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM

How To Assess An Area For Erosion

Post-Flood Assessment

Transcription:

International Erosion Control Association Annual Conference 2009, Reno, Nevada Case Study Technical Presentation A Stream Restoration Case Study in the California Central Coast Justin S. Rogers, P.E., CFM; Water Resources Project Engineer HDR Engineering, Inc., 8690 Balboa Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, California, 92123 Ph. 858-712-8338, Fax 858-712-8333, email justin.rogers@hdrinc.com Brian J. Doeing, P.E., CPESC; National Technical Advisor for Sediment Transport and Scour HDR Engineering, Inc., 8690 Balboa Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, California, 92123 Ph. 858-712-8318, Fax 858-712-8333, email brian.doeing@hdrinc.com Biographical Sketches: Justin Rogers is currently a Water Resources Engineer at HDR Engineering in San Diego, and is a Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM) and a registered professional Civil Engineer in California. He received his masters in Environmental Fluid Mechanics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and his primary interests include hydrology, hydraulic modeling, fluvial geomorphology and stream restoration. He is the author of several publications on the hydrology, and sediment transport in wetlands. Brian Doeing is the National Technical Advisor for Sediment Transport and Scour for HDR Engineering. He brings over 25 years of experience in water resources engineering, and specializes in the areas of sediment transport, stream stability and scour countermeasure design. He is the author of several papers on hydrology, hydraulics, sedimentation, and the evaluation of scour at pipeline stream crossings. He is a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC), a registered professional Civil Engineer in the states of California and Nevada, and received a Masters in Civil Engineering from San Diego State. Abstract: San Antonio Creek is located in the California central coast area within Vandenberg Air Force Base. The creek is actively adjusting its profile and channel geometry and has experienced significant erosion (degradation), deposition (aggradation), channel widening, and bend migration during the recent past. The results of several studies indicate that this trend is expected to continue. The effects of this instability have led to a degraded stream channel environment and hydrologic disconnection of the stream from the surrounding floodplain. In addition to the loss of habitat and wetlands, local infrastructure, such as utilities and highways, and cultural resources are threatened. The purpose of this project was to design scour protection for the infrastructure and to restore form and function to San Antonio Creek within the project area. HDR worked in conjunction with the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, David Derrick (USACE Waterways Experiment Station), John McCullah (Salix Earthcare), and others to develop a proposed design. The proposed design incorporates seven rock riffle grade control structures that will mitigate the lowering of the channel, provide pool and riffle features, and also provide for fish passage. Additionally, bank toe and slope protection will be provided at key areas. Habitat will be restored with the use of environmentally sensitive streambank stabilization and restoration methods. This is expected to provide enhanced habitat for several endangered species within the creek as well as other species. Additionally, cutting point bars and reshaping the channel will allow for a more natural channel shape with a restored flood terrace. Key Words: Stream Restoration, Bank Revetment, Bioengineering, Grade Control, Scour Marketing Paragraph: This case study presentation will focus on the stream restoration design methods used for a severely degraded stream in the Central Coast of California. Design of rock grade control structures, bank revetments and habitat restoration will be discussed.

Synopsis 1.0 Introduction San Antonio Creek is located in the California central coast area within Vandenberg Air Force Base (Figure 1). The creek is actively adjusting its profile and channel geometry (Figure 2) and has experienced significant erosion (degradation), deposition (aggradation), channel widening, and bend migration during the recent past. The results of several studies indicate that this trend is expected to continue. The effects of this instability have led to a degraded stream channel environment and hydrologic disconnection of the stream from the surrounding floodplain. In addition to the loss of habitat and wetlands, local infrastructure, such as utilities and highways, and cultural resources are threatened at 3 sites (Figure 3). The key concerns at the site were over-steepened banks and severe head cuts in the channel. Additionally there were environmental concerns with California red legged frog, three-spine stickleback fish, and steelhead trout. Figure 1: Project Location The purpose of this project was to design scour protection for the infrastructure and to restore form and function to San Antonio Creek within the project area. HDR worked in conjunction with the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, David Derrick (USACE Waterways Experiment Station), John McCullah (Salix Earthcare), and others to develop a proposed design. The project approach was to first conduct a field investigation and to compare current and historical topography. Geomorphic, hydrology, and hydraulic analyses were also conducted. The geomorphic analysis indicated that the channel could be expected to continue degrading, and the channel would at some point transition to a widening phase. The hydraulic analysis indicated that flow depths for the 100- year event were in the range of 10 to 22 feet deep, flowing at 9 to 24 feet per second. The 100-year discharge is completely confined within the main channel in the project reach. Based on this collection of site information, the restoration design was initiated.

Figure 2: Profile in 1993 (green), 2005 (black) and 2007 (red) Figure 3: Project Overview 2.0 Design The overall design approach was to mitigate the channel degradation using rock grade control structures. The general (bend) scour at the three sites where local infrastructure was threatened would be mitigated using bank revetment. The grade control structures and revetments would all be designed for the 100- year event. The project would incorporate bioengineering, including pole plantings and seeding, into the design to restore habitat in the stream as much as possible. The overall goal was to restore the form and function to the creek. The rock riffle design was the key protection feature. Fish passage needed to be maintained within the system, so hand-formed step pools will be constructed on the 20:1 slope on the grade control. Sizing of the rock for the grade control structures was conducted using several design methods. These included: Isbash (1937), USBR (Peterka, 1958), ARS Rock Chute (Robinson et al., 1998), Abt and Johnson (1991), USACE Steep Slope (EM 1601). These methods are all summarized in Rock Ramp Design Guidelines

(USBR, 2007). The methods were compared and the average of the methods times a factor of safety was used for design. Alternately, the maximum method could be selected. The results indicated 2-ton and 4- ton rock for some structures, with 8-ton rock used for the highest energy locations (Caltrans riprap specification). Calculation of the local scour at the toe of grade control structures was based on Clark County (1999) guidelines. This manual recommends using the Simons and Li (1986) for the submerged weir crest case, and the minimum of Simons and Li (1986) or the Veronese (1937) for un-submerged case. Additionally the long term scour was based on a profile analysis. To accommodate this expected scour, launching rock was placed at the toe of the structure with an equivalent volume to launch to the scour depth. The overall detail is shown in Figure 4. Cross Section Plan Profile Figure 4: Grade Control Detail The design of the bank protection incorporated a terraced floodplain concept to widen the incised channel and reduce some of the hydraulic energy. A variety of protection methods were used including vegetated rock riprap, vegetated mechanically stabilized earth, longitudinal peak stone toe, and brush layering. Bend scour was estimated using the Maynord (1996) method, and long term scour was estimated by profile analysis. Toe launching rock was designed to accommodate the calculated scour depths. Rock sizing was conducted using the USACE Engineering Manual 1601 (USACE, 1994). This method was found to be most reliable for revetment design in recent research from the Transportation Research Board (NCHRP, 2006). Site 1 design included rock protection to the 100-year event, launching rock, willow plantings, and a terraced floodplain on the inside of the bend (Figure 5). Site 2 included a launching rock toe, upper protection using vegetated mechanically stabilized earth, and a two-level terraced floodplain on the inside of the bend (Figure 6). Site 3 included longitudinal peak stone toe protection with backfill and willow plantings (Figure 7). Bioengineering for the site primarily consisted of willow plantings into the designed riprap protection. These willows will be harvested onsite, and the primary design guideline is that they must have a moisture source and available soil. The disturbed soil areas will be reseeded with a specific seed mix for

the creek side and the upper slope areas using local native seeds. Additional references for design can be found in Fischenich (2001), and ESSenS (2004). Figure 5: Site 1 Design Figure 6: Site 2 Design Figure 7: Site 3 Design

3.0 Conclusions The proposed design incorporates seven rock riffle grade control structures that will mitigate the lowering of the channel, provide pool and riffle features, and also provide for fish passage. Additionally, bank toe and slope protection will be provided at key areas. Habitat will be restored with the use of environmentally sensitive streambank stabilization and restoration methods. This is expected to provide enhanced habitat for several endangered species within the creek as well as other species. Additionally, cutting point bars and reshaping the channel will allow for a more natural channel shape with a restored flood terrace. A key point is that the design is for 100-year level of protection for the infrastructure but also includes bioengineering features to improve habitat. One of the key lessons learned during this project was that engineering and environmental goals can both be achieved. However, this is only possible if frequent and direct communication is kept open between the design team, client, and regulators. A second key lesson is that bioengineering design methods are currently not well known especially for high energy conditions. More research is needed in this area. A third lesson is that designing with rock under high energy conditions requires careful consideration of failure mechanisms. And finally, good designers must consider constructibility and apply general concepts to site-specific characteristics. 4. 0 Acknowledgments Michael Bird, U.S. Air Force, Vandenberg Air Force Base; David Derrick, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station; John McCullah, Salix Earthcare, Inc.; Jon Blanchard, Fugro West, Inc.; Sunit Deo, HDR Engineering, Inc.; Garrett Higerd, Mono County (formerly w/ HDR Engineering, Inc.) 5.0 References Abt, S.R., and T.L. Johnson. 1991. Riprap design for overtopping flow. J. of Hydraulic Eng., Amer. Soc. of Civil Eng. 117(8):959 972. Clark County. 1999. Flood Control Manual, for Clark County, Nevada. Fischenich, 2001. Stability Thresholds for Stream Restoration Materials, ERDC. Isbash, S. 1936. Construction of dams by depositing rock in running water, Communication No. 3, 2nd Congress on Large Dams. Washington, DC. pp. 123 136. Maynord, S.T. 1996. Toe-Scour Estimation in Stabilized Bendways, J. of Hydraulic Engineering, p. 460-464. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), 2006. Riprap Design Criteria, Recommended Specifications, and Quality Control. Report 568. Peterka, A.J. 1984. Hydraulic design of stilling basins and energy dissipators. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering Monograph No. 25. Robinson, K.M., C.E. Rice, and K.C. Kadavy. 1998. Design of rock chutes. Trans. of the Amer. Soc. of Agric. Eng. 41(3):621 626. Salix, Inc., ESSenS Environmentally Sensitive Streambank Stabilization, 2004 Simons, Li and Associates. 1986. Hydraulic Model Study of Local Scour Downstream of Rigid Grade- Control Structures. Pima County, Arizona. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1994. EM 1110-2-1601 Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels. Veronese, A. 1937. Erosioni di fondo a valle di uno scarico. Annali dei Lavori Publicci. 75(9), 717 726 (in Italian). U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) 2007, Rock Ramp Design Guidelines.