bridge deck length x width rapid visual assessment · 1bridge * document any potential fish passage...
TRANSCRIPT
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
BoxArch
1Bridge
* Document any potential fish passage barriers. ** If 'NO' is checked for Observation 5 or 6, additional field observation & measurements may be required. Refer to section 'Stream Crossing Section' in the Monitoring Protocol for additional measurements and evaluation procedures. Figs 1-4 are included for ease of reference. *** Velocities are to be taken 0.6 times the total depth measured from the water's surface. Refer to Figure 5.
Location Left 1/4 Pt 1/2 Pt 3/4 PtDepth
Apron
5. A natural low flow channel exists through the structure or if not the streambed surface within the structure simulates the streambed beyond the structure inlet and outlet similar to design conditions.**6. Stream is free of channelizing along the surface of the structure.**7. Up & downstream channel appears stable (no apparent erosion).
1 Bridge Deck Length X WidthRapid Visual Assessment:
This item to be completed on initial survey only.
3. Natural streambed material exists throughout structure (i.e. countersunk approximately 1 foot)
Observation
4. Stream channel is free of scour activity that may impede fish passage.
Y / N N.A.
1. The structure is installed generally in accordance with plans (height, width, elevation, location, etc…)
2. Overall structure width is wider than the average stream widths upstream and downstream .
Structure TypeNumber of Barrels
X Width (ft) X Height (ft) ProjectingWing wallHeadwallApronRiprap
Pipe Diameter
Depth Vel.
7xW DwnStrm
Depth Vel.
MidStr7xW UpStrm
PCN: Date: Year Constructed:
Assessed By:County:PRJ #
Structure Location:Stream Name:
Right Thalweg
Structure Shape Comments
Other:Other:
Inlet Type Outlet Type*At Stream GradeCascade over RiprapFree Fall into PoolFree Fall Onto Rip Rap
8. Vegetation is/has reestablished on the stream banks within the construction area.Field Measurements:
Describe observations used in making above determinations. Describe whether unusual channelizing exists within the structure or stream. Note other unique site conditions that may/may not warrant corrective actions. Document with additional photographs if needed.
Stream Depth and Velocities at Structure***
Depth Vel. Depth Vel. Depth
Outlet
Vel.Vel.Inlet
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
12
34
78
6
Photos Location Description (optional)
Downstream
Latitude Longitude
Figures 1-5
Upstream
Include description of photograph location for future reference. Photos should include: approximately 7xW upstream/downstream from structure in the direction of the structure showing undisturbed channel beyond the construction limits, the upstream/downstream channel disturbed by the project, and the structure inlet and outlet.
Other (optional)5
REPORT FINDINGS
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
BoxArch
1Bridge
* Document any potential fish passage barriers. ** If 'NO' is checked for Observation 5 or 6, additional field observation & measurements may be required. Refer to section 'Stream Crossing Section' in the Monitoring Protocol for additional measurements and evaluation procedures. Figs 1-4 are included for ease of reference. *** Velocities are to be taken 0.6 times the total depth measured from the water's surface. Refer to Figure 5.
Location Left 1/4 Pt 1/2 Pt 3/4 PtDepth
Apron
5. A natural low flow channel exists through the structure or if not the streambed surface within the structure simulates the streambed beyond the structure inlet and outlet similar to design conditions.**6. Stream is free of channelizing along the surface of the structure.**7. Up & downstream channel appears stable (no apparent erosion).
1 Bridge Deck Length X WidthRapid Visual Assessment:
This item to be completed on initial survey only.
3. Natural streambed material exists throughout structure (i.e. countersunk approximately 1 foot)
Observation
4. Stream channel is free of scour activity that may impede fish passage.
Y / N N.A.
1. The structure is installed generally in accordance with plans (height, width, elevation, location, etc…)
2. Overall structure width is wider than the average stream widths upstream and downstream .
Structure TypeNumber of Barrels
X Width (ft) X Height (ft) ProjectingWing wallHeadwallApronRiprap
Pipe Diameter
Depth Vel.
7xW DwnStrm
Depth Vel.
MidStr7xW UpStrm
PCN: Date: Year Constructed:
Assessed By:County:PRJ #
Structure Location:Stream Name:
Right Thalweg
Structure Shape Comments
Other:Other:
Inlet Type Outlet Type*At Stream GradeCascade over RiprapFree Fall into PoolFree Fall Onto Rip Rap
8. Vegetation is/has reestablished on the stream banks within the construction area.Field Measurements:
Describe observations used in making above determinations. Describe whether unusual channelizing exists within the structure or stream. Note other unique site conditions that may/may not warrant corrective actions. Document with additional photographs if needed.
Stream Depth and Velocities at Structure***
Depth Vel. Depth Vel. Depth
Outlet
Vel.Vel.Inlet
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
12
34
78
6
Photos Location Description (optional)
Downstream
Latitude Longitude
Figures 1-5
Upstream
Include description of photograph location for future reference. Photos should include: approximately 7xW upstream/downstream from structure in the direction of the structure showing undisturbed channel beyond the construction limits, the upstream/downstream channel disturbed by the project, and the structure inlet and outlet.
Other (optional)5
REPORT FINDINGS
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
BoxArch
1Bridge
* Document any potential fish passage barriers. ** If 'NO' is checked for Observation 5 or 6, additional field observation & measurements may be required. Refer to section 'Stream Crossing Section' in the Monitoring Protocol for additional measurements and evaluation procedures. Figs 1-4 are included for ease of reference. *** Velocities are to be taken 0.6 times the total depth measured from the water's surface. Refer to Figure 5.
Location Left 1/4 Pt 1/2 Pt 3/4 PtDepth
Apron
5. A natural low flow channel exists through the structure or if not the streambed surface within the structure simulates the streambed beyond the structure inlet and outlet similar to design conditions.**6. Stream is free of channelizing along the surface of the structure.**7. Up & downstream channel appears stable (no apparent erosion).
1 Bridge Deck Length X WidthRapid Visual Assessment:
This item to be completed on initial survey only.
3. Natural streambed material exists throughout structure (i.e. countersunk approximately 1 foot)
Observation
4. Stream channel is free of scour activity that may impede fish passage.
Y / N N.A.
1. The structure is installed generally in accordance with plans (height, width, elevation, location, etc…)
2. Overall structure width is wider than the average stream widths upstream and downstream .
Structure TypeNumber of Barrels
X Width (ft) X Height (ft) ProjectingWing wallHeadwallApronRiprap
Pipe Diameter
Depth Vel.
7xW DwnStrm
Depth Vel.
MidStr7xW UpStrm
PCN: Date: Year Constructed:
Assessed By:County:PRJ #
Structure Location:Stream Name:
Right Thalweg
Structure Shape Comments
Other:Other:
Inlet Type Outlet Type*At Stream GradeCascade over RiprapFree Fall into PoolFree Fall Onto Rip Rap
8. Vegetation is/has reestablished on the stream banks within the construction area.Field Measurements:
Describe observations used in making above determinations. Describe whether unusual channelizing exists within the structure or stream. Note other unique site conditions that may/may not warrant corrective actions. Document with additional photographs if needed.
Stream Depth and Velocities at Structure***
Depth Vel. Depth Vel. Depth
Outlet
Vel.Vel.Inlet
SDDOT Fish Passage Assessment Work Sheet (Attachment A)
Revision Date: 10/4/2012
12
34
78
6
Photos Location Description (optional)
Downstream
Latitude Longitude
Figures 1-5
Upstream
Include description of photograph location for future reference. Photos should include: approximately 7xW upstream/downstream from structure in the direction of the structure showing undisturbed channel beyond the construction limits, the upstream/downstream channel disturbed by the project, and the structure inlet and outlet.
Other (optional)5
REPORT FINDINGS
From: Brey, MattTo: Huber, RyanCc: Sherman, RonSubject: FW: Topeka Shiner bridgeDate: Thursday, February 21, 2013 11:32:59 AM
Ryan, Not sure how much the response below helps, but this is what happened to the best of ourknowledge. Matthew R. Brey, PEEngineering SupervisorSD DOT, Watertown AreaOffice: (605)882-5166Cell: (605)881-7148Fax: (605)882-5117
From: Johnson, Matt (DOT-Watertown) Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 11:04 AMTo: Brey, MattSubject: RE: Topeka Shiner bridge To be honest I don’t fully remember. I know when we were placing riprap that there were questionsabout y we were installing riprap across the stream channel and we did have some issues trying topush the rock down into the stream, but at the time it was totally covered with water when wewere done. If it was placed at that time I would assume that at that time the water was deepenough and not a problem. Based on the pictures I would say if came after, maybe when Todd wasdown there doing all the inspection and we added more riprap to the bridges. From what I gatheredfrom emails when HDR, Todd and Jeff Senst all went out for review the decision was made to addmore Class A rip rap to the four corners of the bridges, I believe this is what caused all the “extra”on the downstream side of the bridge.
From: Brey, Matt Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 2:47 PMTo: Johnson, Matt (DOT-Watertown)Subject: FW: Topeka Shiner bridge Matt, Take a look at this report from the Willow Creek bridge on the South Connector PCN 00RV. There isa section of waterway with riprap way too high across the channel. Did we (the Contractor) do this?Or was it done by someone else later? What will probably wind up happening is that we will have to remove some of the riprap to bring thebridge into compliance.
Let me know what you remember. Matthew R. Brey, PEEngineering SupervisorSD DOT, Watertown AreaOffice: (605)882-5166Cell: (605)881-7148Fax: (605)882-5117
From: Huber, Ryan Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 2:42 PMTo: Brey, MattSubject: Topeka Shiner bridge
