Price Park Stream Restoration Monitoring Report - Amazon Web ...
Price Park Stream Restoration Monitoring Report EEP Project # 291 Monitoring Year – 06 2008
Submitted to:
NCEEP, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
March 2009
Monitoring Firm
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 Phone: (919) 783-9214 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Project Contact: Adam Spiller Email: [email protected]
Design Firm
701 Corporate Center Drive Suite 475 Raleigh, NC 27607 Phone: 919-854-6200
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND..........................................................................................1 1.1 Project Objectives .........................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach ......................................................1 1.3 Location and Setting .....................................................................................................1 1.4 Project History and Background...................................................................................1 1.5 Monitoring Plan View...................................................................................................5 2.0 PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS....................................7 2.1 Vegetation Assessment .................................................................................................7 2.2. Stream Assessment .......................................................................................................8 2.2.1 Bankfull Event and Stability Assessment .............................................................9 2.2.2 Stability Assessment Table ...................................................................................9 2.2.3 Quantitative Measures Summary Tables ............................................................10 3.0 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................14 4.0 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................14
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9.
Project Restoration Components..........................................................................1 Project Activity and Reporting History ...............................................................3 Project Contact Table...........................................................................................3 Project Background Table....................................................................................4 Verification of Bankfull Events ...........................................................................9 BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates.................................................................9 Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment....................................9 Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary ..................................................10 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary ..............................................11
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Figure 2.
Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................2 Monitoring Plan View..........................................................................................5
APPENDIX A – VEGETATION DATA A1. A2. A3.
Vegetation Data Tables....................................................................................................16 Representative Vegetation Problem Area Photos ............................................................18 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos .................................................................................19
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
APPENDIX B – GEOMORPHOLOGIC DATA B1. B2. B3. B4. B5. B6.
Representative Stream Problem Area Photos ..................................................................24 Stream Photo Stations ......................................................................................................27 Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Table................................................................33 Cross-Section Plots ..........................................................................................................34 Longitudinal Plots............................................................................................................39 Pebble Count Plots...........................................................................................................41
APPENDIX C – CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW C1.
Current Conditions Plan View .........................................................................................48
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program identified UT to Horsepen Creek in Price Park in Greensboro, North Carolina as a restoration project in 2000. In the past, this project has been referred to as UT to Horsepen Creek, Price Park and the Jefferson Pilot stream. Henceforth this project will be referred to as the Price Park project. The approximately 1.0-square mile watershed is located within the USGS 8-digit HUC 03020002 in the Upper Cape Fear River Basin. The project restored 1,436 linear feet of incised, channelized stream to 1,776 feet of sinuous channel. The restoration was designed to correct various problems with the existing stream corridor including unstable channel configuration, minimal bed features, and poor stream and riparian habitat. The restoration plan was completed in October 2000 and called for correcting these problems by stabilizing stream banks, installing in-stream structures, adjusting the stream planform, and replanting the riparian areas with native vegetation. Project construction occurred in 2001 with additional maintenance construction occurring in February 2002 when additional structures were installed. While 2008 is the seventh year since construction was completed, monitoring was not conducted at the site in 2006. In 2007 morphological monitoring was completed, but a formal monitoring report was not prepared. This report describes the findings of the sixth year of monitoring that took place in 2008. The Price Park vegetation monitoring has utilized three different methods throughout the monitoring period. The vegetation monitoring was originally conducted utilizing transects that ran perpendicular to the stream. These were monitored for the baseline conditions and during the first year of monitoring. The second year of monitoring established five square vegetation plots. These plots were monitored in the second, third, and fourth years of monitoring. In monitoring year 05, eight 10x10 meter vegetation monitoring plots were established. Where feasible, the new plots overlapped the approximate areas of the plots established in monitoring year 02. In monitoring years 05 and 06, the new plots were monitored utilizing the CVS vegetation monitoring protocol. In the years since planting, there have been many volunteer stems that have populated the conservation easement. Differentiating between volunteers and planted trees was difficult, but best efforts were made to do so. From these monitoring plots, a site average of 202 planted stems/acre was calculated in monitoring year 06. Monitoring year 06 also counted volunteer stems as part of the Level 2 vegetation monitoring. While the site has substantial buffer acreage and lateral extent for an urban setting, the planted stem survivorship in year-6 as determined by the vegetation plots is yielding a stem density of 202 stems/acre, approximately 75% of the 260 stems/acre, year-5 criterion. The site also has a substantial volunteer population comprised mainly of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and tulip poplar (Lirodendron tulipifera) adding to the stem density substantially to just over 2,000 stems/acre. The most prolific exotic invasive species at the site is kudzu (Pueraria montana), which already covers a large part of the easement and should be controlled as soon as possible. Previous monitoring of the project channel revealed some significant areas of bank instability. Observations in monitoring year 6 found many of these same areas of erosion. A total of 7% of bank footage exhibited some state of erosion during the projects history, but most of these demonstrated little advancement after their initial appearance. Most of these are described as moderate, with the exception of a serious instance of outright widening near a failed structure at ~ station 4+00. Many that were previously demonstrating active erosion have begun to stabilize with vegetation or have become stable over time as the banks were reshaped. This reshaping came mainly in the form of bench expansion in most cases, meaning the upper section of bank in some riffle sections scoured, increasing the area of the bench feature. Some of these areas still need to re-vegetate. Although some of the structures placement and construction were not ideal in terms of more recent practice and understanding, 85% within the reach are maintaining full grade control with a single structure exhibiting outright failure. The placement of some of these
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
structures has limited some of the intended riffle habitat, while adding more discrete functional pool features. There has been evidence of degradational stress in between grade control points on the bed at various times in the projects history, but currently the bed footage exhibiting some form of degradation is estimated at only 3%. The profile has varied vertically over time with the bulk of this appearing to represent movement of bedload through the system, although the section between stations 2+00 and 5+00 appears to have exhibited some downcut after construction. This however does not appear to have advanced over the last 3-4 years since its initial occurrence earlier in the projects history and the water surface and bankfull slopes are nearly identical as measured in 2008 and very close to those measured at the As-built stage. While the site has gone through some adjustments after construction, it appears that the site is exhibiting a stabilizing trend with the continued advancement of the vegetation, although the latter will benefit from the aforementioned planting augmentation and invasive control.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
1.0
PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1
Project Objectives
The goals and objectives of this project are as follows: • Provide a stable stream channel that neither aggrades nor degrades, while maintaining its dimension, pattern, and profile with the capacity to transport its watershed’s water and sediment load. • Reconnect the stream with its floodplain. • Improve aquatic habitat with the use of natural material stabilization structures such as root wads, rock vanes, woody debris and a riparian buffer. • Provide wildlife habitat and bank stability through the creation of a riparian zone. • Incorporate the existing greenway plan into the stream restoration plan.
1.2
Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
A previously incised channel, UT to Horsepen Creek, was restored using channel dimension, pattern, and profile modifications and the establishment of a vegetated riparian zone adjacent to the stream. The Priority I restoration involved converting the 1,436 ft straightened channel into a sinuous channel that meanders for a total of 1,776 ft. Cross vanes and root wads were incorporated for aquatic habitat enhancement and bed and bank stability. A 50-foot riparian buffer on either side of the stream was planted with native vegetation. In addition, an aerial sanitary sewer line was re-aligned to be perpendicular to the stream flow and a gas line was rerouted under the stream channel.
1.3
Location and Setting
The Unnamed Tributary to Horsepen Creek is located in Price Park within the city limits of Greensboro, North Carolina. The 1.0-square mile watershed has a park setting with Jefferson Elementary located to the west, Price Park to the east, and Guilford College to the south of the site. There is moderate potential for future development.
1.4
Project History and Background
R = Restoration
Price Park EEP Project # 291
Type
Approach
Linear Feet
Segment / Reach ID UT to Horsepen Creek
Existing Linear Feet
Table 1. Project Restoration Components Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
N/A
R
P1
1,776
Stationing 0+00 - 16+46
Comment
P1 = Priority 1
1
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
DIRECTIONS TO PRICE PARK SITE: From Interstate 40, take Exit 213 (Guilford College Road) North. Follow Guilford College Road past W. Friendly Avenue. where Guilford College Road becomes New Garden Road. Continue on New Garden Road and stay right at the Fleming Road and New Garden Road 'Y' intersection. Continue on New Garden Road for approximately 300 yards. Turn right on Hobbs Road. The road bisects the project stream at the bottom of the hill.
Hobbs Rd. New Garden Rd.
Project Location
Friendly Ave.
Guilford College Rd.
Market St.
Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map Price Park, Guilford County, EEP Project # 291 0.25 0.125 0
0.25
0.5 Miles
-
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Data Collection Complete N/A 2000 2001 2001 2002 2001 Jan-02 Jan-04 Jan-04 Aug-02 Aug-03 Aug-04 Aug-05 Jul-07* Oct-08
Activity or Report
Restoration Plan Mitigation Plan Construction Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area As-Built report Permanent seed mix applied to reach Containerized and B&B plantings for reach Structural maintenance (Bank Grading) Supplemental planting of containerized material Year 1 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 4 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring** Year 6 Monitoring *No monitoring was conducted in 2006 **Data collected but not submitted in an annual monitoring report in 2007
Actual Completion or Delivery N/A Dec-00 Aug-01 Feb-02 June-02 Aug-01 Jan-02 Jan-04 Jan-04 Aug-02 Aug-03 Aug-04 Aug-05 Nov-07 Jan-09
Table 3. Project Contact Table Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Earth Tech of North Carolina, Inc. Design Firm 701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475 Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 Contact: Ron Johnson Phone: (919) 854-6200 SEI Environmental, INC. Construction Contractor 5100 North I-85, Suite 7 Charolette, NC 28206 Phone: 1-800-873-1250 North State Environmental Inc. Repair Contractor 2889 Lowery Street, Suite B Winston-Salem, NC 27101 Contact: Darrell Westmoreland Phone: (336) 725-2010 Earth Tech of North Carolina, Inc. Monitoring Performer 701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475 As-Built Report and MY-01 Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 Biological & Agricultural Engineering Monitoring Performer North Carolina State University MY-02, 03, 04 Campus Box 7625 Raleigh, NC 27695 Contact: Dan Clinton Phone: (919) 515-6771 KCI Associates of North Carolina Monitoring Performer 4601 Six Forks Rd. MY-06, 07 Raleigh, NC 27609 Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller Phone: (919) 783-9214 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Price Park EEP Project # 291
3
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 4. Project Background Table Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Project County Guilford County Drainage Area 1.0 sq. miles Drainage Impervious Cover Estimate Estimated at >10% Stream Order 1st order Physiographic Region Piedmont Ecoregion Southern Outer Piedmont (45b) Rosgen Classification of As-built E-Stream Type Dominant Soil Types N/A* Reference Site ID N/A* USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03030002 NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-06-02 NCDWQ Classification for Project and Reference C Any portion of the project segment 303d listed? No Any portion of the project segment upstream of a 303d No listed segment? Reasons for 303d Listing or Stressor N/A % of Project Easement Fenced 0% *Historical project documents necessary to provide these data were unavailable at the time of report submission
Price Park EEP Project # 291
4
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.0
PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS
2.1
Vegetation Assessment
The Price Park vegetation monitoring has utilized three different methods throughout the monitoring period. The vegetation monitoring was originally conducted utilizing transects that ran perpendicular to the stream. These were monitored for the baseline conditions and during the first year monitoring. The second year of monitoring established five square vegetation plots. These plots were monitored in the second, third, and fourth years of monitoring. In monitoring year 05, eight 10x10 meter vegetation monitoring plots were established. Where feasible, the new plots overlapped the approximate areas of the plots established in monitoring year 02. In monitoring years 05 and 06, the new plots were monitored utilizing the CVS vegetation monitoring protocol. In the years since planting, there have been many volunteer stems that have populated the conservation easement. Differentiating between volunteers and planted trees was difficult, but best efforts were made to do so. From these monitoring plots, a site average of 202 planted stems/acre was calculated in monitoring year 06. The four plots representing the upper 60% of the project above the Jefferson Club Road bridge yielded an average planted stem density of 320 stems per acre in monitoring year 6, while the area below this bridge demonstrated planted stem densities of approximately 80 stems/acre. This zone will benefit from planting augmentation and possibly a jurisdictional delineation for a wetland feature of some apparent quality for the lower 200 feet of the project on stream right. The impacts to the vegetation counts were concentrated in this area primarily because of the repeated beaver activity. EEP’s wildlife control contractor removed beaver on two occasions and broke the dam at the lower culvert, but remnant material was used by beaver that recolonized the site and re-established the dam. EEP has informed KCI that another removal effort was scheduled for earlier this year. Monitoring year 06 also counted volunteer stems as part of the Level 2 vegetation monitoring. The most numerous volunteer species included green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). The data from the sixth year of monitoring revealed that only two of the eight monitoring plots contained enough palnted trees to be consistent with the 260 planted stems/acre vegetation success criterion. However, including volunteer trees all but two plots had greater than 260 stems/acre and the site average is 2,033 total stems/acre. The most prolific of the site’s exotic invasive species is kudzu (Pueraria montana), which already covers a large part of the easement and should be controlled as soon as possible. The other invasive species that are present in the project area include: Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), elaeagnus (Elaegnus sp.), mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus), Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense), lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), and microstegium (Microstegium vimineum). It is recommended that a site assessment for replanting be conducted and that an aggressive invasive species control program be implemented. See vegetation data and photos in Appendix A and Current Conditions Plan View in Appendix C. The taxonomic standard being used for vegetation identifications is “Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding areas by Alan S. Weakley.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
7
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.2.
Stream Assessment
Previous monitoring of the project channel revealed some significant areas of bank instability. Observations in monitoring year 6 found many of these same areas of erosion. A total of 7% of bank footage exhibited some state of erosion during the projects history, but most of these demonstrated little advancement after their initial appearance. Most of these are described as moderate, with the exception of a serious instance of outright widening near a failed structure at approximately Station 4+00. Many that were previously demonstrating active erosion have begun to stabilize with vegetation or have become stable over time as the banks were reshaped. In many cases eroded banks can stabilize over time. This can happen as banks become undercut and then the eventual slumping deposits the vegetated tops of the banks on the toe of the bank. The result is a bank with a protected toe and a new, more stable and less steep bank. Raw, eroded banks can also stabilize over time as vegetation grows on them even without slumping. Both of these natural methods of bank stabilization are occurring along many banks at the Price Park site. This is apparent throughout the site where the lower portions of the bank are well vegetated, but the top half of the bank is unvegetated and in some cases still prone to erosion at higher flows. In most places, the banks at Price Park are vertical, because the toe of bank has eroded away. However, in some cases these banks have stabilized. An additional year of monitoring will indicate whether the currently eroding banks are able to stabilize over time. The bank erosion areas of immediate concern are the ones that still, seven years after construction, do not have vegetation established on them. These areas can be seen in the Current Conditions Plan View. The stream is vertically controlled in some places by the cross vanes that are still functioning and bedrock. There are some apparent areas of stream bed degradation, but most of these areas are no longer worsening. While the bed features are present throughout the stream, they are not in a consistent riffle-pool sequence, but the bed exhibits a more diverse and faceted nature than the asbuilt profile exhibits. The beaver dam at the downstream limits of the project stream is backwatering the lower portion of the stream, which is described in the Current Conditions Plan View. The Monitoring Plan View illustrates how the existing cross vanes are located at the beginning of tangent sections (heads of riffles) on the stream planform. A typical cross vane should concentrate flow in the center of the channel and induce scour to help maintain pools. The arms should also slow water in the near bank region before redirecting it. At Price Park the placement of some of the structures in the lowest extent of meanders combined with short riffles was not ideal in terms of more recent practice and understanding and this has resulted in the conversion of some intended riffle habitat into pools. The cross vanes on the project stream act as grade control structures, but also promote the formation of pools where riffles should be beginning. The installed cross vane arms do not angle out away from the center boulder. Instead of directing water away from the banks, the vane arms act as large stone toe bank protection. Because of their placement, the cross vanes have been evaluated primarily as grade control measures and stone toe stabilization, in which case most are functional. Root wads, which are the other structures at the site, are only marginally functional. While they are still providing stream and terrestrial habitat, many of them are positioned above the streams baseflow and are beginning to rot. Certain degrading root wads then cause the surrounding stabilizing boulders to become displaced in some instances. In some places the root material is rotted away entirely and the root wads are hard to find. See additional stream assessment and photos in Appendix B and Current Conditions Plan View in Appendix C.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
8
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.2.1
Bankfull Event and Stability Assessment
2.2.1.a Verification of Bankfull Events Table Table 5. Verification of Bankfull Events Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Date of Data Collection 7/25/2008
Date of Occurrence 6/30/2008 8/27/2008
Method
Photo Number
Crest Gauge Tropical Storm Fay
N/A N/A
2.2.1.b BEHI and Sediment Export Table Table 6. BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park N/A
2.2.2
Stability Assessment Table
Table 7. Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Feature Initial MY - 01 MY - 02 MY - 03 MY - 04 MY - 05 MY - 06 A. Riffles 100% 59% B. Pools 100% 117% C. Thalweg 100% 77% D. Meanders 100% 66% E. Bed General 100% 97% F. Banks 100% 93% G. Vanes / J Hooks etc. 100% 64% H. Wads and Boulders 100% 77%
Please note that the pool feature in Table 7 has a rating above 100%. This occurs when there are more pools identified in the longitudinal profile survey for that monitoring year than were originally counted during the as-built survey.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
9
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Regional Curve Interval Min Max Mean Min Max Med Dimension Bankfull Width (ft) USGS gauge data Floodprone Width (ft) unavailable for this site Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) Width/Depth Ratio Bank Height Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Wetted Perimeter (ft) Hydraulic Radius (ft) Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) Radius of Curvature (ft) Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width Ratio Profile Riffle Length (ft) Riffle Slope (ft/ft) Pool Length (ft) Pool Spacing (ft) Substrate d50 (mm) d84 (mm) Additional Reach Parameters Valley Length (ft) Channel Length (ft) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) BF Slope (ft/ft) Rosgen Classification
Table 8. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park
Quantitative Measures Summary Tables
Price Park EEP Project # 291
2.2.3
10
0.018 E5
1,436 1 0.0094 G5/E5
0.71 bdrk
48
7.5
0.46 24.9
22.9
0.08 0.054
0.01
15.8 11.3 32 2.4
22.0 18.8 45 3.3
10.5 5.7 22 1.6
Pre-Existing Project Reference Condition Stream Min Max Mean Min Max Mean 11.6 20.1 15.9 5.7 7.5 6.6 16.9 >77 20.0 35.0 28.0 31.8 32.2 32.0 4.0 6.1 5.1 1.6 2.8 2.2 0.7 0.8 0.8 3.2 4.2 3.7 1.3 1.6 1.5 4.2 12.7 8.5 8.2 9.2 8.7 1.5 1.6 1.1 >4.8 3.5 4.6 4.1
E5
>2.2
E5
1,776
0.45 103
7.1
36.7 2.3 3.6 8.1
0.33 8
5.8
31.9 2.1 3.5 7.3
Max Mean 17.2 14.0
As-built*
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
0.22 8
4.9
24.1 1.8 3.2 6.2
32.5 2.0 3.5 8.3
36.8 2.0 4.3
Min 13.3
Riffle Pool 16.4 18.0
Design
Price Park EEP Project # 291
* No monitoring was perfomed during 2006; MY-05 was performed during 2007. ** Two additional cross-sections were surveyed per EEP's request. *** Cross-Section 4 could not be located during the MY-05 and MY-06 monitoring. **** No substrate data was recorded for Cross-Section 2.
Parameter
11
Cross Section 3 Riffle MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension 14.0 14.7 14.7 21.4 24.2 24.0 Bankfull Width (ft) 14.0 >90 >90 >90 >90 Floodprone Width (ft) 2 28.4 30.8 29.7 36.8 40.8 37.8 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft ) 30.7 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.6 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.2 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 3.5 6.4 7.0 7.0 7.4 12.6 14.4 15.2 Width/Depth Ratio >6.1 >4.0 >4.0 Entrenchment Ratio 1 Bank Height Ratio 27.4 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 1.4 Hydraulic Radius (ft) Substrate 0.1 0.6 20.0 4.7 d50 (mm) 0.2 d84 (mm) 6.7 12.1 8.5 43.0 29.0
35.5 2.1 3.6 8.2
37.2 2.1 3.2 8.2
0.3 6.9
MY1 17.3
MY0 17.2
0.3 14.8
1.4 16.7
*** ***
MY5 *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
*** ***
MY6 *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Cross Section 4*** Riffle MY2 MY3 MY4 17.2 17.1 16.2 >100 >100 36.3 35.1 32.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 3.7 3.7 3.5 8.2 8.6 8.1 >5.9
Table 9 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Cross-Section 1 Cross-Section 2 Parameter Riffle Pool MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension Bankfull Width (ft) 13.3 14.8 15.0 16.8 14.1 20.1 21.0 22.2 21.0 21.2 21.2 20.6 23.5 21.3 Floodprone Width (ft) >89 >89 >80 >80 >99 >99 25.6 37.8 34.9 41.5 61.1 64.0 50.7 47.5 42.9 44.6 48.9 51.5 49.7 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 25.2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.9 1.7 2.5 2.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.3 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 3.6 3.6 4.4 4.4 4.9 4.4 4.6 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.9 Width/Depth Ratio 7.0 8.7 6.0 8.0 4.7 6.6 6.9 9.7 9.1 10.6 10.1 8.6 Entrenchment Ratio >5.3 >4.0 >4.0 >4.7 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 26.6 26.1 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 2.4 1.9 Substrate 0.1 2.6 13.0 1.2 0.3 1.4 2.3 **** 4.0 d50 (mm) 0.3 d84 (mm) 87.7 19.6 8.0 28.0 16.0 1.5 14.5 13.7 **** 19.0
Price Park EEP Project # 291
* No monitoring was perfomed during 2006; MY-05 was performed during 2007. ** Two additional cross-sections were surveyed per EEP's request. **** No substrate data was recorded for Cross-Section 2.
12
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 9 cont. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Cross-Section A** Cross-Section B** Parameter Riffle Pool MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension 14.4 25.6 29.8 17.5 Bankfull Width (ft) >60 >60 >60 >60 Floodprone Width (ft) 2 37.6 40.9 36.5 32.1 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft ) 2.2 1.5 1.4 2.1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 3.2 5.0 4.9 3.3 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 6.5 17.4 21.7 8.4 Width/Depth Ratio >3.0 >2.0 >2.0 >3.0 Entrenchment Ratio 1.0 1.0 Bank Height Ratio 16.8 33.8 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 1.9 1.2 Hydraulic Radius (ft) Substrate 6.6 1.9 0.2 17 d50 (mm) 40 d84 (mm) 15 4.3 29
Price Park EEP Project # 291
13
* Historical project documents necessary to provide these data were unavailable at the time of report submission.
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 9 cont. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park MY - 01 (2002) MY - 02 (2003) MY - 03 (2004) MY - 04 (2005) MY - 05 (2007) MY - 06 (2008) Parameter Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) 49 80 52 95 46 97 69 59 94 76 41 86 65 41 86 65 84 65 48 85 61 27 97 50 29 71 48 28 72 47 28 72 47 Radius of Curvature (ft) 49 Meander Wavelength (ft) 127 183 150 118 197 162 126 211 162 136 202 161 119 201 166 119 201 166 5.2 3.4 6.1 2.8 6.0 4.3 3.4 5.3 4.3 1.9 3.9 3.0 1.6 3.4 2.6 Meander Width Ratio 3.2 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 9 87 47 8.6 38 19.1 7 24 13 5 32 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.030 0.009 0.006 0.084 0.018 0.01 0.131 0.048 0.005 0.042 0.025 Pool Length (ft) 28 73 59 15 71 35 7 48 20 9 45 16 Pool Spacing (ft) 21 153 92 21 153 92 34.5 219 62.5 15 58 35 25 221 61 26 309 53 Additional Reach Parameters 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 Valley Length (ft) 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 Channel Length (ft) 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 Sinuosity 0.0062 0.0078 0.0076 0.0066 0.0067 0.0062 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) N/A* N/A* N/A* N/A* N/A* 1 Number of Bankfull Events E5 E5 E5 E5 E5 E5 Rosgen Classification
3.0
METHODOLOGY
The CVS-EEP protocol (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) was used to collect vegetation data from PricePark this year, the sixth year of monitoring. This methodology was incorporated during the fifth year of monitoring. The method used before that time was the EEP 2004 Stem Counting Protocol.
4.0
REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., R. K. Peet, S. D. Roberts, and T. R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.0 (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) Weakley, Alan S. 2006. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas. (http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/FloraArchives/WeakleyFlora_2006-Jan.pdf)
Price Park EEP Project # 291
14
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix A Vegetation Data
Price Park EEP Project # 291
15
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
A1 - Vegetation Data Tables Table A1. Vegetation Metadata Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Brian Roberts 8/15/2008 14:21 kci-problem-II-fixed.mdb M:\2007\12071067_2007 EEP OPEN END\Veg_database
Report Prepared By Date Prepared Database Name Database Location
PROJECT SUMMARY------------------------------------Project Project Length Description Code Name (ft) Stream Restoration site in 291 Price Park 1,776 Greensboro, NC
Table A2. Vegetation Vigor by Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Species 4 Alnus serrulata 2 Cornus amomum 1 Diospyros virginiana 5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 4 Quercus falcata 1 Quercus michauxii 5 Quercus phellos 3 Carpinus caroliniana 5 TOT: 8 26
3
Stream-to-Edge Width (ft)
Area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
80
26,397
8
8
2
1
0
Missing
3 6 1 3 1 14
Price Park EEP Project # 291
1
1
1
2
16
Vine Strangulation
2 5 2 5 6 2 8 3 33
Insects
2 5 4 5 10 2 8 4 40
Deer
No Damage
TOT:
Alnus serrulata Carpinus caroliniana Cornus amomum Diospyros virginiana Fraxinus pennsylvanica Quercus falcata Quercus michauxii Quercus phellos 8
All Damage Categories
Species
Table A3. Vegetation Damage by Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
3
1 2
3
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
1
1
1
1
2
2
Vine Strangulation
10 4 4 7 3 1 1 3 33
Insects
13 6 4 9 3 1 1 3 40
Deer
No Damage
TOT:
PP-A-0001-year:6 PP-A-0002-year:6 PP-A-0003-year:6 PP-A-0004-year:6 PP-A-0005-year:6 PP-A-0006-year:6 PP-A-0007-year:6 PP-A-0008-year:6 8
All Damage Categories
Plot
Table A4. Vegetation Damage by Plot Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
3
3
TOT:
Table A6. Vegetative Problem Areas Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park (UT to Horsepen Creek) Segment/Reach: Ut to Horsepen Creek (1,758 ft.) Feature/Issue Station # / Range Probable Cause Invasive Vegetation 00+30 – 00+60 Kudzu 11+00 – 11+60 Kudzu
Price Park EEP Project # 291
17
2 1 1 6
1
1 1
1
2 4
plot PP-A-0008-year:6
plot PP-A-0007-year:6
plot PP-A-0006-year:6
plot PP-A-0005-year:6
2 3 3
1 1 1 7 2 2 1 13
plot PP-A-0004-year:6
2 1.67 2 1.25 3.33 2 2 1
plot PP-A-0003-year:6
1 3 2 4 3 1 4 4
plot PP-A-0002-year:6
avg# stems
2 5 4 5 10 2 8 4
plot PP-A-0001-year:6
# plots
Alnus serrulata Carpinus caroliniana Cornus amomum Diospyros virginiana Fraxinus pennsylvanica Quercus falcata Quercus michauxii Quercus phellos 8
Total Planted Stems
Species
Table A5. Stem Count by Plot and Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
2
3 1 9
3
Photo # VP1
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
1
1 1
3
A2 – Representative Vegetation Problem Area Photos
VP1 – Mimosa (Albrizia julibrissin) and kudzu (Pueraria montana). Photo taken near Station 3+50. 10/29/08 MY 06
VP2 – Thorny olive (Elaeagnus pungens) along stream bank. Photo taken near Station 5+50. 10/29/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
18
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
A3 - Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 – Taken looking southeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 2 – Taken looking northeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
19
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 3 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 4 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
20
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 5 – Taken looking south toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 6 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
21
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 7 – Taken looking northeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 8 – Taken looking south toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
22
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix B Geomorphologic Data
Price Park EEP Project # 291
23
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
B1 – Representative Stream Problem Area Photos
SP1 – Severe bank erosion. Photo taken near Station 4+00 (XS1). 10/29/08 - MY 06
SP2 – Upper bank erosion. Photo taken near Station 5+00. 10/29/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
24
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
SP3 – Root wads completely above baseflow, rotting, and with scour behind. Photo taken near Station 9+00. 10/29/08 - MY 06
SP4 – Failed cross vane. Photo taken near Station 4+00. 11/5/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
25
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
SP5 – Beaver dam causing backwater conditions to Station 13+60. Photo taken near Station 17+50. 10/29/08 MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
26
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix B2 –Stream Photo Stations
M1-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M1-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M2-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M2-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M3-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M3-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
27
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M4-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M4-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M5-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M5-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M6-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M6-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
28
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M7-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M7-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M8-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M8-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M9-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M9-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
29
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M10-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M10-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M11-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M11-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M12-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M12-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
30
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M13-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M13-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M14-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M14-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M15-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M15-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
31
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M16-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M16-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M17-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M17-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
32
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
B3 –Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Table Table B1. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park
Feature Category A. Riffles
B. Pools
C. Thalweg
Metric (per As-built and reference baselines) 1. Present? 2. Armor stable (e.g. no displacement)? 3. Facet grade appears stable? 4. Minimal evidence of embedding/fining? 5. Length appropriate? 1. Present? (e.g. no severe aggradation)
(# Stable) Number Total Number / % Perform. Feature Performing Total Number feet in unstable in Stable Perform. Mean as Intended per As-built * state Condition or Total 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 21 18 N/A 117%
2. Sufficiently deep (Dmax pool:Mean Bkf > 1.6?) 3. Length appropriate? 1. Upstream of meander bend centering? 2. Downstream of meander centering?
21 21 12 14
18 18 17 17
N/A N/A N/A N/A
117% 117% 71% 82%
11
17
N/A
65%
0 17 17
6 17 17
N/A N/A N/A
0% 100% 100%
N/A
N/A
1/15
99%
N/A N/A 11
N/A N/A 13
3/90 18/240 N/A
95% 93% 85%
11 0 11 10 10
13 13 13 13 13
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
85% 0% 85% 77% 77%
117% 77%
D. Meanders 1. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled erosion? 2. Of those eroding, # w/ concomitant point bar formation? 3. Apparent Rc within spec? 4. Sufficient floodplain access and relief? E. Bed General 1.General channel bed aggradation areas (bar formation) 2. Channel bed degradation - areas of increasing down cutting or head cutting? F. Bank 1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank G. Vanes 1. Free of back or arm scour?
H. Wads / Boulders
2. Height appropriate? 3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate? 4. Free of piping or other structural failures? 1. Free of scour? 2. Footing stable?
66%
97% 93%
64% 77%
* Total number of features per as-built estimated from planview sheets.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
33
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06- Final
Station 0.0 3.6 3.8 8.1 13.6 20.8 23.3 25.9 28.8 30.3 30.4 32.4 34.4 36.0 36.9 37.6 38.2 39.5 41.3 42.4 43.0 43.9 43.9 45.6 46.0 47.4 49.1 49.5 49.6 51.1 56.0 59.6 65.5 82.3 88.5
Elevation 98.37 98.54 98.55 98.75 98.92 99.18 99.16 98.03 97.78 97.39 94.94 94.42 94.42 94.46 94.97 94.84 94.13 93.80 93.44 93.30 93.22 93.36 94.05 95.14 95.26 95.31 96.10 97.17 98.00 98.33 98.80 100.16 100.30 100.68 100.44
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 90
92
94
96
98
100
102
104
0
10
20
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 1, Riffle 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
30
40
50 Station (feet)
60
70
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 1, Riffle
97.8 64.0 21.0 102.2 >80 4.6 3.0 6.9 >4 1.0
B4 - Cross-Section Plots
80
90
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
100
Station 0.0 5.5 18.1 22.7 34.6 37.8 43.9 46.4 51.1 55.2 56.2 55.8 56.2 57.1 57.9 59.2 60.6 61.6 62.3 62.7 64.2 66.0 70.2 73.3 76.3 83.2 92.3 99.9
Elevation 97.00 97.17 97.12 96.97 97.14 95.92 95.63 94.41 93.97 93.49 92.26 91.59 91.16 90.92 90.83 90.56 90.49 90.66 91.06 92.46 94.54 95.60 96.06 97.32 97.54 97.55 97.43 97.44
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
0
10
20
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 2, Pool 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
30
40
50 Station (feet)
60
70
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 2, Pool
95.4 49.7 21.3 4.9 2.3 -
80
90
Bankfull MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
100
Station 0.0 22.8 24.2 24.7 27.4 31.7 36.1 37.2 37.7 38.0 38.6 39.0 39.4 39.8 40.4 40.4 41.3 41.5 42.6 45.2 46.7 50.8 54.0 59.8 72.2 85.3
Elevation 96.61 96.42 95.26 93.79 93.81 93.71 93.74 92.69 91.50 91.42 91.42 91.40 91.48 91.47 91.48 91.50 91.73 92.68 93.44 93.91 94.76 95.40 96.66 96.71 96.57 96.42
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 90
92
94
96
98
100
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 3, Riffle 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
20
30
40 50 Station (feet)
60
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 3, Riffle
95.0 37.8 24.0 98.6 >90 3.6 1.6 15.2 >4 1.0
70
80
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
90
Station 0.0 2.6 12.2 12.3 17.8 20.2 21.5 24.2 25.6 26.0 26.1 27.4 28.3 29.3 30.0 30.9 32.1 33.8 36.0 39.5 42.2 45.5 49.0 53.4 57.1 57.2
Elevation 499.55 499.40 499.69 498.84 498.79 498.71 498.63 496.86 496.09 494.91 494.28 494.22 494.16 494.51 494.84 496.09 497.38 498.13 498.97 499.00 499.10 500.03 500.05 499.95 500.04 500.23
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 492
494
496
498
500
502
504
506
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - A, Riffle 1.0 7/25/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan, A. Spiller
20
30 Station (feet)
40
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - A, Riffle
499.1 40.9 29.8 504.0 >60 4.9 1.4 21.7 >2 1.0
50
MY-06, 7/28/08
MY-05, 6/25/07
Flood Prone Area
Bankfull
60
Elevation 491.95 491.75 492.01 491.85 491.47 490.47 490.47 490.77 490.60 490.38 488.23 487.70 487.70 487.00 486.85 486.87 486.88 486.93
488.00
487.87 488.99 490.16 490.63 490.79 490.74 490.66 490.98
Station 0.0 0.4 0.5 3.1 6.6 10.0 10.1 16.0 20.1 22.7 23.6 24.6 24.6 27.8 29.3 31.0 32.1 32.9
33.3
34.1 35.5 39.3 40.7 47.0 52.6 56.7 57.0
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 484
486
488
490
492
494
496
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - B, Riffle 1.0 8/22/2008 B. Roberts, B. Hayes
20
Station (feet)
30
40
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - B, Riffle
490.1 32.1 14.4 493.4 >60 3.2 2.2 6.5 >3 1.0
50
MY-06, 8/22/08
MY-05, 6/25/07
Flood Prone Area
Bankfull
60
B5 - Longitudinal Plots Longitudinal Profile Price Park EEP Project Number 291- MY06 Stations 00+00 to 10+00 100
98
Assumed Elevation (ft)
96
SBKF = -0.0065x + 99.602
94
92
90 SWS = -0.0063x + 96.279 88
86 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Station (ft) MY-00, 4/11/02
MY-01, 12/17/02
MY-02, 9/30/03
MY-03, 6/4/04
MY-04, 6/4/05
MY-06, 7/28/08
Water Surface
Bankfull
In-stream Structures
BKF Slope
MY-05, 6/25/07
900
1000
Longitudinal Profile Price Park EEP Project Number 291- MY06 Stations 10+00 to 18+00 96
94
Assumed Elevation (ft)
92
SBKF = -0.0065x + 99.602
90
88
86 SWS = -0.0063x + 96.279 84
82
80 1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
Station (ft) MY-00, 4/11/02
MY-01, 12/17/02
MY-02, 9/30/03
MY-03, 6/4/04
MY-04, 6/4/05
MY-06, 7/28/08
Water Surface
Bankfull
In-stream Structures
BKF Slope
MY-05, 6/25/07
1700
1800
Note:
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048 C O B L B L D R BDRK Total
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
6 100
2
4 1
13 7 10 5 15 4 3 3 3 8 5 3
Cross Section 1 Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 8 Silt/Clay
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.091 0.35 1.2 3.4 16 55
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.2 dispersion 13.3 skewness 0.00
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 1 Riffle
B6 - Pebble Count Plots
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
8% 50% 33% 3% 0% 6%
MY06
MY05
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S 4 15 10 12 12 9 7 10 8 4 8 2 4 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 106 Note: Due to hazardous conditions, no data were collected for MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section 2 Pool - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.46 1.6 4 8 19 43
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 3.0 dispersion 6.7 skewness -0.10
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 2 Pool
1000
Type silt/clay sand 39% gravel 60% cobble 1% boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
MY06
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
Note:
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048 C O B L B L D R BDRK Total
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
102
3 4 2 11 10 13 12 7 7 4 3 9 8 2 2 2
Cross Section 3 Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 3 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.66 2.3 4.7 8.5 29 53
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 4.4 dispersion 6.6 skewness -0.02
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 3 Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
3% 29% 64% 4% 0%
MY06
MY05
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
18 6 3 2 4 2 6 9 5 7 9 1 8 1 1 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 101 Note: Due to missing monumentation, no data were collected for MY05 or MY06.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section 4 Riffle - MY03 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 18 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 0.12 1.8 7.4 19 41
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.1 dispersion 19.8 skewness -0.14
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 4 Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
18% 33% 48% 2%
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
17 16 10 6 4 9 4 3 4 2 2 2
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 102 Note: Cross Section A was established in MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section A Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 23 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 0.1 0.2 0.52 4.3 13
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 0.5 dispersion 12.4 skewness 0.30
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS A Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay 23% sand 52% gravel 25% cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
MY06
MY05
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
12 3 1 1 11 4 2 3 4 3 6 10 16 4 3 1 3 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK 1 Total 107 Note: Cross Section B was established in MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section B Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 18 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 1.1 6.6 23 40 87
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.6 dispersion 56.3 skewness -0.37
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS B Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
1%
17% 26% 49% 7%
MY06
MY05
Appendix C Current Conditions Plan View
Price Park EEP Project # 291
47
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06- Final
Submitted to:
NCEEP, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
March 2009
Monitoring Firm
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 Phone: (919) 783-9214 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Project Contact: Adam Spiller Email: [email protected]
Design Firm
701 Corporate Center Drive Suite 475 Raleigh, NC 27607 Phone: 919-854-6200
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND..........................................................................................1 1.1 Project Objectives .........................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach ......................................................1 1.3 Location and Setting .....................................................................................................1 1.4 Project History and Background...................................................................................1 1.5 Monitoring Plan View...................................................................................................5 2.0 PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS....................................7 2.1 Vegetation Assessment .................................................................................................7 2.2. Stream Assessment .......................................................................................................8 2.2.1 Bankfull Event and Stability Assessment .............................................................9 2.2.2 Stability Assessment Table ...................................................................................9 2.2.3 Quantitative Measures Summary Tables ............................................................10 3.0 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................14 4.0 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................14
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9.
Project Restoration Components..........................................................................1 Project Activity and Reporting History ...............................................................3 Project Contact Table...........................................................................................3 Project Background Table....................................................................................4 Verification of Bankfull Events ...........................................................................9 BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates.................................................................9 Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment....................................9 Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary ..................................................10 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary ..............................................11
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Figure 2.
Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................2 Monitoring Plan View..........................................................................................5
APPENDIX A – VEGETATION DATA A1. A2. A3.
Vegetation Data Tables....................................................................................................16 Representative Vegetation Problem Area Photos ............................................................18 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos .................................................................................19
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
APPENDIX B – GEOMORPHOLOGIC DATA B1. B2. B3. B4. B5. B6.
Representative Stream Problem Area Photos ..................................................................24 Stream Photo Stations ......................................................................................................27 Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Table................................................................33 Cross-Section Plots ..........................................................................................................34 Longitudinal Plots............................................................................................................39 Pebble Count Plots...........................................................................................................41
APPENDIX C – CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW C1.
Current Conditions Plan View .........................................................................................48
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program identified UT to Horsepen Creek in Price Park in Greensboro, North Carolina as a restoration project in 2000. In the past, this project has been referred to as UT to Horsepen Creek, Price Park and the Jefferson Pilot stream. Henceforth this project will be referred to as the Price Park project. The approximately 1.0-square mile watershed is located within the USGS 8-digit HUC 03020002 in the Upper Cape Fear River Basin. The project restored 1,436 linear feet of incised, channelized stream to 1,776 feet of sinuous channel. The restoration was designed to correct various problems with the existing stream corridor including unstable channel configuration, minimal bed features, and poor stream and riparian habitat. The restoration plan was completed in October 2000 and called for correcting these problems by stabilizing stream banks, installing in-stream structures, adjusting the stream planform, and replanting the riparian areas with native vegetation. Project construction occurred in 2001 with additional maintenance construction occurring in February 2002 when additional structures were installed. While 2008 is the seventh year since construction was completed, monitoring was not conducted at the site in 2006. In 2007 morphological monitoring was completed, but a formal monitoring report was not prepared. This report describes the findings of the sixth year of monitoring that took place in 2008. The Price Park vegetation monitoring has utilized three different methods throughout the monitoring period. The vegetation monitoring was originally conducted utilizing transects that ran perpendicular to the stream. These were monitored for the baseline conditions and during the first year of monitoring. The second year of monitoring established five square vegetation plots. These plots were monitored in the second, third, and fourth years of monitoring. In monitoring year 05, eight 10x10 meter vegetation monitoring plots were established. Where feasible, the new plots overlapped the approximate areas of the plots established in monitoring year 02. In monitoring years 05 and 06, the new plots were monitored utilizing the CVS vegetation monitoring protocol. In the years since planting, there have been many volunteer stems that have populated the conservation easement. Differentiating between volunteers and planted trees was difficult, but best efforts were made to do so. From these monitoring plots, a site average of 202 planted stems/acre was calculated in monitoring year 06. Monitoring year 06 also counted volunteer stems as part of the Level 2 vegetation monitoring. While the site has substantial buffer acreage and lateral extent for an urban setting, the planted stem survivorship in year-6 as determined by the vegetation plots is yielding a stem density of 202 stems/acre, approximately 75% of the 260 stems/acre, year-5 criterion. The site also has a substantial volunteer population comprised mainly of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and tulip poplar (Lirodendron tulipifera) adding to the stem density substantially to just over 2,000 stems/acre. The most prolific exotic invasive species at the site is kudzu (Pueraria montana), which already covers a large part of the easement and should be controlled as soon as possible. Previous monitoring of the project channel revealed some significant areas of bank instability. Observations in monitoring year 6 found many of these same areas of erosion. A total of 7% of bank footage exhibited some state of erosion during the projects history, but most of these demonstrated little advancement after their initial appearance. Most of these are described as moderate, with the exception of a serious instance of outright widening near a failed structure at ~ station 4+00. Many that were previously demonstrating active erosion have begun to stabilize with vegetation or have become stable over time as the banks were reshaped. This reshaping came mainly in the form of bench expansion in most cases, meaning the upper section of bank in some riffle sections scoured, increasing the area of the bench feature. Some of these areas still need to re-vegetate. Although some of the structures placement and construction were not ideal in terms of more recent practice and understanding, 85% within the reach are maintaining full grade control with a single structure exhibiting outright failure. The placement of some of these
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
structures has limited some of the intended riffle habitat, while adding more discrete functional pool features. There has been evidence of degradational stress in between grade control points on the bed at various times in the projects history, but currently the bed footage exhibiting some form of degradation is estimated at only 3%. The profile has varied vertically over time with the bulk of this appearing to represent movement of bedload through the system, although the section between stations 2+00 and 5+00 appears to have exhibited some downcut after construction. This however does not appear to have advanced over the last 3-4 years since its initial occurrence earlier in the projects history and the water surface and bankfull slopes are nearly identical as measured in 2008 and very close to those measured at the As-built stage. While the site has gone through some adjustments after construction, it appears that the site is exhibiting a stabilizing trend with the continued advancement of the vegetation, although the latter will benefit from the aforementioned planting augmentation and invasive control.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 - Final
1.0
PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1
Project Objectives
The goals and objectives of this project are as follows: • Provide a stable stream channel that neither aggrades nor degrades, while maintaining its dimension, pattern, and profile with the capacity to transport its watershed’s water and sediment load. • Reconnect the stream with its floodplain. • Improve aquatic habitat with the use of natural material stabilization structures such as root wads, rock vanes, woody debris and a riparian buffer. • Provide wildlife habitat and bank stability through the creation of a riparian zone. • Incorporate the existing greenway plan into the stream restoration plan.
1.2
Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
A previously incised channel, UT to Horsepen Creek, was restored using channel dimension, pattern, and profile modifications and the establishment of a vegetated riparian zone adjacent to the stream. The Priority I restoration involved converting the 1,436 ft straightened channel into a sinuous channel that meanders for a total of 1,776 ft. Cross vanes and root wads were incorporated for aquatic habitat enhancement and bed and bank stability. A 50-foot riparian buffer on either side of the stream was planted with native vegetation. In addition, an aerial sanitary sewer line was re-aligned to be perpendicular to the stream flow and a gas line was rerouted under the stream channel.
1.3
Location and Setting
The Unnamed Tributary to Horsepen Creek is located in Price Park within the city limits of Greensboro, North Carolina. The 1.0-square mile watershed has a park setting with Jefferson Elementary located to the west, Price Park to the east, and Guilford College to the south of the site. There is moderate potential for future development.
1.4
Project History and Background
R = Restoration
Price Park EEP Project # 291
Type
Approach
Linear Feet
Segment / Reach ID UT to Horsepen Creek
Existing Linear Feet
Table 1. Project Restoration Components Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
N/A
R
P1
1,776
Stationing 0+00 - 16+46
Comment
P1 = Priority 1
1
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
DIRECTIONS TO PRICE PARK SITE: From Interstate 40, take Exit 213 (Guilford College Road) North. Follow Guilford College Road past W. Friendly Avenue. where Guilford College Road becomes New Garden Road. Continue on New Garden Road and stay right at the Fleming Road and New Garden Road 'Y' intersection. Continue on New Garden Road for approximately 300 yards. Turn right on Hobbs Road. The road bisects the project stream at the bottom of the hill.
Hobbs Rd. New Garden Rd.
Project Location
Friendly Ave.
Guilford College Rd.
Market St.
Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map Price Park, Guilford County, EEP Project # 291 0.25 0.125 0
0.25
0.5 Miles
-
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Data Collection Complete N/A 2000 2001 2001 2002 2001 Jan-02 Jan-04 Jan-04 Aug-02 Aug-03 Aug-04 Aug-05 Jul-07* Oct-08
Activity or Report
Restoration Plan Mitigation Plan Construction Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area As-Built report Permanent seed mix applied to reach Containerized and B&B plantings for reach Structural maintenance (Bank Grading) Supplemental planting of containerized material Year 1 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 4 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring** Year 6 Monitoring *No monitoring was conducted in 2006 **Data collected but not submitted in an annual monitoring report in 2007
Actual Completion or Delivery N/A Dec-00 Aug-01 Feb-02 June-02 Aug-01 Jan-02 Jan-04 Jan-04 Aug-02 Aug-03 Aug-04 Aug-05 Nov-07 Jan-09
Table 3. Project Contact Table Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Earth Tech of North Carolina, Inc. Design Firm 701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475 Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 Contact: Ron Johnson Phone: (919) 854-6200 SEI Environmental, INC. Construction Contractor 5100 North I-85, Suite 7 Charolette, NC 28206 Phone: 1-800-873-1250 North State Environmental Inc. Repair Contractor 2889 Lowery Street, Suite B Winston-Salem, NC 27101 Contact: Darrell Westmoreland Phone: (336) 725-2010 Earth Tech of North Carolina, Inc. Monitoring Performer 701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475 As-Built Report and MY-01 Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 Biological & Agricultural Engineering Monitoring Performer North Carolina State University MY-02, 03, 04 Campus Box 7625 Raleigh, NC 27695 Contact: Dan Clinton Phone: (919) 515-6771 KCI Associates of North Carolina Monitoring Performer 4601 Six Forks Rd. MY-06, 07 Raleigh, NC 27609 Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller Phone: (919) 783-9214 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Price Park EEP Project # 291
3
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 4. Project Background Table Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Project County Guilford County Drainage Area 1.0 sq. miles Drainage Impervious Cover Estimate Estimated at >10% Stream Order 1st order Physiographic Region Piedmont Ecoregion Southern Outer Piedmont (45b) Rosgen Classification of As-built E-Stream Type Dominant Soil Types N/A* Reference Site ID N/A* USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03030002 NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-06-02 NCDWQ Classification for Project and Reference C Any portion of the project segment 303d listed? No Any portion of the project segment upstream of a 303d No listed segment? Reasons for 303d Listing or Stressor N/A % of Project Easement Fenced 0% *Historical project documents necessary to provide these data were unavailable at the time of report submission
Price Park EEP Project # 291
4
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.0
PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS
2.1
Vegetation Assessment
The Price Park vegetation monitoring has utilized three different methods throughout the monitoring period. The vegetation monitoring was originally conducted utilizing transects that ran perpendicular to the stream. These were monitored for the baseline conditions and during the first year monitoring. The second year of monitoring established five square vegetation plots. These plots were monitored in the second, third, and fourth years of monitoring. In monitoring year 05, eight 10x10 meter vegetation monitoring plots were established. Where feasible, the new plots overlapped the approximate areas of the plots established in monitoring year 02. In monitoring years 05 and 06, the new plots were monitored utilizing the CVS vegetation monitoring protocol. In the years since planting, there have been many volunteer stems that have populated the conservation easement. Differentiating between volunteers and planted trees was difficult, but best efforts were made to do so. From these monitoring plots, a site average of 202 planted stems/acre was calculated in monitoring year 06. The four plots representing the upper 60% of the project above the Jefferson Club Road bridge yielded an average planted stem density of 320 stems per acre in monitoring year 6, while the area below this bridge demonstrated planted stem densities of approximately 80 stems/acre. This zone will benefit from planting augmentation and possibly a jurisdictional delineation for a wetland feature of some apparent quality for the lower 200 feet of the project on stream right. The impacts to the vegetation counts were concentrated in this area primarily because of the repeated beaver activity. EEP’s wildlife control contractor removed beaver on two occasions and broke the dam at the lower culvert, but remnant material was used by beaver that recolonized the site and re-established the dam. EEP has informed KCI that another removal effort was scheduled for earlier this year. Monitoring year 06 also counted volunteer stems as part of the Level 2 vegetation monitoring. The most numerous volunteer species included green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). The data from the sixth year of monitoring revealed that only two of the eight monitoring plots contained enough palnted trees to be consistent with the 260 planted stems/acre vegetation success criterion. However, including volunteer trees all but two plots had greater than 260 stems/acre and the site average is 2,033 total stems/acre. The most prolific of the site’s exotic invasive species is kudzu (Pueraria montana), which already covers a large part of the easement and should be controlled as soon as possible. The other invasive species that are present in the project area include: Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), elaeagnus (Elaegnus sp.), mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus), Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense), lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), and microstegium (Microstegium vimineum). It is recommended that a site assessment for replanting be conducted and that an aggressive invasive species control program be implemented. See vegetation data and photos in Appendix A and Current Conditions Plan View in Appendix C. The taxonomic standard being used for vegetation identifications is “Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding areas by Alan S. Weakley.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
7
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.2.
Stream Assessment
Previous monitoring of the project channel revealed some significant areas of bank instability. Observations in monitoring year 6 found many of these same areas of erosion. A total of 7% of bank footage exhibited some state of erosion during the projects history, but most of these demonstrated little advancement after their initial appearance. Most of these are described as moderate, with the exception of a serious instance of outright widening near a failed structure at approximately Station 4+00. Many that were previously demonstrating active erosion have begun to stabilize with vegetation or have become stable over time as the banks were reshaped. In many cases eroded banks can stabilize over time. This can happen as banks become undercut and then the eventual slumping deposits the vegetated tops of the banks on the toe of the bank. The result is a bank with a protected toe and a new, more stable and less steep bank. Raw, eroded banks can also stabilize over time as vegetation grows on them even without slumping. Both of these natural methods of bank stabilization are occurring along many banks at the Price Park site. This is apparent throughout the site where the lower portions of the bank are well vegetated, but the top half of the bank is unvegetated and in some cases still prone to erosion at higher flows. In most places, the banks at Price Park are vertical, because the toe of bank has eroded away. However, in some cases these banks have stabilized. An additional year of monitoring will indicate whether the currently eroding banks are able to stabilize over time. The bank erosion areas of immediate concern are the ones that still, seven years after construction, do not have vegetation established on them. These areas can be seen in the Current Conditions Plan View. The stream is vertically controlled in some places by the cross vanes that are still functioning and bedrock. There are some apparent areas of stream bed degradation, but most of these areas are no longer worsening. While the bed features are present throughout the stream, they are not in a consistent riffle-pool sequence, but the bed exhibits a more diverse and faceted nature than the asbuilt profile exhibits. The beaver dam at the downstream limits of the project stream is backwatering the lower portion of the stream, which is described in the Current Conditions Plan View. The Monitoring Plan View illustrates how the existing cross vanes are located at the beginning of tangent sections (heads of riffles) on the stream planform. A typical cross vane should concentrate flow in the center of the channel and induce scour to help maintain pools. The arms should also slow water in the near bank region before redirecting it. At Price Park the placement of some of the structures in the lowest extent of meanders combined with short riffles was not ideal in terms of more recent practice and understanding and this has resulted in the conversion of some intended riffle habitat into pools. The cross vanes on the project stream act as grade control structures, but also promote the formation of pools where riffles should be beginning. The installed cross vane arms do not angle out away from the center boulder. Instead of directing water away from the banks, the vane arms act as large stone toe bank protection. Because of their placement, the cross vanes have been evaluated primarily as grade control measures and stone toe stabilization, in which case most are functional. Root wads, which are the other structures at the site, are only marginally functional. While they are still providing stream and terrestrial habitat, many of them are positioned above the streams baseflow and are beginning to rot. Certain degrading root wads then cause the surrounding stabilizing boulders to become displaced in some instances. In some places the root material is rotted away entirely and the root wads are hard to find. See additional stream assessment and photos in Appendix B and Current Conditions Plan View in Appendix C.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
8
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
2.2.1
Bankfull Event and Stability Assessment
2.2.1.a Verification of Bankfull Events Table Table 5. Verification of Bankfull Events Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Date of Data Collection 7/25/2008
Date of Occurrence 6/30/2008 8/27/2008
Method
Photo Number
Crest Gauge Tropical Storm Fay
N/A N/A
2.2.1.b BEHI and Sediment Export Table Table 6. BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park N/A
2.2.2
Stability Assessment Table
Table 7. Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Feature Initial MY - 01 MY - 02 MY - 03 MY - 04 MY - 05 MY - 06 A. Riffles 100% 59% B. Pools 100% 117% C. Thalweg 100% 77% D. Meanders 100% 66% E. Bed General 100% 97% F. Banks 100% 93% G. Vanes / J Hooks etc. 100% 64% H. Wads and Boulders 100% 77%
Please note that the pool feature in Table 7 has a rating above 100%. This occurs when there are more pools identified in the longitudinal profile survey for that monitoring year than were originally counted during the as-built survey.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
9
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Regional Curve Interval Min Max Mean Min Max Med Dimension Bankfull Width (ft) USGS gauge data Floodprone Width (ft) unavailable for this site Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) Width/Depth Ratio Bank Height Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Wetted Perimeter (ft) Hydraulic Radius (ft) Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) Radius of Curvature (ft) Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width Ratio Profile Riffle Length (ft) Riffle Slope (ft/ft) Pool Length (ft) Pool Spacing (ft) Substrate d50 (mm) d84 (mm) Additional Reach Parameters Valley Length (ft) Channel Length (ft) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) BF Slope (ft/ft) Rosgen Classification
Table 8. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park
Quantitative Measures Summary Tables
Price Park EEP Project # 291
2.2.3
10
0.018 E5
1,436 1 0.0094 G5/E5
0.71 bdrk
48
7.5
0.46 24.9
22.9
0.08 0.054
0.01
15.8 11.3 32 2.4
22.0 18.8 45 3.3
10.5 5.7 22 1.6
Pre-Existing Project Reference Condition Stream Min Max Mean Min Max Mean 11.6 20.1 15.9 5.7 7.5 6.6 16.9 >77 20.0 35.0 28.0 31.8 32.2 32.0 4.0 6.1 5.1 1.6 2.8 2.2 0.7 0.8 0.8 3.2 4.2 3.7 1.3 1.6 1.5 4.2 12.7 8.5 8.2 9.2 8.7 1.5 1.6 1.1 >4.8 3.5 4.6 4.1
E5
>2.2
E5
1,776
0.45 103
7.1
36.7 2.3 3.6 8.1
0.33 8
5.8
31.9 2.1 3.5 7.3
Max Mean 17.2 14.0
As-built*
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
0.22 8
4.9
24.1 1.8 3.2 6.2
32.5 2.0 3.5 8.3
36.8 2.0 4.3
Min 13.3
Riffle Pool 16.4 18.0
Design
Price Park EEP Project # 291
* No monitoring was perfomed during 2006; MY-05 was performed during 2007. ** Two additional cross-sections were surveyed per EEP's request. *** Cross-Section 4 could not be located during the MY-05 and MY-06 monitoring. **** No substrate data was recorded for Cross-Section 2.
Parameter
11
Cross Section 3 Riffle MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension 14.0 14.7 14.7 21.4 24.2 24.0 Bankfull Width (ft) 14.0 >90 >90 >90 >90 Floodprone Width (ft) 2 28.4 30.8 29.7 36.8 40.8 37.8 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft ) 30.7 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.6 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.2 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 3.5 6.4 7.0 7.0 7.4 12.6 14.4 15.2 Width/Depth Ratio >6.1 >4.0 >4.0 Entrenchment Ratio 1 Bank Height Ratio 27.4 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 1.4 Hydraulic Radius (ft) Substrate 0.1 0.6 20.0 4.7 d50 (mm) 0.2 d84 (mm) 6.7 12.1 8.5 43.0 29.0
35.5 2.1 3.6 8.2
37.2 2.1 3.2 8.2
0.3 6.9
MY1 17.3
MY0 17.2
0.3 14.8
1.4 16.7
*** ***
MY5 *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
*** ***
MY6 *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Cross Section 4*** Riffle MY2 MY3 MY4 17.2 17.1 16.2 >100 >100 36.3 35.1 32.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 3.7 3.7 3.5 8.2 8.6 8.1 >5.9
Table 9 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Cross-Section 1 Cross-Section 2 Parameter Riffle Pool MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension Bankfull Width (ft) 13.3 14.8 15.0 16.8 14.1 20.1 21.0 22.2 21.0 21.2 21.2 20.6 23.5 21.3 Floodprone Width (ft) >89 >89 >80 >80 >99 >99 25.6 37.8 34.9 41.5 61.1 64.0 50.7 47.5 42.9 44.6 48.9 51.5 49.7 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 25.2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.9 1.7 2.5 2.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.3 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 3.6 3.6 4.4 4.4 4.9 4.4 4.6 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.2 5.0 5.0 4.9 Width/Depth Ratio 7.0 8.7 6.0 8.0 4.7 6.6 6.9 9.7 9.1 10.6 10.1 8.6 Entrenchment Ratio >5.3 >4.0 >4.0 >4.7 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 26.6 26.1 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 2.4 1.9 Substrate 0.1 2.6 13.0 1.2 0.3 1.4 2.3 **** 4.0 d50 (mm) 0.3 d84 (mm) 87.7 19.6 8.0 28.0 16.0 1.5 14.5 13.7 **** 19.0
Price Park EEP Project # 291
* No monitoring was perfomed during 2006; MY-05 was performed during 2007. ** Two additional cross-sections were surveyed per EEP's request. **** No substrate data was recorded for Cross-Section 2.
12
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 9 cont. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park Cross-Section A** Cross-Section B** Parameter Riffle Pool MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 MY-00 MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05* MY-06 Dimension 14.4 25.6 29.8 17.5 Bankfull Width (ft) >60 >60 >60 >60 Floodprone Width (ft) 2 37.6 40.9 36.5 32.1 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft ) 2.2 1.5 1.4 2.1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 3.2 5.0 4.9 3.3 Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft) 6.5 17.4 21.7 8.4 Width/Depth Ratio >3.0 >2.0 >2.0 >3.0 Entrenchment Ratio 1.0 1.0 Bank Height Ratio 16.8 33.8 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 1.9 1.2 Hydraulic Radius (ft) Substrate 6.6 1.9 0.2 17 d50 (mm) 40 d84 (mm) 15 4.3 29
Price Park EEP Project # 291
13
* Historical project documents necessary to provide these data were unavailable at the time of report submission.
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06 - Final
Table 9 cont. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park MY - 01 (2002) MY - 02 (2003) MY - 03 (2004) MY - 04 (2005) MY - 05 (2007) MY - 06 (2008) Parameter Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) 49 80 52 95 46 97 69 59 94 76 41 86 65 41 86 65 84 65 48 85 61 27 97 50 29 71 48 28 72 47 28 72 47 Radius of Curvature (ft) 49 Meander Wavelength (ft) 127 183 150 118 197 162 126 211 162 136 202 161 119 201 166 119 201 166 5.2 3.4 6.1 2.8 6.0 4.3 3.4 5.3 4.3 1.9 3.9 3.0 1.6 3.4 2.6 Meander Width Ratio 3.2 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 9 87 47 8.6 38 19.1 7 24 13 5 32 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.030 0.009 0.006 0.084 0.018 0.01 0.131 0.048 0.005 0.042 0.025 Pool Length (ft) 28 73 59 15 71 35 7 48 20 9 45 16 Pool Spacing (ft) 21 153 92 21 153 92 34.5 219 62.5 15 58 35 25 221 61 26 309 53 Additional Reach Parameters 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 Valley Length (ft) 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 1,776 Channel Length (ft) 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 Sinuosity 0.0062 0.0078 0.0076 0.0066 0.0067 0.0062 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) N/A* N/A* N/A* N/A* N/A* 1 Number of Bankfull Events E5 E5 E5 E5 E5 E5 Rosgen Classification
3.0
METHODOLOGY
The CVS-EEP protocol (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) was used to collect vegetation data from PricePark this year, the sixth year of monitoring. This methodology was incorporated during the fifth year of monitoring. The method used before that time was the EEP 2004 Stem Counting Protocol.
4.0
REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., R. K. Peet, S. D. Roberts, and T. R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.0 (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) Weakley, Alan S. 2006. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas. (http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/FloraArchives/WeakleyFlora_2006-Jan.pdf)
Price Park EEP Project # 291
14
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix A Vegetation Data
Price Park EEP Project # 291
15
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
A1 - Vegetation Data Tables Table A1. Vegetation Metadata Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Brian Roberts 8/15/2008 14:21 kci-problem-II-fixed.mdb M:\2007\12071067_2007 EEP OPEN END\Veg_database
Report Prepared By Date Prepared Database Name Database Location
PROJECT SUMMARY------------------------------------Project Project Length Description Code Name (ft) Stream Restoration site in 291 Price Park 1,776 Greensboro, NC
Table A2. Vegetation Vigor by Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park Species 4 Alnus serrulata 2 Cornus amomum 1 Diospyros virginiana 5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 4 Quercus falcata 1 Quercus michauxii 5 Quercus phellos 3 Carpinus caroliniana 5 TOT: 8 26
3
Stream-to-Edge Width (ft)
Area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
80
26,397
8
8
2
1
0
Missing
3 6 1 3 1 14
Price Park EEP Project # 291
1
1
1
2
16
Vine Strangulation
2 5 2 5 6 2 8 3 33
Insects
2 5 4 5 10 2 8 4 40
Deer
No Damage
TOT:
Alnus serrulata Carpinus caroliniana Cornus amomum Diospyros virginiana Fraxinus pennsylvanica Quercus falcata Quercus michauxii Quercus phellos 8
All Damage Categories
Species
Table A3. Vegetation Damage by Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
3
1 2
3
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
1
1
1
1
2
2
Vine Strangulation
10 4 4 7 3 1 1 3 33
Insects
13 6 4 9 3 1 1 3 40
Deer
No Damage
TOT:
PP-A-0001-year:6 PP-A-0002-year:6 PP-A-0003-year:6 PP-A-0004-year:6 PP-A-0005-year:6 PP-A-0006-year:6 PP-A-0007-year:6 PP-A-0008-year:6 8
All Damage Categories
Plot
Table A4. Vegetation Damage by Plot Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
3
3
TOT:
Table A6. Vegetative Problem Areas Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park (UT to Horsepen Creek) Segment/Reach: Ut to Horsepen Creek (1,758 ft.) Feature/Issue Station # / Range Probable Cause Invasive Vegetation 00+30 – 00+60 Kudzu 11+00 – 11+60 Kudzu
Price Park EEP Project # 291
17
2 1 1 6
1
1 1
1
2 4
plot PP-A-0008-year:6
plot PP-A-0007-year:6
plot PP-A-0006-year:6
plot PP-A-0005-year:6
2 3 3
1 1 1 7 2 2 1 13
plot PP-A-0004-year:6
2 1.67 2 1.25 3.33 2 2 1
plot PP-A-0003-year:6
1 3 2 4 3 1 4 4
plot PP-A-0002-year:6
avg# stems
2 5 4 5 10 2 8 4
plot PP-A-0001-year:6
# plots
Alnus serrulata Carpinus caroliniana Cornus amomum Diospyros virginiana Fraxinus pennsylvanica Quercus falcata Quercus michauxii Quercus phellos 8
Total Planted Stems
Species
Table A5. Stem Count by Plot and Species Project Number and Name: 291 - Price Park
2
3 1 9
3
Photo # VP1
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
1
1 1
3
A2 – Representative Vegetation Problem Area Photos
VP1 – Mimosa (Albrizia julibrissin) and kudzu (Pueraria montana). Photo taken near Station 3+50. 10/29/08 MY 06
VP2 – Thorny olive (Elaeagnus pungens) along stream bank. Photo taken near Station 5+50. 10/29/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
18
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
A3 - Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 – Taken looking southeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 2 – Taken looking northeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
19
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 3 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 4 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
20
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 5 – Taken looking south toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 6 – Taken looking east toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
21
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Vegetation Plot 7 – Taken looking northeast toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Vegetation Plot 8 – Taken looking south toward the center of the plot from the origin. 8/14/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
22
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix B Geomorphologic Data
Price Park EEP Project # 291
23
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
B1 – Representative Stream Problem Area Photos
SP1 – Severe bank erosion. Photo taken near Station 4+00 (XS1). 10/29/08 - MY 06
SP2 – Upper bank erosion. Photo taken near Station 5+00. 10/29/08 - MY 06 Price Park EEP Project # 291
24
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
SP3 – Root wads completely above baseflow, rotting, and with scour behind. Photo taken near Station 9+00. 10/29/08 - MY 06
SP4 – Failed cross vane. Photo taken near Station 4+00. 11/5/08 - MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
25
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
SP5 – Beaver dam causing backwater conditions to Station 13+60. Photo taken near Station 17+50. 10/29/08 MY 06
Price Park EEP Project # 291
26
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
Appendix B2 –Stream Photo Stations
M1-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M1-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M2-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M2-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M3-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M3-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
27
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M4-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M4-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M5-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M5-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M6-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M6-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
28
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M7-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M7-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M8-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M8-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M9-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M9-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
29
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M10-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M10-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M11-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M11-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M12-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M12-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
30
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M13-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M13-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M14-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M14-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M15-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M15-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
31
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
M16-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M16-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
M17-US – MY06 – 11/5/08
M17-DS – MY06 – 11/5/08
Price Park EEP Project # 291
32
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 – MY06 – Final
B3 –Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Table Table B1. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment Project Number and Name: 291 – Price Park
Feature Category A. Riffles
B. Pools
C. Thalweg
Metric (per As-built and reference baselines) 1. Present? 2. Armor stable (e.g. no displacement)? 3. Facet grade appears stable? 4. Minimal evidence of embedding/fining? 5. Length appropriate? 1. Present? (e.g. no severe aggradation)
(# Stable) Number Total Number / % Perform. Feature Performing Total Number feet in unstable in Stable Perform. Mean as Intended per As-built * state Condition or Total 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 59% 10 17 N/A 59% 21 18 N/A 117%
2. Sufficiently deep (Dmax pool:Mean Bkf > 1.6?) 3. Length appropriate? 1. Upstream of meander bend centering? 2. Downstream of meander centering?
21 21 12 14
18 18 17 17
N/A N/A N/A N/A
117% 117% 71% 82%
11
17
N/A
65%
0 17 17
6 17 17
N/A N/A N/A
0% 100% 100%
N/A
N/A
1/15
99%
N/A N/A 11
N/A N/A 13
3/90 18/240 N/A
95% 93% 85%
11 0 11 10 10
13 13 13 13 13
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
85% 0% 85% 77% 77%
117% 77%
D. Meanders 1. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled erosion? 2. Of those eroding, # w/ concomitant point bar formation? 3. Apparent Rc within spec? 4. Sufficient floodplain access and relief? E. Bed General 1.General channel bed aggradation areas (bar formation) 2. Channel bed degradation - areas of increasing down cutting or head cutting? F. Bank 1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank G. Vanes 1. Free of back or arm scour?
H. Wads / Boulders
2. Height appropriate? 3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate? 4. Free of piping or other structural failures? 1. Free of scour? 2. Footing stable?
66%
97% 93%
64% 77%
* Total number of features per as-built estimated from planview sheets.
Price Park EEP Project # 291
33
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06- Final
Station 0.0 3.6 3.8 8.1 13.6 20.8 23.3 25.9 28.8 30.3 30.4 32.4 34.4 36.0 36.9 37.6 38.2 39.5 41.3 42.4 43.0 43.9 43.9 45.6 46.0 47.4 49.1 49.5 49.6 51.1 56.0 59.6 65.5 82.3 88.5
Elevation 98.37 98.54 98.55 98.75 98.92 99.18 99.16 98.03 97.78 97.39 94.94 94.42 94.42 94.46 94.97 94.84 94.13 93.80 93.44 93.30 93.22 93.36 94.05 95.14 95.26 95.31 96.10 97.17 98.00 98.33 98.80 100.16 100.30 100.68 100.44
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 90
92
94
96
98
100
102
104
0
10
20
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 1, Riffle 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
30
40
50 Station (feet)
60
70
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 1, Riffle
97.8 64.0 21.0 102.2 >80 4.6 3.0 6.9 >4 1.0
B4 - Cross-Section Plots
80
90
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
100
Station 0.0 5.5 18.1 22.7 34.6 37.8 43.9 46.4 51.1 55.2 56.2 55.8 56.2 57.1 57.9 59.2 60.6 61.6 62.3 62.7 64.2 66.0 70.2 73.3 76.3 83.2 92.3 99.9
Elevation 97.00 97.17 97.12 96.97 97.14 95.92 95.63 94.41 93.97 93.49 92.26 91.59 91.16 90.92 90.83 90.56 90.49 90.66 91.06 92.46 94.54 95.60 96.06 97.32 97.54 97.55 97.43 97.44
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
0
10
20
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 2, Pool 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
30
40
50 Station (feet)
60
70
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 2, Pool
95.4 49.7 21.3 4.9 2.3 -
80
90
Bankfull MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
100
Station 0.0 22.8 24.2 24.7 27.4 31.7 36.1 37.2 37.7 38.0 38.6 39.0 39.4 39.8 40.4 40.4 41.3 41.5 42.6 45.2 46.7 50.8 54.0 59.8 72.2 85.3
Elevation 96.61 96.42 95.26 93.79 93.81 93.71 93.74 92.69 91.50 91.42 91.42 91.40 91.48 91.47 91.48 91.50 91.73 92.68 93.44 93.91 94.76 95.40 96.66 96.71 96.57 96.42
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 90
92
94
96
98
100
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - 3, Riffle 1.0 7/28/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan
20
30
40 50 Station (feet)
60
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - 3, Riffle
95.0 37.8 24.0 98.6 >90 3.6 1.6 15.2 >4 1.0
70
80
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY-00, 4/11/02 MY-01, 12/17/02 MY-02, 9/30/03 MY-03, 6/4/04 MY-04, 6/4/05 MY-05, 6/25/07 MY-06, 7/28/08
90
Station 0.0 2.6 12.2 12.3 17.8 20.2 21.5 24.2 25.6 26.0 26.1 27.4 28.3 29.3 30.0 30.9 32.1 33.8 36.0 39.5 42.2 45.5 49.0 53.4 57.1 57.2
Elevation 499.55 499.40 499.69 498.84 498.79 498.71 498.63 496.86 496.09 494.91 494.28 494.22 494.16 494.51 494.84 496.09 497.38 498.13 498.97 499.00 499.10 500.03 500.05 499.95 500.04 500.23
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 492
494
496
498
500
502
504
506
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - A, Riffle 1.0 7/25/2008 B. Roberts, K. Vaughan, A. Spiller
20
30 Station (feet)
40
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - A, Riffle
499.1 40.9 29.8 504.0 >60 4.9 1.4 21.7 >2 1.0
50
MY-06, 7/28/08
MY-05, 6/25/07
Flood Prone Area
Bankfull
60
Elevation 491.95 491.75 492.01 491.85 491.47 490.47 490.47 490.77 490.60 490.38 488.23 487.70 487.70 487.00 486.85 486.87 486.88 486.93
488.00
487.87 488.99 490.16 490.63 490.79 490.74 490.66 490.98
Station 0.0 0.4 0.5 3.1 6.6 10.0 10.1 16.0 20.1 22.7 23.6 24.6 24.6 27.8 29.3 31.0 32.1 32.9
33.3
34.1 35.5 39.3 40.7 47.0 52.6 56.7 57.0
River Basin: Watershed: XS ID Drainage Area (sq mi): Date: Field Crew:
Elevation (feet) 484
486
488
490
492
494
496
0
10
SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area: Bankfull Width: Flood Prone Area Elevation: Flood Prone Width: Max Depth at Bankfull: Mean Depth at Bankfull: W / D Ratio: Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio:
Cape Fear Price Park, MY-06 XS - B, Riffle 1.0 8/22/2008 B. Roberts, B. Hayes
20
Station (feet)
30
40
Cape Fear River Basin, Price Park, MY-06, XS - B, Riffle
490.1 32.1 14.4 493.4 >60 3.2 2.2 6.5 >3 1.0
50
MY-06, 8/22/08
MY-05, 6/25/07
Flood Prone Area
Bankfull
60
B5 - Longitudinal Plots Longitudinal Profile Price Park EEP Project Number 291- MY06 Stations 00+00 to 10+00 100
98
Assumed Elevation (ft)
96
SBKF = -0.0065x + 99.602
94
92
90 SWS = -0.0063x + 96.279 88
86 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Station (ft) MY-00, 4/11/02
MY-01, 12/17/02
MY-02, 9/30/03
MY-03, 6/4/04
MY-04, 6/4/05
MY-06, 7/28/08
Water Surface
Bankfull
In-stream Structures
BKF Slope
MY-05, 6/25/07
900
1000
Longitudinal Profile Price Park EEP Project Number 291- MY06 Stations 10+00 to 18+00 96
94
Assumed Elevation (ft)
92
SBKF = -0.0065x + 99.602
90
88
86 SWS = -0.0063x + 96.279 84
82
80 1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
Station (ft) MY-00, 4/11/02
MY-01, 12/17/02
MY-02, 9/30/03
MY-03, 6/4/04
MY-04, 6/4/05
MY-06, 7/28/08
Water Surface
Bankfull
In-stream Structures
BKF Slope
MY-05, 6/25/07
1700
1800
Note:
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048 C O B L B L D R BDRK Total
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
6 100
2
4 1
13 7 10 5 15 4 3 3 3 8 5 3
Cross Section 1 Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 8 Silt/Clay
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.091 0.35 1.2 3.4 16 55
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.2 dispersion 13.3 skewness 0.00
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 1 Riffle
B6 - Pebble Count Plots
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
8% 50% 33% 3% 0% 6%
MY06
MY05
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S 4 15 10 12 12 9 7 10 8 4 8 2 4 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 106 Note: Due to hazardous conditions, no data were collected for MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section 2 Pool - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.46 1.6 4 8 19 43
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 3.0 dispersion 6.7 skewness -0.10
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 2 Pool
1000
Type silt/clay sand 39% gravel 60% cobble 1% boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
MY06
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
Note:
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048 C O B L B L D R BDRK Total
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
102
3 4 2 11 10 13 12 7 7 4 3 9 8 2 2 2
Cross Section 3 Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 3 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.66 2.3 4.7 8.5 29 53
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 4.4 dispersion 6.6 skewness -0.02
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 3 Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
3% 29% 64% 4% 0%
MY06
MY05
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
18 6 3 2 4 2 6 9 5 7 9 1 8 1 1 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 101 Note: Due to missing monumentation, no data were collected for MY05 or MY06.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section 4 Riffle - MY03 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 18 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 0.12 1.8 7.4 19 41
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.1 dispersion 19.8 skewness -0.14
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS 4 Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
18% 33% 48% 2%
MY03
MY02
MY01
As-Built
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
17 16 10 6 4 9 4 3 4 2 2 2
C O B L B L D R BDRK Total 102 Note: Cross Section A was established in MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section A Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 23 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 0.1 0.2 0.52 4.3 13
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 0.5 dispersion 12.4 skewness 0.30
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS A Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay 23% sand 52% gravel 25% cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
MY06
MY05
G R A V E L S
S A N D S
12 3 1 1 11 4 2 3 4 3 6 10 16 4 3 1 3 1
C O B L B L D R BDRK 1 Total 107 Note: Cross Section B was established in MY05.
Very Fine .062 - .125 Fine .125 - .25 Medium .25 - .50 Coarse .50 - 1 Very Coarse 1-2 Very Fine 2-4 Fine 4 - 5.7 Fine 5.7 - 8 Medium 8 - 11.3 Medium 11.3 - 16 Coarse 16 - 22.6 Coarse 22.6 - 32 Very Coarse 32 - 45 Very Coarse 45 - 64 Small 64 - 90 Small 90 - 128 Large 128 - 180 Large 180 - 256 Small 256 - 362 Small 362 - 512 Medium 512 - 1024 Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 Bedrock >2048
Cross Section B Riffle - MY06 Particle Millimeter Count < 0.062 S/C 18 Silt/Clay
% Finer Than (Cumulative)
D16 D35 D50 D65 D84 D95
0.1
Size (mm) 0.062 1.1 6.6 23 40 87
0% 0.01
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
5 6 17 4 2 3 3 11 15 10 8 4 5 1 10 100 3 Particle Size - Millimeters 3 3 Size Distribution mean 1.6 dispersion 56.3 skewness -0.37
Particle Size Distribution Price Park XS B Riffle
1000
Type silt/clay sand gravel cobble boulder bedrock hardpan wood/det artificial
10000
1%
17% 26% 49% 7%
MY06
MY05
Appendix C Current Conditions Plan View
Price Park EEP Project # 291
47
KCI Associates of North Carolina 2008 - MY06- Final
