20171242 Ver 1_2018 Monitoring Report_20190106

Strickland, Bev
From: Jennifer Robertson <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 11:33 AM
To: 'Shaeffer, David Leigh (Dave) CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
([e-mail])'; Johnson, Alan
Cc: Franchina, David A.; 'Seth Malamut ([e-mail])'; W. Scott Cooper;
Kathy Godley
Subject: [External] South Fork Business Park 2018 Stream Restoration Monitoring Report /
Action ID: 2008-00363 and Project #: 17-1242
Attachments: South Fork Business Park Monitoring Report 2018 Flattened.pdf
=External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verified. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
NNNNUmff nc. ov
David/Alan,
Attached is the 2018 stream restoration annual monitoring report for South Fork Business Park. Please see
the cover letter that includes request for a conference call. Please let us know your availability for the call.
Thank you,
Jennifer L Robertson, President
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
712 English Tudor Lane
Charlotte, NC 28211
[phone] office
[phone] mobile
www.atiasenvi.com
Offices in Asheville and Charlotte
NMENTAL

�� A
r� .A►
AftW
�� ` ■ '
January 16, 2018
US Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources,
Charlotte Regulatory Satellite Office 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit
Attn: Mr. David Shaeffer Attn: Mr. Alan Johnson
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 611 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28262 Mooresville, NC 28115
Re: South Fork Business Park, Mooresville, NC
Stag Mooresville 2 LP
Stream Restoration First Annual Monitoring Report
Corps Action ID: SAW -2008-00363 / DWR Project #: 17-1242
David/Alan:
Attached please find the first annual monitoring report for the stream restoration
project at South Fork Business Park. As I believe you are aware this property was sold
in 2017. The new owner is Stag Mooresville 2 LP. Mr. Seth Malamut is the contact for
Stag. Mr. David Franchina, McGuireWoods LLP, is the environmental attorney for Stag
Mooresville 2 LP. Mr. Franchina has requested a call with you to discuss follow up
permitting and related matters. Please let me know your availability for a call.
Best regards,
�A+ dl&4z VAO-,
Jennifer L Robertson
][e-mail]

South Fork Business Park
Stream Restoration Annual Monitoring Report
Corps Action ID: SAW -2008-00363
DWR Project #: 17-1242
Report Completion Date: June 26, 2018
I19,
Prepared For:
STAG Mooresville 2 LP
One Federal Street, 23rd Floor
Boston, MA 02110
Prepared By.-
Atlas
y:Atlas Environmental, Inc.
712 English Tudor Lane
Charlotte, NC 28211
A-,.TL�
ENVIRONMENTAL
1

Table of Contents
Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... 3
Restoration and Construction Summary........................................................................................................... 3
StructureLocation Map................................................................................................................................ 5
Morphology/Hydrology.................................................................................................................................... 6
Dimension..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Pattern........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Profile...........................................................................................................................................................7
Biological.......................................................................................................................................................... 8
VegetationMonitoring Plots.........................................................................................................................8
VegetationPlot Map...................................................................................................................................14
AquaticLife Survey....................................................................................................................................15
Non -Performing Grade Control Structures.....................................................................................................16
Conclusion......................................................................................................................................................23
PhotographLog..............................................................................................................................................24
ConstructionPhotographs...........................................................................................................................25
As -Built Photographs..................................................................................................................................28
2018 Monitoring Photographs....................................................................................................................30
NCSAM Evaluations.....................................................................................................................................36
Patternand Structure Locations......................................................................................................................40
LongitudinalProfile........................................................................................................................................42
Cross-Sections................................................................................................................................................49
Reach Classification and Data Worksheets....................................................................................................74
2

Introduction
Stream impacts to an unnamed tributary to South Fork Withrow Creek, a Class C water, were
results of both direct and indirect impacts leading to the issuance of a Notice of Violation from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated August 24, 2016. A combination of excessive storm
flow directed to the stream and construction of an impoundment located on the unnamed
tributary created a system characterized by extremely flashy and erosive flows at discharges
causing instability. The excessive flows resulted in rapid down -cutting of the stream bed and
vertical banks forming gully -like stream conditions with no floodplain access. The mobilized
sediment in the upper reaches impacted lower reaches burying stream features, aiding storm
flows at discharges exceeding natural flow, restricting aquatic life mobility, and creating a loss of
habitat. The stream restoration objectives focused on providing a natural system that was able to
efficiently transport sediment, provide for aquatic life mobility, and restore the stream
morphology (pattern, profile, and dimensions) for both temporal and morphological stability.
Restoration and Construction Summary
Stream restoration construction activities on site conducted by South Fork Mooresville LLC and
Atlas Environmental, Inc. began on April 10, 2017 and were concluded on July 12, 2017.
Originally a total of 16 grade control and habitat forming structures were installed along the
1,621 linear feet of stream from the toe of the slope at the upstream reach to the approximate
location of the removed storm water best management practice dam. No grade control structures
were installed along the section of stream downstream from the existing sewer line due channel
migration being restricted by existing bedrock. In -stream structures consisted primarily of log
vanes and steps with rock structures installed in locations where extra stability was required.
There are a total of 9 log structures (log vanes and steps) and 7 large rock structures 0 -hooks and
cross vanes). Two additional log steps were installed on May 8 and 9, 2018 to reduce the relative
elevation change between structures, increase aquatic life passage, and minimize changes of
being undercut by erosive storm flows. Storm water control devices, Aqua -Shield units, were
installed to treat storm water runoff by removing total suspended solids. The main Aqua -Shield
unit sends treated water to the stream via a level spreader through a single 24 -inch pipe and the
remainder of the water, from large storm events, is culverted to the dry detention basin through a
48 -inch pipe. The water moves through the forebay separated from the main area of the pond by
riprap and gravel to an outlet that directs the water treated by settling back to the stream at a
downstream location at the end of the stream restoration reach. The Aqua -Shield systems allow
for a reduction in the amount of storm water that is being directed to the stream. The level
spreader system that discharges treated water to the stream consists of a level 24 -inch corrugated
metal pipe with approximately 100 two inch holes torched into the pipe at varying elevations.
The holes control the discharge stabilizing the stream system by creating a more natural
hydrograph. The storm water flows through a bio -engineered wetland for additional settling and
slowing of the flow before entering a widened section of the stream.
3

Grade Control Structure Tvae and Order
Structure
*Structure Number
Log Step
1
Log Step
2
Rock Cross Vane
3
Rock Vane
4
Log Vane
5
Log Vane
6
Rock Vane
7
Rock J -Hook
8
Rock Cross Vane
9
Log Vane
10
Rock Cross Vane
11
Log Vane
12
Log Step
13
Log Vane
14
Rock Cross Vane
15
Log Vane
16
Log Step
17
Log Vane
18
*All structures are numbered from upstream to downstream.

Structure Location Map
`� f1
N
7 �
L1 W
2L
71
{ C
w
3
0
3
9
4
7
a
O

Morphology/Hydrology
Field work for the 2018 "Stream Restoration Annual Monitoring Report" was completed in May and June
2018. All measurements of dimension, pattern, and profile were collected using a Nikon Pulse Laser Station
NPL -332. A total of 12 cross sections, a longitudinal profile, and a pattern map were produced from the
collected data and analyzed using RIVERMorph Professional 5.1. Select data was also imported into GIS
applications for additional analysis and for quality checking the data. The drainage basin of the reach was
measured to be 0.081 square miles by GIS applications. Basin topographic relief is 98 feet and stream
topographic relief is 26.5 feet. Bankfull discharge of the stream was determined to be between 5.62 CFS and
5.93 CFS using Manning's Roughness and Friction Factor/Relative Roughness, respectively.
Dimension
Channel geometry was characteristic of a first order perennial stream located in the piedmont of North
Carolina consisting of cohesive banks. Of the 12 cross sections collected 5 were located at riffles, 4 were
located at glides, one was located at a pool, one was located at a run, and one was listed as being located at
other. The cross section listed as "other" is cross section 1 and is in a highly vegetated section with wetland
vegetation along both banks. Features relating to a specific bed form were absent and this cross section was
not used in the calculation of dimension ratios. The cross section that was used for calculation of roughness
and discharge calculation is cross section 9. This cross section is an average representation of the entire reach
and is along the lower third but is upstream of the dry detention basin discharge. The stream in the area of the
dry detention discharge was armored with boulders to dissipate energy and protect the banks. Downstream of
this point the stream is bedrock controlled. The average bankf ill Width to Depth ratio of the riffles is 16.8
with an average width at bank full of 5.39 feet and depth of 0.49 feet. The average flood -prone width area is
10.6 giving an entrenchment ratio of 2.07 which falls between moderately and slightly entrenched. The
stream is capable of reaching the floodplain during high flow events. This metric is essential at the South
Fork site due to the flashy nature caused from storm water. If there is no access to the floodplain the stream
would begin to down -cut from a C -stream to a G -stream and over widen to an F -stream leading to high
sediment mobility. Cross section dimension of the riffle sections shows a decrease in bankfull width to depth
ratio with bar building occurring along the stream edges and defined streams forming with an inner berm and
bankfull bench.

XS9 STA 8+31 RIFFLE
o XS 9 2018 XS 9 2017
Horizontal Oislanos [ft]
A comparison of cross section 9, a riffle, at station 8+31 clearly shows a bar building along the left bankfull
indicator, an inner berm, and deepening of the main channel that is creating a low flow area to efficiently
transport sediment at a variety of flow conditions.
Pattern
The pattern of the stream is slightly sinuous exhibiting limited lateral migration due to the highly cohesive,
high clay content, banks. Measured channel geometry averages have a linear wavelength of 107 feet,
meander length of 125 feet, and a radius of curvature of 17-20 feet. The sinuosity of the reach was calculated
by stream length/valley length to be 1.12. This sinuosity is slightly less than that of a typical C -stream. It is
likely that future monitoring reports will indicate a belt width becoming wider and sinuosity increasing closer
to a 1.2. The dimensionless ratios are appropriate and show little change from the 2017 As -Built report.
Profile
The channel profile was collected along the thalweg of the stream with an emphasis on collecting points
around areas of large elevation changes and constructed grade control structures. Due to the restoration reach
beginning at the head of the basin a variety of slopes are displayed ranging from steeper at the upper most
section to flatter near the confluence with South Fork Withrow Creek. The upper third of the longitudinal
profile exhibits slopes that approximate 4.2-4.5% up to structure number 3 that is immediately upstream of the
constructed wetland. Stream slopes through the middle and lower sections of the reach range from 1.3-1.5%
to the area of bedrock control that begins immediately downstream of the existing aerial sewer line crossing.

Biological
Monitoring of biological indices includes the establishment of six, randomly selected, vegetation plots. The vegetation
plots are 10 foot X 10 foot squares which are marked by white PVC pipe and orange paint. Live stakes were harvested
and planted from existing vegetation during construction along with the planting of 2000 live stakes on December 5 and 6,
2017. Live stake species that were planted included Elderberry, Black Willow, Silky Willow, and Silky Dogwood. There
were 500 live stakes planted of each species. In addition to vegetation monitoring Atlas has conducted general surveys
for aquatic life including fishes, amphibians, crustaceans, reptiles, and macro -invertebrates over the past year.
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Plot 1
Vegetation
Stems Per Plot
*Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
3
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix sp.)
13
Soft Rush Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Dog Fennel Eu atorium ca illi olium
Observed in
plot
Seedbox Ludwi is alterni olia
Observed in
plot
Golden rod (Solida o sp.))
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot one has 16 stems which is
equivalent to 6,970 stems per acre. (435.6 * 16 = 6969.6 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.

Plot 2
Vegetation
Stem Per Plot
*Elderbe Sambucus canadensis
1
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix sp.)
11
*Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum
2
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Soft Rush Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Sweet pea Lath rus sp.)
Observed in
plot
Ticktrefoil Desmodium nudi orum
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot two has 14 stems which is
equivalent to 6,098 stems per acre. (435.6 * 14 = 6098.4 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.

Plot 3
Vegetation
Stem Per Plot
*Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
1
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix s
9
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Sweet pea Lath rus s
Observed in
plot
Soft Rush (Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Deer -Tongue Grass Dichanthelium clandestinum
Observed in
plot
Knotweed (Polygonum sp.)
Observed in
plot
Golden rod Solida o sp.)
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot three has 10 stems which is
equivalent to 4,356 stems per acre. (435.6 * 10 = 4356 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.
10

Plot 4
Vegetation
Stem Per Plot
*Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
9
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix s
5
*Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum
5
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Soft Rush (Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Deer -Tongue Grass Dichanthelium clandestinum
Observed in
plot
Knotweed (Polygonum sp.)
Observed in
plot
Golden rod Solida o sp.)
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot three has 19 stems which is
equivalent to 8,276 stems per acre. (435.6 * 19 = 8276.4 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.
11

Plot 5
Vegetation
Stem Per Plot
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix s
12
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Soft Rush Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Seedbox Ludwi is alterni olia
Observed in
plot
Do fennel (Eu atorium ca illi olium)
Observed in
plot
Knotweed (Polygonum sp.)
Observed in
plot
Golden rod Solida o s
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot three has 12 stems which is
equivalent to 5,227 stems per acre. (435.6 * 12 = 5227.2 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.
12

Plot 6
Vegetation
Stem Per Plot
*Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
5
*Black Willow, Silky Willow Salix s
12
*Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum
2
Sedges Carex Sp.)
Observed in
plot
Soft Rush Juncus effuses)
Observed in
plot
Do fennel Eu atorium ca illi olium
Observed in
plot
Ticktrefoil Desmodium s
Observed in
plot
Golden rod Solida o s
Observed in
plot
Wild Mullein Verbascum tha sus
Observed in
plot
*Live stake species
The plot size is 10 Foot X 10 Foot which makes 435.6 plots per acre. After the first year plot three has 19 stems which is
equivalent to 8,276 stems per acre. (435.6 * 19 = 8276.4 stems per acre). Vegetation mortality of the live stakes is
expected to occur this coming year.
13

0

Aquatic Life Survey
During the monitoring report fieldwork Atlas staff assessed a variety of riffles and pools throughout the
restoration reach in a qualitative effort to assess the rebound of aquatic life for environmental uplift. During
the survey all species in the "Observed Aquatic Life" table were visually documented within the restoration
reach. There are significantly greater varieties and numbers of macro -invertebrates and fish than what existed
prior to restoration. The majority of fish were observed in deep pools along the middle and downstream
sections of the restoration reach and appear to be creek chubs. Indicators of higher stream quality (EPT taxa)
were observed in higher numbers through the upper third of the reach that receives less flow and where the
bed has higher quantities of detritus and shade. The upper section also receives direct inflow of groundwater
at cooler temperatures than downstream areas providing for higher dissolved oxygen concentrations. It is
expected that the lower reaches will begin to attract higher quality EPT taxa in the future. Reptiles and
amphibians have also been observed throughout the entire reach but were not observed during the monitoring
report and are denoted in the table with an asterisk.
Observed Aquatic Life
Species
Riffle Beetles
Creek Chub
Midges
Crawfish
Crane Flies
Stoneflies
*Snapping Turtles
Mayflies
*Northern Water Snake
Dragonflies
*Various Frogs
Damselflies
Caddisflies
*observed at an earlier date
Over the past year Atlas Environmental has surveyed the reach of the stream multiple times and these species have been
observed in the riffles and pools.
15

Non -Performing Grade Control Structures
November 8, 2017
Rock Cross Vane — Structure 9
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on November 8, 2017. The structure was washed under and
around due to high flow during rain events. The repair was completed by lowering the structure for low flow periods and
the bank was stabilized around the structure on November 14, 2017.
Log Vane — Structure 12
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on November 8, 2017. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs. The repair was completed by digging upstream of the structure and wrapping the log in coir
matting. Then, folding the matting upstream and covering it up with the streambed material on November 14, 2017.
16

February 27, 2018
Rock Cross Vane — Structure 9
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on January 4, 2018. The structure was washed under and
around due to high flow during rain events. The fix was completed by lowering the structure even more for low flow
periods and the bank was stabilized around the structure on February 27, 2018.
Log Vane — Structure 12
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on January 4, 2018. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs. The repair was completed by digging upstream of the structure and wrapping the log in fabric.
Then, folding the fabric upstream and covering it up with the streambed material on February 27, 2018.
17

May 8, 2018
Log Step — Structure 17
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on April 27, 2018. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs during high flow periods. The repair was completed by digging upstream of the structure while
adding a log under the existing one and wrapping the log in fabric. Then, folding the fabric upstream and covering it up
with the streambed material on May 8, 2018. A coir log was added along the stream bank for stability.
Log Vane — Structure 18 (New)
This log vane was added below structure 17 to help with grade control. The structure was installed by using sand bags to
dam up the stream and setup a pump around zone. Once dry the streambed was removed and a new log was added at the
correct height. The log was stabilized with coir matting. Then, folding the matting upstream and covering it up with the
streambed material on May 8, 2018.
18

Log Vane — Structure 16 (New)
This log vane was added above structure 17 to help with grade control. The structure was installed by using sand bags to
dam up the stream and setup a pump around zone. Once dry the streambed was removed and a new log was added at the
correct height. The log was stabilized with coir matting. Then, folding the matting upstream and covering it up with the
streambed material on May 8, 2018.
Rock Cross Vane — Structure 11
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on April 27, 2018. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs. The fix was completed by digging upstream of the structure and wrapping the log thick black
fabric. Then, folding the fabric upstream and covering it up with the streambed material on May 8, 2018.
19

Rock Cross Vane — Structure 15
The non -preforming grade control structure was functioning but need adjustments. Coir matting was adding to the stream
edge to force water to flow over the structure.
June 4, 2018
Log Vane — Structure 10
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on June 6, 2018. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs. The repair was completed by digging upstream of the structure and wrapping the log in fabric.
Then, folding the fabric upstream and covering it up with the streambed material on June 7, 2018.
all

Log Vane — Structure 14
The non -preforming grade control structure was observed on June 6, 2018. The structure was washed under due to
undercutting of the logs. The repair was completed by digging upstream of the structure and wrapping the log in fabric.
Then, folding the fabric upstream and covering it up with the streambed material on June 7, 2018.
June 18, 2018
Log Vane — Structure 16
Structure 16 is a non -preforming grade control structure. After installation repairs to this structure have included adding a
coir log and thicker fabric in upstream of the structure to prevent the stream bed from undercutting under the log. The
black fabric was nailed to the log then buried under the stream bed upstream for approximately 8 feet. A "V" notch was
cut into the center of the log to allow base flow to flow over the log during normal flow instead of around or under the
structure. This fixes have allowed structure 16 to remain stable since the last adjustments.
21

Rock Cross Vane — Structure 15
The non -preforming grade control structure was undercutting the rock structure. Coir matting was adding to the stream
edge to force water to flow over the structure. Installation repairs to this structure have included adding a coir log and
thicker fabric upstream of the structure to prevent the stream bed from undercutting under the rock structure and to direct
flow to the middle of the structure.
Log Vane — Structure 18
After installation repairs to this structure have included adding a coir log and thicker fabric upstream of the structure to
prevent the stream bed from undercutting under the log. The black fabric was nailed to the log then buried under the
stream bed upstream for approximately 8 feet. A "V" notch was cut into the center of the log to allow base flow to flow
over the log during normal flow instead of around or under the structure.
22

Conclusion
The extent of the stream restoration project at South Fork Business Park appears to be in good and stable
condition. Changes have been observed between the 2017 As -Built Report and the 2018 Annual Monitoring
Report that are indicating creation of a more defined stream. Observed changes through the restoration reach
include bar building and creation of inner berms as a result of large, relatively short duration, storm events.
These changes narrow the channel for low flow periods and allow for more efficient sediment transport during
both high and low flow periods from down welling along the point bars. The constructed wetland between
cross sections 3 and 4 dramatically reduces the immediate impact of storm events on the restoration reach.
The wetland is now vegetated with thick wetland herbs and the live stakes. The Willows have had an
especially high survival rate. The additional storage and limited discharge of treated storm water are essential
for the health and stability of the system downstream. Select banks and log steps are becoming undercut due
to pool development. These features provide great habitat and refuge from both high flow events and
predators. Raccoon prints have been observed along the entire reach specifically located around the large
pools. Observed fish typically range from one inch up to four inches and are located in large pools from the
wetland to the confluence with South Fork Withrow Creek.
Indicators of incision, such as a low bank above a bankfull indicator, have not been observed. Predicted
changes from 2018 to 2019 would be for cross section 3, downstream to the large j -hook to become narrower
and experience bar building events along the right bank. The channel is currently U-shaped with very shallow
water which is causing slight deposition and bank water. This area was constructed with a wide W/D ratio to
handle the large flows from the wetland. However, a slight narrowing of the channel may prevent emergence
of wetland vegetation.
Due to site conditions multiple bankfull discharge have been observed on various occasions in the last year.
The high frequency of bankfull discharges lead to structures in the lower reach not preforming as designed and
required the addition of two log steps. These steps were placed above and below the last structure that was
proposed in the restoration plan. The addition of the two log steps reduced the elevation change per step and
will minimize future chances of being undercut in the future. Log step installation procedures were also
amended to include a low flow notch in the log for pool development and sediment transport, a coir log buried
upstream of the step for added re -enforcement, and installation of thick matting nailed to the structure and
buried upstream of the structure to prevent downcutting of the stream bed.
23

Photograph Log
24

Construction Photographs
Construction Photo
Structure 1: Installation
44W
Structure 2: Installation
Filling of historic sediment basin
&Arn
Structure 1: After Installation
Structure 2: After Installation
Filling of historic sediment basin
25

Construction Photographs
Looking Upstream from structure 6
Structure 6: After Installation
Aqua Swirl to drainage pipe Drainage pipe to wetland
Wetland looking upstream
Structure 5: Below wetland
26

Construction Photographs
Structure 5: Looking downstream
Below Structure 6: Northern water
snake
Grading stream to elevation
Structure 6: Looking
downstream
Common snapping turtle
Grading stream to elevation
27

As Built Photographs
As -Built Photo
I
it
z
JL A.A
28

2018 Monitoring Photographs
2018 Monitoring
xSi
XS 2
xSl
A.� T �
' meN.4
XS 3
XS 2 XS 3
30

2018 Monitoring Photographs
XS 4
XS 5
m
�
`
XS 4
31

3
3An
.
d::. +� _
1"S
A
i
-
yr_ fir` '�'
1 � ,r•_
�"
_ {
ti'' ,�,
•mow
_ :
�
.zl':;r:r.-,� ar- - .1 i �z}S 1..�,
`'•.
va
. tom. [4�;.'-5-...
..
]' �
3
3An
.
d::. +� _

2018 Monitoring Photographs
9r"• F
�; �� . t .yin'• 'aA!
XS 10 XS 11
� •rig=
XS 10 XS 12
.. f
F
XS 11 XS 12
33

Upper reach overview
2018 Monitoring Photographs
� M 1r 4*
Channel bed development
....[. 4s
Constructed wetland stability
Mid -reach overview
Thick vegetation around channel
Lower -reach overview
34

2018 Monitoring Photographs
.#r
Stream at dry -detention outfall
Vegetation plots
Pool development
8 Fish approx. 2" in length in deep pool
Vegetation surveys
35

NC SAM Evaluations
W

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manulal Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Fork Business Date of Assessment 81912016
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization Atlas Environmental Inc
Notes of Field Assessment Form (YIN) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (YIN) NO
Additional stream informationlsupplementary measurements included (YIN) NO
NC SAAR feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
(1) Habitat
USACEI NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
{2) Streamllntertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
{3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2)Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
{3) Substrate
LOW
{3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flaw Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW
37

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Ver'Sion 2.1
Stream Site Name South Fork Business Date of Assessment July 12 2017
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organizaticn Atlas Environmental Inc
Notes of Field Assessment Form (YfN) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (WN) NO
Additional stream information)supplementary measurements included (YfN) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
(1) Habitat
USAGE( NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Ouality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2)Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manulal Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Fork Business date of Assessment June 21, 2418
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor NamelQrganization Jennifer Robertson Atlas
Environmental
Notes of Field Assessment Form (YIN) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (YIN) NO
Additional stream informationlsupplementary measurements included (YIN) NO
NC $AM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
(1) Water Qua lity
USACEI NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
{3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(d) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(d) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorpholegy
HIGH
(2) Streamllntertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomarphology
NA
(1) Water Qua lity
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2)Indicators of Stressors
NG
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zane Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW Pr
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall MEDIUM

Pattern and Structure Locations
40

U
D
I
3
U
CL
Ln
Ln
j`(D
[_T
0�
41
O
]0�
�
❑f
1
p
N
Q
�
U
D
I
3
U
CL
Ln
Ln
j`(D
[_T
0�
41

Longitudinal Profile
42

LTJ
Elevation (ft)
43

RIVERMORPH PROFILE SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow Creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
Profile Name: Lang Pro
survey Date: 06/06/2018
Survey Data
DIST
CH
WS
6KF P1 P2 P3 P4
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
756.5
0
756.86
8.042
756.68
756.8
9.667
755.72
755.8
33.591
754.48
754.6
754.78
35.636
754.22
754.3
44.589
754.24
754.3
47.837
753.06
753.2
66.965
752.22
752.35
67.133
752.38
86.513
751.8
751.9
88.363
750.78
89.273
751.3
101.584
751.02
751.28
102.671
749.94
750.2
103.149
750.1
117.02
750.38
750.45
118.407
748.48
119.957
749.12
130.582
749.4
749.56
749.8
133.854
749.34
141.588
749.28
749.41
145.485
748.08
145.872
748.24
164.229
747.82
164.229
748.02
184.58
747.6
206.91
747.44
212.912
747.26
747.35
213.882
746.58
214.652
746.7
215.402
745.12
232.925
745.76
234.089
745.52
746
746.21
245.61
745.8
249.669
745.3
272.545
745.7
282.827
745.74
283.766
745.52
291.388
744.92
291.907
745.52
310.237
744.96
311.095
745.52
334.479
745.52
334.564
745.38
339.565
742.44
339.565
744.08
340.592
742.34
744.2
745.34
354.269
743.84
44
371.827
744.38

391.772
744.06
397.214
742.66
400.223
743.96
419.868
743.76
420.665
744.04
431.917
743.74
743.9
744.03
451.22
743.84
451.682
743.46
470.398
743.84
471.408
743.5
499.594
743.2
500.128
742.78
518.524
742.5
528.466
742.78
743.02
743.25
546.838
742.34
548.228
742.8
594.406
741.98
595.146
742.3
597.155
740.7
598.026
742.02
608.717
741.54
625.653
741.48
626.188
741.66
629.468
741.48
741.68
741.95
641.211
741.2
664.57
741.04
664.57
741.58
689.411
741.2
689.411
741.44
690.979
738.76
692.213
739.98
700.885
739.96
701.92
739.06
730.265
739.62
730.945
739.66
739.98
740.29
731.088
739.54
741.742
739.96
742.344
739.68
743.633
737.8
745.041
739.32
766.891
739.12
767.926
738.72
782.679
738.5
793.833
738.66
795.413
737.78
805.862
738.5
813.964
738.5
815.197
738.16
831.208
738.4
738.68
739.11
840.734
737.8
841.34
738.02
868.388
737.56
869.09
737.26
885.463
737.16
885.463
737.36
897.969
737.1
898.849
737.34
899.163
736.78
901.417
735.54
919.173
736.2
920.032
736.7
932.149
736.56
736.65
737.59
939.075
736.28
939.965
736.66
940.52
734.22
943.914
735.72
45

958.31 735.5
958.967 735.74
973.23 735.16
988.324 734.64
989.321 735.4
1003.22 734.98
1003.705 735.46
1004.98 734.58
1006.155 732.32
1018.929 734.62
1019.706 734.08
1026.807 734.02
1029.185 734.6
1029.812 732.76
1031.765 734.3
1035.686 734.1 734.32 734.78
1053.746 733.42
1065.478 733.36
1066.325 733.68
1081.655 733.24
1096.606 733.46 733.78 734.66
1111.955 733.2
1115.593 733
Gross section / Bank Profile Locations
Name
Type
Profile station
----------------------------------------------------------------------
xS 1
other XS
33.6
XS 2
Glide xs
130.6
XS 3
Glide xs
234
xs 4
Pool xs
340.6
XS 5
Riffle xs
431.9
xs 6
Riffle xs
528.5
xS 7
Run XS
629.5
XS 8
Glide xs
731
XS 9
Riffle XS
831.2
XS 11
Riffle XS
1035.7
x512
Riffle xs
1096.6
XS 10
Glide XS
932.149
Measurements from Graph
Bankfull slope: 0
Variable
Min
Avg
Max
----------------------------------------------------------------------
s riffle
0.00983
0.01246
0.01411
S pool
0.00041
0.00167
0.00306
S run
0.01858
0.02905
0.04162
S glide
0.00755
0.00991
0.01228
S step
0
0
0
P - P
37.69
98.87
193.36
Pool length
20.48
39.74
52.44
Riffle length
43.42
59.26
74.56
Dmax riffle
0.81
0.95
1.07
Dmax pool
1.49
2.12
2.83
Dmax run
0.36
0.52
0.94
Dmax glide
0.45
0.70
0.87
Dmax step
0
0
0
Low bank ht
0
0
0
Length and depth
measurements
in feet,
slopes in ft/ft.
RIVERMORPH PROFILE SUMMARY 46

Notes
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 monitoring
Profile Name: Lang Pro
survey Date: 06/06/2018
DIST Nate
0
REW
33.591
X51 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
33.591
67.133
REW
89.273
REW
103.149
REW
119.957
REW
130.582
X52 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
130.582
145.872
REW
164.229
REW
214.652
REW
234.089
X53 -
TW
Intersect
station
234.089
245.61
REW
282.827
REW
291.907
REW
311.095
REW
334.479
REW
339.565
REW
340.592
X54 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
340.592
371.827
REW
400.223
REW
420.665
REW
431.917
X55 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
431.917
451.22
REW
470.398
REW
499.594
REW
528.466
X56 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
528.466
548.228
REW
595.146
REW
598.026
REW
626.188
REW
629.468
X57 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
629.468
664.57
REW
689.411
REW
692.213
REW
700.885
REW
730.945
X58 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
730.945
731.088
X58TW
- TW
Intersect
@ station 731.088
741.742
REW
745.041
REW
766.891
REW
793.833
REW
805.862
REW
813.964
REW
831.208
X59 -
TW
Intersect
@
station
831.208
841.34
REW
868.388
REW
885.463
REW
898.849
REW
899.163
REW
920.032
REW
932.149
X510 -
TW
Intersect
@ station
932.149
939.965
REW
943.914
REW
958.967
REW
47
989.321
REW

1003.705
REW
1004.98
REW
1018.929
REW
1029.185
REW
1031.765
REW
1035.686
x511 - Tw Intersect @ station 1035.686
1066.325
REW
1096.606
x512 - Tw Intersect @ station 1096.606
1111.955
REW
48

Cross -Sections
49

XS1 STA 0+33 OTHER
o c�.,e �9��� • 9enku�� I�k� • Wei, s��� Po���
Nbkr - 9.96 I; bkT - 2 RGk1 - 1 9i
Horizontal Distance (ft)
50

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow Creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
Cross section Name: xS 1
Survey Date: 06/05/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.04
0
755.44
LP BTM
2.33
0
755.22
754.78
5.46
0
754.96
-----
8.37
0
754.62
4.99
9.68
0
754.56
LEW
12.82
0
754.48
TW
15.79
0
754.6
REW
16.98
0
754.78
BKF
19.07
0
754.92
1.06
21.03
0
755.3
5.29
22.35
0
755.38
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left Side Right Side
slope 0.051 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft) 0.64
Movable Particle (mm) 109.0
51
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
755.08
755.08
755.08
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
754.78
754.78
754.78
Floodprone Width (ft)
15.88
-----
-----
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.98
4.99
4.99
Entrenchment Ratio
1.59
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.2
0.19
0.21
Maximum De th (ft)
0.3
0.28
0.3
Width/Depth Ratio
49.9
26.64
23.76
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.99
0.93
1.06
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.01
5.28
5.29
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.2
0.18
0.2
Begin BKF Station
7
7
11.99
End BKF Station
16.98
11.99
16.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left Side Right Side
slope 0.051 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft) 0.64
Movable Particle (mm) 109.0
51

X52 STA 1+30 GLIDE
Ocmv,a poms •��M�I� • We�,s���Po�s
AbRf 53
Horizontal Distance (ft)
52

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 2
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.18
0
750.66
LP BTM
5.25
0
750.22
749.8
9.19
0
749.98
-----
11.58
0
749.78
BKF
11.91
0
749.58
LEW
12.24
0
749.48
0.23
12.66
0
749.4
TW
13.21
0
749.56
REW
13.87
0
749.82
BKF
15.34
0
750.14
1.69
19.47
0
750.68
0.17
21.76
0
751.02
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
53
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
750.2
750.2
750.2
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
749.8
749.8
749.8
Floodprone width (ft)
10.22
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
2.48
1.24
1.24
Entrenchment Ratio
4.12
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.21
0.2
0.23
Maximum De th (ft)
0.4
0.38
0.4
width/Depth Ratio
11.81
6.12
5.39
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.53
0.25
0.28
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.63
1.7
1.69
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.2
0.15
0.17
Begin BKF station
11.34
11.34
12.58
End BKF Station
13.82
12.58
13.82
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
53

X53 STA 2+34 GLIDE
Ocmv,a pom�s •��M��� I� • W,3�,S���Po���6
AbRf - 9.5
Horizontal Distance (ft)
54

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: x5 3
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.06
0
748.1
LP btm
1.01
0
746.8
746.21
1.59
0
746.3
BKF
2.23
0
745.9
LEW
4.26
0
745.68
-----
7.86
0
745.52
TW
10.63
0
746
REW
11.42
0
746.12
BKF
13.53
0
746.86
2.14
15.36
0
748.2
RP btm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
55
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
746.9
746.9
746.9
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
746.21
746.21
746.21
Floodprone width (ft)
12.65
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
9.94
4.98
4.97
Entrenchment Ratio
1.27
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.45
0.47
0.43
Maximum De th (ft)
0.69
0.64
0.69
width/Depth Ratio
22.09
10.49
11.56
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
4.5
2.36
2.14
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.11
5.72
5.67
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.45
0.41
0.38
Begin BKF Station
1.73
1.73
6.71
End BKF station
11.68
6.71
11.68
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
55

X54 STA 3+40 POOL
Ocmv,a pom�s •��M��� �� • W,3�a,s���Po���
Anxl - 15.5
Horizontal Distance (ft)
M

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 4
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
0.03 {
1.69 {
4.38 {
5.86 {
5.87 {
6.56 {
7.41 {
8.8 {
10.34 {
11.43 {
11.92 {
12.31 {
13.87 {
15.05 {
15.77 {
:S ELEV
NOTE
-------------------------------------------------------
746.78
LP BTM
r 746.14
748.34
i 745.8
748.34
i 745.34
BKF
1 744.14
LEW
1 743.56
15.74
1 743.54
-----
1 742.52
7.41
1 742.34
TW
r 742.92
2.13
i 743.24
-----
1 744.2
REW
1 746.06
2.04
1 747.18
3
1 747.28
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
57
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
748.34
748.34
748.34
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
745.34
745.34
745.34
Floodprone width (ft)
15.74
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.41
3.7
3.71
Entrenchment Ratio
2.13
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
2.09
2.15
2.04
Maximum De th (ft)
3
2.91
3
width/Depth Ratio
3.55
1.72
1.82
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
15.49
7.94
7.54
wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.57
8.35
8.04
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.47
0.95
0.94
Begin BKF Station
5.86
5.86
9.56
End BKF Station
13.27
9.56
13.27
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
57

XS5 STA 4+31 RIFFLE
o c�.,e Pomp • 9anku�� I�k� • W„m, s�na� rmmis
WLk' - .. I�➢k' - 16 .4➢kI - .9tl
Horizontal Distance (ft)
58

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 5
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.23
0
745.66
LP BTM
3.44
0
745.32
744.03
4.5
0
744.7
-----
6.1
0
744.18
1.54
7.66
0
744
BKF
7.87
0
743.86
LEW
8.32
0
743.74
0.27
9.08
0
743.76
TW
9.46
0
743.9
REW
10.71
0
744.06
BKF
12.97
0
744.34
0.1
17.25
0
745.18
8.94
19.92
0
745.64
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
59
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
744.32
744.32
744.32
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
744.03
744.03
744.03
Floodprone Width (ft)
7.14
-----
-----
Bankfull Width (ft)
3.08
1.54
1.54
Entrenchment Ratio
2.32
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.16
0.2
0.12
Maximum De th (ft)
0.29
0.29
0.27
Width/Depth Ratio
19.25
7.82
12.83
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.48
0.3
0.18
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.17
1.87
1.84
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.15
0.16
0.1
Begin BKF Station
7.4
7.4
8.94
End BKF Station
10.48
8.94
10.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
59

XS6 STA 5+28 RIFFLE
Ocmv,a pom�s •��M��� I� • We�,s���Po���
WLk: - // I�➢k: - %1 A➢kI - -1
Horizontal Distance (ft)
'

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 6
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.07
0
744.32
LP BTM
2.1
0
743.32
743.25
5.53
0
743.12
BKF
6.12
0
743.08
LEW
6.8
0
742.9
-----
7.77
0
742.98
0.29
8.35
0
743.08
0.47
8.4
0
743.02
12.45
9.37
0
742.78
TW
10.08
0
743.02
REW
10.77
0
743.38
BKF
12.94
0
744
6.91
17.24
0
744.42
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
61
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
743.72
743.72
743.72
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
743.25
743.25
743.25
Floodprone Width (ft)
10.67
-----
-----
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.22
3.61
3.61
Entrenchment Ratio
1.48
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.21
0.12
0.29
Maximum De th (ft)
0.47
0.35
0.47
Width/Depth Ratio
34.38
29.07
12.45
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.49
0.45
1.04
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
7.41
3.98
4.12
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.2
0.11
0.25
Begin BKF Station
3.3
3.3
6.91
End BKF station
10.52
6.91
10.52
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
61

XS7 STA 6+29 RUN
o c�.,e Pomp • 9anku�� I� • wem, s�na� rmmis
.4Lkf - .62
Horizontal Distance (ft)
62

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 7
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.43
0
743.38
LP BTM
2.66
0
742.78
741.95
4.01
0
742.46
-----
5.22
0
741.94
BKF
6.45
0
741.62
LEW
6.76
0
741.48
TW
7.19
0
741.54
TW
7.53
0
741.68
REW
8.93
0
741.96
BKF
12.14
0
742.2
2.33
15.74
0
742.76
0.16
18.32
0
743.02
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
63
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
742.42
742.42
742.42
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
741.95
741.95
741.95
Floodprone width (ft)
9.45
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
3.68
1.84
1.84
Entrenchment Ratio
2.57
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.22
0.25
0.2
Maximum De th (ft)
0.47
0.47
0.43
width/Depth Ratio
16.73
7.38
9.2
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.82
0.46
0.36
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.82
2.35
2.33
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.22
0.2
0.16
Begin BKF Station
5.2
5.2
7.04
End BKF Station
8.88
7.04
8.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
63

X58 STA 7+30 GLIDE
o c�.,e Pomp • ea�M��� �� • wem, s�na� Pomp
AbKf - 1.31
Horizontal Distance (ft)
64

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: x5 8
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.39
0
741.48
LP BTM
2.18
0
741.06
740.29
3.84
0
740.2
BKF
4.28
0
739.94
LEW
4.72
0
739.66
-----
6.14
0
739.74
0.4
6.29
0
739.98
REW
7.11
0
740.38
BKF
9.63
0
741.2
0.64
12.51
0
741.54
2.43
14.32
0
741.88
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
65
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
740.92
740.92
740.92
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
740.29
740.29
740.29
Floodprone Width (ft)
6.32
-----
-----
Bankfull Width (ft)
3.26
1.63
1.63
Entrenchment Ratio
1.94
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.41
0.41
0.4
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.63
0.63
0.6
Width/Depth Ratio
7.95
3.94
4.07
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.32
0.68
0.64
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.64
2.41
2.43
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.36
0.28
0.27
Begin BKF station
3.67
3.67
5.3
End BKF station
6.93
5.3
6.93
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
65

XS9 STA 8+31 RIFFLE
Ocmv,a pom�s •Oe�M��� I� • We�,s���Po���
AbKf - 2.C6
Horizontal Distance (ft)
M.

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: XS 9
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
0.31 {
2.66 {
5.76 {
7.73 {
8.15 {
8.79 {
9.67 {
10.6 {
11.32 {
12.38 {
12.69 {
12.78 {
13.28 {
16.3 {
20.08 {
:S ELEV
NOTE
-------------------------------------------------------
740.14
LP BTM
r 739.68
739.82
i 739.18
739.82
i 739.26
BKF
1 738.84
739.11
1 738.82
14.1
1 739.06
IB
1 738.7
LEW
1 738.48
2.94
r 738.48
2.4
i 738.4
TW
i 738.68
REW
1 738.96
BKF
1 739.9
0.71
1 740.22
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
67
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
739.82
739.82
739.82
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
739.11
739.11
739.11
Floodprone width (ft)
14.1
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
5.88
2.94
2.94
Entrenchment Ratio
2.4
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.35
0.23
0.47
Maximum De th (ft)
0.71
0.48
0.71
width/Depth Ratio
16.8
12.77
6.26
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
2.06
0.68
1.38
wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.44
3.64
3.75
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.32
0.19
0.37
Begin BKF Station
7.88
7.88
10.82
End BKF Station
13.76
10.82
13.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
67

XS10 STA 9+32 GLIDE
O Gmintl Poinlc ♦ 9enMull Irtliralas � W e[er Suilece Poinlc
WLk: - !.V! I'➢�' - fl A➢kI - 3.31
Horizontal Distance (ft)
941

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: UT to south Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: x5 10
Survey Date: 06/07/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.02
0
738.52
LP BTM
1.3
0
737.96
737.59
2.88
0
737.62
BKF
3.01
0
737.16
LEW
3.84
0
736.58
-----
4.74
0
736.56
TW
6.1
0
736.86
0.8
6.34
0
737.12
REW
8.06
0
737.56
BKF
11.09
0
737.86
3.57
12.67
0
738.36
LP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
WE
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
738.62
738.62
738.62
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
737.59
737.59
737.59
Floodprone Width (ft)
12.65
-----
-----
Bankfull Width (ft)
5.47
2.88
2.59
Entrenchment Ratio
2.31
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.61
0.86
0.32
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.03
1.03
0.8
Width/Depth Ratio
8.97
3.34
8.09
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.32
2.49
0.83
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.19
4.22
3.57
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.54
0.59
0.23
Begin BKF station
2.89
2.89
5.77
End BKF station
8.36
5.77
8.36
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
WE

XS11 STA 10+35 RIFFLE
o c�.,e Pomp • 9anku�� I� • wem, s�na� rmmis
.4Lkf
Horizontal Distance (ft)
70

:��*��:gar•�:iJ:r�:z•����xw��•l��n►►i►�r_�:a�
River Name: UT to south Fork withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
cross section Name: x5 11
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation:
Channel
0 ft
Right
Backsight Rod
Reading:
0 ft
735.22
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.09
0
737.18
LP BTM
1.22
0
736.88
1.13
2.35
0
736.46
-----
4.16
0
735.94
0.44
4.95
0
735.38
0.56
6.84
0
734.6
BKF
6.92
0
734.28
LEw
7.18
0
734.1
TW
7.74
0
734.1
0.26
8.26
0
734.14
7.63
8.51
0
734.32
REw
8.99
0
734.96
BKF
10.4
0
735.34
12.43
0
735.62
13.98
0
736.3
15.04
0
736.48
16.46
0
737.4
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
71
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
735.22
735.22
735.22
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
734.66
734.66
734.66
Floodprone width (ft)
4.62
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
2.07
0.94
1.13
Entrenchment Ratio
2.23
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.43
0.42
0.44
Maximum De th (ft)
0.56
0.56
0.56
width/Depth Ratio
4.81
2.22
2.57
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.89
0.4
0.49
wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.62
1.81
1.92
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.34
0.22
0.26
Begin BKF station
6.69
6.69
7.63
End BKF station
8.76
7.63
8.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
71

XS12 STA 10+96 RIFFLE
Ocmv,a pom�s •��M��� I� • W„�a,s���Po���
AbKf - ],31
Horizontal Distance (ft)
72

River Name: UT to South Fork Withrow creek
Reach Name: 2018 Monitoring
Cross section Name: XS12
Survey Date: 06/06/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
0.05 {
1.38 {
1.99 {
3.49 {
4.76 {
5.64 {
6.21 {
7.27 {
7.77 {
8.54 {
9.23 {
10.54 {
11.38 {
12.97 {
14.94 {
16.66 {
18.1 {
19.72 {
S ELEV
NOTE
-------------------------------------------------------
736.86
LP BTM
} 736.9
735.86
} 735.78
735.86
} 735.56
734.66
} 733.74
LEW
} 733.6
14.14
} 733.46
TW
} 733.76
8.85
} 734.02
4.43
} 733.74
1.6
} 733.66
-----
} 733.68
0.83
} 733.78
REW
} 734.66
BKF
} 735.18
1
} 736.2
10.66
} 736.56
5.68
} 736.8
RP BTM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right Side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
73
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
735.86
735.86
735.86
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
734.66
734.66
734.66
Floodprone width (ft)
14.14
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
8.85
4.42
4.43
Entrenchment Ratio
1.6
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.83
0.88
0.78
Maximum De th (ft)
1.2
1.2
1
Width/Depth Ratio
10.66
5
5.68
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
7.35
3.91
3.44
wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.75
6
5.59
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.75
0.65
0.62
Begin BKF station
4.12
4.12
8.54
End BKF Station
12.97
8.54
12.97
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right Side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
73

Reach Classification and Data Worksheets
74

Worksheet 5-3. Field form for Level II stream classification (Rosgen, 1996; Rosgen and Silvey, 2005).
Stream= UT to South Fork Withrow Creek, Reach - 2018 Monitoring
Basin: Drainage Area: 51.84 acres 0.081 mi'
Location:
Twp_&Rge:
Cross -Section Monuments (Lat./Lang.)- 0 Lat 10 Long Date: 06/25fi8
Observers: Atlas Environmental Valley Type: II
Bankfull WIDTH (VMfbkfl
WIDTH of the stream channel at bBnkfUlI stage elevation, in a riffle section- 55,$19
Bankfull DEPTH (dk,0
Mean DEPTH of the stream channel cross-section, at bankfull stage elevation, in a
We section (dW = Al WOW)• 0,35
Bankfull X -Section AREA (Abkr)
AREA of the stream channel cross-section, at bankfull stage elevation, in a riffle
section. 2,06
WidthiDepth Ratio WWI dbk0
Bankfull WIDTH divided by bankfull mean DEPTH, in a riffle section. 16.8
Maximum DEPTH (dmbkf)
Maximum depth of the bankfull channel cross-section, or distance between the
bankfull stage and Thalweg elevations, in a riffle section. 0.71
WIDTH of Flood -Prone Area (Wfpa)
Twice maximum DEPTH, or (2 x d,,,w) = the stagefelevation at which flood -prone area
WIDTH is determined in a riffle section. 14.1
Entrenchment Ratio (ER)
The ratio of flood -prone area WIDTH divided by bankfull channel WIDTH Cwrr.I WOOD
(riffle section). 2.4
Channel Materials (Particle Size Index ) D50
The D5D particle size index represents the mean diameter of channel materials, as
sampled from the channel surface, between the bankfull stage and Thalweg
elevations_ 16.18
Water Surface SLOPE (S)
Channel slope = "rise over run" for a reach approximately 20-30 bankfull channel
widths in length, with the 'riff le-to-rifHe" water surface slope representing the gradient
at bankfull stage. 0,4148
Channel SINUOSITY (k}
Sinuosity is an index of channel pattern, determined from a ratio of stream length
divided by valley length (SL f VL); or estimated from a ratio of valley slope divided by
channel slope (V5) S). 1 12
ft
ft'
Ft: ;t
ft
ft
ft:;t
TL. `L
Copyright Q 2006 W iIdland Hydrology WARSSS page 5-29
75

Worksheet 2-2. Computations of velocity and Bankfull discharge using various methods (Rosgen, 2006b; Rosgen and
Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull 'VELOCITY & DISCHARGE Estimates
Stream: UT to South Fork Withrow Creek
11 Location: Reach - 2018 Monitoring
Date: 1612512018 1 Stream Type: t;4
Valley Type: II
Observers: lAtIas Envi
HUC:
INPUT VARIABLES
OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Riffle Cross -Sectional
2-06 Abkf
Bankfull Riffle Mean DEPTH
0.35 dbkr
AREA,
Bankfull Riffle WIDTH
5,88 bkf
Wetted PERMIMETER
W
IF$ 44 p
,l,
•-(2 " dbkf ) + VVbkl
f-!
D84 at Riffle
15.34 Dia,
p.4 (mm)1304.8
0.05 Asa
I
tmmj
ft
Bankfull SLOPE
0.4148 5bkf
Hydraulic RADIUS
0 32 R
(ft 1 ft)
Abkr 1 Wp
I,r[
9
Relative Roughness
Gravitational Acceleration
32.2
(ff I sec3}
R(ft) I a sa 01)
6.40 R 1064
Drainage Area
0.1 DA
Shear Velocity
u*
(7.391
RS)"
(ftisec}
ESTIMATION METHODS
Bankfull
Bankfull
VELOCITY
DISCHARGE
1- Friction Relative
ft I sec
5.93
Cfs
FactorZ Roughness
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's n from Friction Factor I Relative
Roughness (Figs. 2-16,2-19) u = 1.49"Rx"'S "/n n = 0.031
2 73
It 1 sec
5.62
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.49R2'' "S"21n
b) Manning's n from 'Stream Type (Fig. 2-20) n = 0.031
2 73
ft !sec
5.62
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1A9`R2' *SV
NIA
ft l see
NIA
Cfs
c) Man ning'sn from Jarrett (US GS): n = 0 39-S
Note: This equation is applicable to steep, sfepfpool, high boundary
roughness, cobble. and boulder-dornlnated stream systams: i -e-, for n = N1A
Stream T es At. A2, A3, 61, 32, 133, G2 a& E3
3. _Other Methods (Hey, Darcy -Weisbach, Chezy G, etc.)
3-13 ft J sec
11
6.455 Cfs
Darcy -Weisbach (Leopold, Wolman and Miller
I Other Methods (Hey, Darcy -Weisbach, Chezy C, etc -
ft i sec
I0.00 0.00 cfs
Chez C
4- Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q f A
�•� ft 1 ser,
.qQ Cfs
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q �,f) x year
4- Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q I A
0.00 ft I SPC
0.00 Cfs
Protrusion Height Options for the D.6 Term in the Relative Roughness Relation (RJD64) — Estimation Method 1
Fair nand -bed channels: Measure 100 "protrusion heights" of sand dunes from the downstream side of feature to the lop of
Option 1. feature.
Substitute the DpA sand dune protrusion height in 0 for the Dao term in method 1.
For boulder -dominated channels: Measure 100 "protrusion heights" of boulders an the sides from the bed elevation to the top of
Option 2. ft
the rock on that side. Substitute the aaa boulder protrusion height in for the E)R4 term in method 1,
For bedrockdominated channels: Measure 100 "protrusion heights" of rock separations, steps, joints or uplifted surfaces above
Option I
channel bed elevation. substitute the Dg, bedrock protrusion height in ft for the D,, term in method 1 -
For log -influenced channels: Measure "protrustion heights" proportionate to channel width of log diameters or the height of the
Qption 4-
log on upstream side if embedded. Substitute the DpA protrusion haight in ft for the D,,4 term in method 1,
Copyright O 2008 Wildland Hydrology
River Stability Field Guide page 2-41
76

Worksheet 5-4. Morphological relations, including dimensionless ratios of river reach sites (Rosgen and Silvey, 2007; Rosgen,
2008).
Stream: UT to South Fork Withrow Creek
Location: Reach -201S Monitoring
Qbservws: Atlas Environmental
Date:/36125118
Valle Type: II stream Type:
C 4
Riffle Dimensions"
River Reach dimension Summary Data.....1
Mean Min Max Riffle Dimensions & Dimensionless Ratios-
Mean
Min
Max
Riffle WAM (W,,,)
5.39
3.48
7.22 ft
Riffle Cm. -Sectional Area (A,kr) (fe)
1.34
4.48
2.06
*
Mean Riffle Depth (d,kr)
0.24
0.18
0.35 ft
Riffle Widt WDepth Ratio Am I drk1)
23.48
16.80
34.38
ie
Maximum Riffle Depth (dm„}
0.49
4.29
1 0.71 fl
Max Riffle Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d,„a, I dhkl�
2.026
1.812
2238
c
Width of Flood -Prone Area (Wij)
m 10.6
7.14
14.1 ft
Entrenchment Ratio (blip. ( WW)
2,065
1.478
2.398
m
E
Riffle Inner Berm Width (W„j
Q
1 Q ft
Riffle Inner Berm Width to Riffle Width (Wu r Wt,i,
0,000
4.040
D-000
F
m
Riffle Inner Berm Depth (d,)
0 1
0
1 4 ft
Riffle Inner Berm Depth to Mean Depth (dk, I d,,,r)
0.400
0.040
4.440
Riffle Inner Berm Area (a,,)
1 0 1
0
1 0 ff'
Riffle Inner Berm Area to Riffle Area (A,, I ALw)
0.000
0.000
0,900
Riffle Inner Berm 4WD Ratio (W„1 d,h)
p
4
1 4
Pool Dimensions" " "'
Mean
Min
Max
Pool Dimensions & Dimensionless Ratios-'
Mean
Min
Max
Pawl Width (Wpkrp)
7.41
7.41
1 7,41 Ift
I Foal Width to Riffle Width (Ww,) WAktj
1.37$
1.375
1,37$
Mean Pool Depth (d,,,,)
2.09
2.49
F709Tt
Mean Pool Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (dwp 1 dw)
8,708
PQQI Gross -Sectional Area (A,,,,)
1 15,51
15.51
15.5 ift
I Pool Area to Riffle Area {A,,,,, f NO
111.5601
11.560 111.5601
v
•N
Maximum Paol Depth (d,.,,)3
3
3 ft
Max Paol Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d,,, J dhkr}
12.$00
12.$00
12.504
E
Pool Inner Berm Width (WbP}
1 0 1
0
1 0 1ft
Pool Inner Berm Width to Pool Width (WAP f Wk3krp)
1 0.000 1
0.040 1 4.900
O
Pool Inner Berm Depth (d, p)
1p
0
0 ft
Pool Inner Berm Depth to Pool Depth {dao! dp„raj
10.000
OADO
0,000
3
Pool Inner Berm Area (AQP}
11
0
4
0 ft`
Pool Inner Bean Area to Pool Area (ASR { 4akrp)
i 4.400
0.000
0.400
[PQ 1nt B$r $IQpe (5"0
' 0.000' 0.000' 0,0001fflft Pool Inner Berm Wid#hIDepth Ratio (Wlbpf dlbp}
0.000 '
0.004
0.000
Run Dim9ngions'
Mean
Min
Max
Run ❑imgn$ionte$$ Ratio$-"
Mean
Min
Max
Run Width (Wbu,)
3.681
3.68
1 3.68 ft
Run Width to Riffle Width (W,,,rr f 1W,kr)
4.683
0.6$3
4.683
c
Mean Run Depth (d,.,,)
4,22
0,22
0,22 ft
Mean Run Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d„pr1 dw)
0.917
0.917
0,917
c
Run Gros"ecuonal Area (A,krr)
1 0.$2
0.82
1 0.82 ft
I Run Area to Riffle Area {A,,,rr I A,kr}
0.612
0.812
4.612
c
Maximum Run Depth {dr)
0.471
0.47
1 0.47 Ift
I Max Run Depth to Mean Rime Depth {dr„ v I JbW)
1.958
1.958
1.958
fir
Run WidthiDepth Ratio (W11,0 d,*lr;
1 16.7 1
16.7
1 16.7 Ift
Glide Difnens[on s-
Mean
Min
Max
Glide Dimensions & Dimensionless Ratios-*
Mean
Min
Max
Glide Width (Ww,,)
1 5.231 7.48 1 9.94 1 f
jGlide Width to Riffle Width (W,,,,,1 W,kr)
1 0.970 1
0.460 1 1.844
w
Mean Glide Depth (dw,)
1 0.3161
0.21
1 0,4$ fk
Mean Glide Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d„qj 7 dm,)
1,$QD
O,$7$
1.875
¢
Glide Gri s-Scolional Area (&krg)
2.12
0.53
4.5 f#
Glide Area t0 Riffle Area (A, rg! k,}
1,5$2
0.396
3.358
Maximum Glide Depth (d,M,n)
1 0,571
0.4 1 0.69 1ft
I Max Glide Depth to Mean Rime Depth {d B e I d,kr)
1 2.375 1
1.867 1 2.875
Glide WidthlDepth Ratio (W,,,l d,,,)
14
7.95
22.1 ftlfl Glide Inner Berm WidthlDepth Ratio {W„gJ d,h9}
4.000
0.004
8.040
m
Glide Inner Barin Width (Wb�}
0
0
0 it
Glide inner Berm Width to Glide Width (W .^kr)
0.000
0.000
0.000
i9
Glide Inner Berm Depth (d,bQ)
' 0 '
4
' 0 'ft
Glide Inner Berm Depth to Glide Depth {da9 ! dwk)
' 0.000 '
0.000 '
0,400
Glide Inner Berm Area (AN,}
0
4
0 ftp
Glide Inner Berm Area to Glide Area (Abs f Aukrg)
0.004
0.000
0.400
Ste Dimensions-
Mean
Min
Max
Step Dimensionless Ratios:-
Mean
Mln
Max
Step Width (Whkl)
1 4 1
0
1 0 Ift
I Step 4Vidut to Riffle Width (W,,,f, I W hkf)
0.000 1
0.004
8.004
Mean Step Depth {dw,}
1 0 1
0
1 0 ff
Mean Step Depth to Riffle Dep#h (dhkr,f dw)
0.004 1
0.000
0.000
a
2
Step Cross -Sectional Area {Ai,,,,a)
1 0 1
0
D ft
I Step Area to Riffle Area (Aw,, I Aw)
0.004 1
4.400
0,400
Maximum Step Depth (din,,,)
0
0
4 Ift
Max Step Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d_1 d,,f)
0,004
0.040
4.440
Step WidthlDepth Ratio (W,,,rsf d -r)
0
0
0
RIHre Poo system O,e„ 0, E. F scream t pos) bed features include riffles, runs. pools and g416s 77
-Seep-Pad System (,e„ n. B. G sveam types) bed features Include riffles, eapos, chules. pools arid steps (note: Include rapids and chutes r+ r,ttle category),
"'Gonvergenc�Dlvergenae system (r,e„ D Stream types) bed features include rimes and pools; cross -sect -ons taken at miles for classAlcatlon purposes
-'Wan vahaes are used as the normallxallon parameter for all dlmenslorkss raWs; e g , minmum poor width to raffle width rano uses 11ye mean riffle width value

Worksheet 54. Morphological relations, including dimensionless ratios of river reach sites (Rosgen and Silvey, 2007; Rosgen,
2008)-
I Stream: UT to South Fork With raw Creek Location. Reach - 2018 Monitorina I
Observers: Atlas Environmental Date: OW25A S Valley Type: II Stream Type: C 4
River Reach Summary Data ..... 2
Streamflyw. Estimated Mean Velocity at Bankful I Stage (ubkr) 0 fNsec jEstirnation Method
= StreanAl w. Estimated Discharge at Bankfull Stage (Olkf) r 0 refs Drainage Area r 0.081 rnry
Geomat Mean Min Marx Di mensionl"S Geometry Ratios Mein Min Max
Wavelength (iL) 1 107 165.1 1 184 Ift Linear Wavelength to Riffle Width (A I Wbkf) 119.86$1 12.0891 34.165
Individual Pool Length {Lp} 139.7 120.5 1 52.4 If I Individual Pool Length to Riffle Widlh (LP I Wiw) 1 7.373 1 3.800 1 9.729 1
to Pool Spacing (Pg} I 98.9 137.7 1 193 Ift I Pool to Poral Spacing to Riffle Width A I Wnkr) 118.3431 6.993 135.874
Val ley Slope {-Q%',) 0-02 fV(t Average Water Surface Slope (S) 1 0,014$ jrjvft Sinuosity (5n,IS) 1-12
Stream Length (SL) 0 ift I Vslley Length (VL) 0 Ft Sinuosity (5L I VL)
Low Bank Height
(Stream Meander Length (LT) 125 77.7
184 eft
(Stream Meander Length Ratio (Lm I Wekf)
23.191 14.417 34.189
c
end 0 ft
{d,riaK}
end 0 ft
(LBH I drnax} end
Run Slope to Average Water Surface Slope (Sr�r, I S)
1 1.963 1 1.255 1 2.812
Pool Slope (S')
10,Q0210.0001fl. 0031filft
It
I Radius of Curvature (R_}
17.2
12.81
23.4 ft
Radius of Curvature to Riffle Width (R -.I Wo,rf}
1 3.193
2.382
4,341
L
Belt Width (W,ir}
31.2
22.6
47.7 ft
Meander Width Ratio (Wbnl Wim)
5.7$7
4.197
8.$40
IMax Run Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (dm„°,,,,, I dbkl)
Are Length (L,)
0
1 0 1
0 Ift
I Arc Length to Riffle Width (L81 WIAF)
0.000
O.00t7
0.000
1 8,8333
162083 111.7921
83.180154
Max Glide Depth (d,,,eV)
1 0,7 10,45
1
4,87 Ift
I Max Glide Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d_, I dew)
2,9167
1.8 T5
Riffle Length
1 59.3
43.4
74.6 ft
I Riffle Length to Riffle W idth (Lr' Wbkr}
1 10.994 1
8.058
13.833
0
Del
29.56
1'5.34
mm
c
Individual Pool Length {Lp} 139.7 120.5 1 52.4 If I Individual Pool Length to Riffle Widlh (LP I Wiw) 1 7.373 1 3.800 1 9.729 1
to Pool Spacing (Pg} I 98.9 137.7 1 193 Ift I Pool to Poral Spacing to Riffle Width A I Wnkr) 118.3431 6.993 135.874
Val ley Slope {-Q%',) 0-02 fV(t Average Water Surface Slope (S) 1 0,014$ jrjvft Sinuosity (5n,IS) 1-12
Stream Length (SL) 0 ift I Vslley Length (VL) 0 Ft Sinuosity (5L I VL)
Low Bank Height
stertl U�ft
Max Depth
start�Oft
Bank -Height Ratio (BHR) start)
(LBH)
end 0 ft
{d,riaK}
end 0 ft
(LBH I drnax} end
Facet Slopes
Mean Min Max
Dimenslonless FaaM Slope Ratlas
Mean Min Max
Riffle Slope (Srv)
1001210.01 Q 1x.014 fUft
I Riffle Slope to Average VVater Surface Slope (Sr, I S)
1 0.842 1 0.664 1 Q.953
Run Slope (Stun)
0-029 0.019 0,042 ftlft
Run Slope to Average Water Surface Slope (Sr�r, I S)
1 1.963 1 1.255 1 2.812
Pool Slope (S')
10,Q0210.0001fl. 0031filft
jPool Slope to Average Water Surface Slope (SR f S)
1 0.113 1 0.028 10,207
(Glide Slope (Sv)
0.0100.008O.01Mftlft
(Glide Slope la Average Water Surface Slope (Sq I S)
i 0,670
0.510
0.830
Step Slope {8�}
10.00010.00010.0 OftM
I Step Slope to Average Water Surface Slope (Ss 1S}
0.000
0.000
0,000
Max Depth F.
Mean
Min
Max
Dimensionless Depth Ratios
Mean
Min
Max
Max Riffle Depth (drnaur}
0,95 m
t7-$1
1,07 ft
Max Riffle Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (dr,_dr dhkf)
19583
3,375
4,4583
Max Run depth (dmaxrun)
0.52 10,36
10.94
Ift
IMax Run Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (dm„°,,,,, I dbkl)
12-16671
1.5 13.9167
Max Pool Depth (dmaO
2.12
1,49
183 Ift
I Max Pool Depth to Mean Riffle Depth {d_p I dbkf!
1 8,8333
162083 111.7921
83.180154
Max Glide Depth (d,,,eV)
1 0,7 10,45
1
4,87 Ift
I Max Glide Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d_, I dew)
2,9167
1.8 T5
3,625
Max Step Depth (d_) I
I 0 1
0 1
0 Ift
I Max Step Depth to Mean Riffle Depth (d1Y8, I d,,r)
O
0 1
0
' Min, max $ mean depths are meaeured from Thalwag to benkfull at mid -point of reedure ror rattles and runs, the deepest part or poole, $ al the tail -out of glider.
kCompo!Oe sample cf rffites and pools within the designaled reagh_ ` Active bed of a Hffie. °Height of roughness feature above bed
11RIIIIIIIIIIII
Rea010
Riffle`
Bar
Rouhb
RiMee
Bar Protrusion Helight d
°!4 Siluclay
0
0
D16
4.08
1.89
mm
%a Sand
10.53
16.82
D35
9.75
5.62
mm
% Gravel
89.47
83.180154
16.18
7.32
mm
% Cobble
4
0
Del
29.56
1'5.34
mm
c
°!a Boulder
0
0
D95
40.54
2'x.7
mm
!e Bedrock
0 1
0
D1a4 1
64 1
45
1 1 Imm
' Min, max $ mean depths are meaeured from Thalwag to benkfull at mid -point of reedure ror rattles and runs, the deepest part or poole, $ al the tail -out of glider.
kCompo!Oe sample cf rffites and pools within the designaled reagh_ ` Active bed of a Hffie. °Height of roughness feature above bed
11RIIIIIIIIIIII