LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study, 9-2010

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study
Chittenden County, VT
September 3, 2010
Prepared for:
LaPlatte Watershed Partnership
Lewis Creek Association
Hinesburg, VT
Prepared by:
Milone & MacBroom, Inc.
South Burlington, VT
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... iii
1.0 Project Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................. 3
1.3 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................... 3
1.4 Collaborative Study Approach ................................................................................ 4
2.0 Existing Databases .............................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR) ................................................. 5
2.2 Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTRANS) .................................................... 7
2.3 Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT) ........................... 7
2.4 Summary Database ................................................................................................. 7
3.0 Meetings with Towns .......................................................................................................... 8

3.1 Town of Shelburne .................................................................................................. 8
3.2 Town of Charlotte ................................................................................................... 9
3.3 Town of Hinesburg ................................................................................................. 9
4.0 Field Assessment .............................................................................................................. 11

4.1 Assessment Plan.................................................................................................... 11
4.2 Assessment Results ............................................................................................... 11
5.0 Structure Improvement Matrix ......................................................................................... 21
6.0 Evolving Culvert Design Guidelines ................................................................................ 21
7.0 Moving Forward ............................................................................................................... 22
8.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 23
Appendix A – Culvert Improvement Matrix ................................................................................ 24
Appendix B – Structure Summary Database ................................................................................ 32
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study i

Acknowledgements
This project was funded by a Vermont Clean and Clear Grant to the Lewis Creek Association
(CC 2009-RCG-3-04). Andrea Morgante of the LaPlatte Watershed Partnership, in conjunction
with Marty Illick of the Lewis Creek Association, coordinated this project. Pam Brangan of the
Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission provided GIS data and project guidance.
Bernie Gagnon, Public Works Director for the Town of Shelburne, contributed firsthand
knowledge of the structures in Shelburne. Junior Lewis, road foreman for the Town of Charlotte,
provided information on structures and existing maintenance of structures in Charlotte. Mike
Anthony, Road Commissioner for Town of Hinesburg, contributed information on structures in
Hinesburg.
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study ii

Executive Summary
Road and stream networks cross at many locations and bridges and culverts are used to carry
roadways over stream channels. These structures create fixed points in river channels that
naturally tend to move on the landscape and typically are much smaller than the channel width.
Undersized structures can lead to excessive flooding and erosion as water, sediment, debris, and
ice cannot naturally pass through the structure. Inadequate bridges and culverts are risks to
public safety and limit fish passage fragmenting aquatic habitat.
In the LaPlatte River watershed (area = 53 square miles) 136 miles of roads and 174 miles of
rivers exists. The road density is thus 2.6 miles of road per square mile of watershed and the river
density is 3.3 miles of river channel per square mile of watershed. A total of 165 stream
crossings were identified in the watershed not including driveways, trails, or unmapped roads.
Many more crossings are located on smaller streams due to their higher abundance in the
watershed than larger streams (52% of the stream length in watershed is 1st order; 9% of is 5th
order).
Bridges and culverts are regulated by the State of Vermont under 10 VSA Chapter 41 and the US
Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Vermont General Permit).
Stream crossing projects typically require a state level review, although if the drainage area is
less than one square mile no state permits apply. In general, regulations do not apply to structures
on smaller headwater tributaries. These streams are highly fragmented in part because structures
are unregulated. Headwater streams pose design challenges for crossings as they typically carry
little flow yet can be required to convey large flood waves and debris flows during intense storm
events.
Three bridge and culvert databases exist in Vermont including:

• Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR) Bridge and Culvert Assessment that is
part of the Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment;
• Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTRANS) Database; and
• Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT).
These three inventories were compiled and reviewed for the Laplatte River watershed. The
VTrans and VOBCIT databases inventory culverts, but provide little information to guide
replacement or improvement of structures. The VTANR assessment measures specific variables
that can indicate instabilities or incompatibility with stream processes and limitations of fish
passage. The VTANR assessment information was used to create an improvement matrix that
documents deficiencies and provides suggestions for design to be used during future structure
replacement.
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study iii

The State of Vermont has been proactive in creating a design manual for improving structures
for aquatic organism passage (Bates and Kirn 2009). The design guidelines generally attempt to
make crossings as invisible to fish as possible. The recommendations in the state include:
• Spanning 1.25 times the bankfull channel width;
• Embedding the culvert 20-40% of its height into the stream bed to maintain natural bed
materials in the structure and limit the chance of forming an outlet drop;
• Matching structure and channel slope; and
• Limiting floodplain fill.
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study iv

1.0 Project Introduction
1.1 Background
Streams and roads frequently cross paths in the landscape as much of the transportation network
lies in valleys. These fixed structures in the landscape convey water, sediment, debris, and ice
under them while roadways pass over them. Humans rely on safe roadways for travel while at
the same time fish and wildlife need to move up and down rivers to carry out their life cycles.
Crossings fundamentally create a conflict as roads are permanent infrastructure fixed in position
while rivers naturally attempt to move while carrying water and sediment forming aquatic
habitat. Bridges and culverts are the most common types of crossings. Other types of crossings
that are not addressed in this study include fords, tunnels, or ferries.
Crossing structures are designed to carry a storm of a given magnitude (e.g., 25-year flood).
Flows higher than the design storm can cause a crossing structure to washout and damage the
overlying road. Sediment, debris, and ice can also lead to structure washouts. Undersized,
deteriorated, improperly designed, or poorly installed structures increase likelihood of failure.
Often conflicts with rivers are caused by undersized structures, poor alignment, structures
located at breaks in slope where sediment tends to accumulates, or severe constriction of the
floodplain. Washouts are a public safety risk. Emergency replacement of structures is expensive
and the rushed nature of the replacement often does not include proper design.
Habitat fragmentation is caused by crossing structures that are not carefully designed to pass
water, sediment, and debris in a way that creates suitable hydraulic conditions for fish passage.
Culverts are often perched where the bottom of the culvert is above the stream bed causing an
outlet drop to the channel. Aquatic organisms may not be able to jump into the culvert to travel
upstream. Blockages can also be caused by excessive velocity or shallow water.
In the LaPlatte River watershed there is a network of river channels with an approximate
combined length of 174 miles. The mostly rural road network is 136 miles long (Table 1). The
river density is 3.3 miles of rivers per square mile of watershed and the road density is 2.6 miles
of roads per square mile of watershed (Table 2).
Table 1: Length of Rivers and Roads

Watershed Charlotte Hinesburg Shelburne
Length of rivers (mi)* 174 55 75 26
Length of roads (mi)** 136 30 58 32
Rivers:Roads 1.3 1.8 1.3 0.8
*Mapped in VHDCARTO GIS layer
**Mapped in E911 and VCGI roads layer
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 1

Table 2: Density of Rivers and Roads
Area (sq mi) 53 16 24 9
Density of rivers (mi/sq mi) 3.3 3.4 3.1 2.9
Density of roads (mi/sq mi) 2.6 1.9 2.4 3.6
Road and stream intersections in the LaPlatte River watershed were estimated in GIS with
Hawth’s Tools (Beyer 2006). This analysis did not include all driveways, trails, or unmapped
roads that may also cross rivers. A total of 165 crossings were identified (Figure 1).
The LaPlatte River is a 5th order stream when it flows into Lake Champlain. Stream order
(Strahler 1952) is one indicator of the size of a stream. Headwater streams are 1st order, when
two 1st order streams meet they form a 2nd order stream, when two 2nd order streams meet they
form a 3rd order stream, and so on. If two streams of different orders join, they retain the higher
order downstream of the confluence. Crossings are located on all stream sizes (Table 3). Many
more crossings are located on smaller streams because they are more abundant than larger rivers
due to the typical pattern of stream channels (52% of the stream length in watershed is 1st order;
9% of is 5th order).
Table 3: Road/Stream Crossings Identified

Watershed Watershed (%) Charlotte Hinesburg Shelburne
1st order 87 53 19 44 21
2nd order 41 25 8 20 10
3rd order 25 15 2 18 4
4th order 6 4 2 4 0
5th order 6 4 2 1 3
TOTAL 165 100 33 87 38
Data source: VHDCARTO, E911 roads, and VCGI roads layer.
Upstream river distance to the next crossing structure was calculated in GIS using RiveEX
(Hornby 2008) for each structure (Figure 1). The distances represent habitat length upstream of
each structure before the next potential blockage. If a structure had reduced aquatic organism
passage, the distance represents the possible habitat gain if the structure is improved. Distances
were calculated for the entire upstream network, and mainstem habitat only (3rd order and higher
streams).
Bridges and culverts are owned and maintained by the state, towns, and private individuals.
Inventories are maintained at the state and local levels. Compiling data in one location for an
overview would provide watershed context and aid in prioritizing replacement and route upgrade
efforts for all owners. A watershed approach to stream crossing allows users to view crossing
deficiencies in the context of the stream network. The watershed view is essential for improving
aquatic organism passage. This project catalogues existing data, highlights additional data needs,

and provides a framework for continued improvement of crossings for public safety and fish
passage.
1.2 Goals and Objectives
Specific structures were identified as problems in the Stream Corridor Plan for the LaPlatte River
and Tributaries in Town of Hinesburg (LWP 2007) and Reaches M6-M11 in Towns of Charlotte
and Shelburne (LWP 2008) on the mainstem Laplatte River and larger tributaries. There is a
need to take a broader look at stream/road crossings across the watershed. LCA-LWP retained
Milone & MacBroom Inc. (MMI) to analyze stream/road crossings in the LaPlatte River
watershed in Shelburne, Hinesburg, and Charlotte. The objectives of the project follow.
• Compile watershed level mapping of all road/stream crossing locations and locations of
assessed structures in existing databases.
• Identify assessment needs and share existing mapping with Towns to determine specific
issues.
• Assess key structures identified as problems and make specific recommendations for
improvements.
• Create a culvert improvement matrix based on collected data to identify specific
improvement needs for structures and ballpark costs for implementation to be used during
regular upgrades or emergency replacements.
• Initiate a dialogue with towns on regulations, best management practices, and funding
opportunities to work towards improved crossings.
• Share revised GIS mapping and other collected data with project stakeholders. GIS files
will reside with LCA-LWP, DEC, CCRPC, and the Towns.
1.3 Regulatory Framework
Stream crossing structures including bridges and culverts are regulated by the State of Vermont
under 10 VSA Chapter 41 and the US Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (Vermont General Permit). Crossings involving more than 3,000 square feet of area
filled under the Ordinary High Water (OHW) would require the Vermont General Permit.
Stream crossing projects require a state level review. Projects are regulated under 10 VSA
Chapter 41 and require a Stream Alteration Permit if the crossing has a drainage area greater than
10 square miles and involves more than 10 cubic yards of fill or excavation below the stream
banks. Projects not requiring the Stream Alteration Permit that have watershed areas between 1
and 10 square miles are required to complete an Application for Approval for Stream Crossing

Structure and obtain approval from the VTDEC. If the drainage area is less than 1 square mile no
state permits apply.
Vermont Agency of Transportation stream crossings are regulated under 19 VSA, Section 10(12)
and follow a different regulatory process. Timber harvest temporary structures are regulated
separately and have specific guidelines required.
Streams with a designated FEMA floodway require a No Rise Certification to document that the
new structure would not increase the water surface elevation in the floodway. Typically only
larger streams have a designated floodway so this would not apply to smaller streams.
In general, regulations do not apply to structures on smaller headwater tributaries. These streams
are highly fragmented in part because structures are unregulated. Headwater culverts and small
bridges are prone to washouts as common flow-based design approaches do not properly
consider loading of sediment, debris and ice common in the higher elevations especially in
mountainous watersheds. Discussions about crossing structures tend to indicate that undersized
headwater culverts are common maintenance challenges.
1.4 Collaborative Study Approach
Many project partners have worked with LCA-LWP and MMI on this project to contribute data,
analyze findings, develop methods, and share management approaches. Project stakeholders
include:
• Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC)

• Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) River Management Program
• Town of Shelburne
• Town of Hinesburg
• Town of Charlotte
2.0 Existing Databases
Multiple databases catalogue bridges and culverts in Vermont. The three main inventories are:
• Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR) Bridge and Culvert Assessment

• Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTRANS) Database
• Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT)

Each of these databases is individually maintained by separate parties, as described below. These
inventories are available in GIS format available for download at Vermont Center for
Geographic Information (VCGI, http://www.vcgi.org/). The GIS product is called TRANSTRUC
database. Currently there is an effort to link the separate databases using a common Structure
Number.
Table 4: LaPlatte River watershed structures included in TRANSTRUC Database (VCGI, Last
Update June 2008)
Primary (VTRANS) 15 3 8 4
Geomorph (VTANR) 21 4 16 1
Local (VOBCIT) 975 297 495 160
The three databases have some overlap. Individual structures may be located in both the VTANR
database and either the VTRANS or VOBCIT. Mapping at the watershed scale and individual
town scale has been compiled to show database coverage (Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5). VTRANS and
VOBCIT database locations include only updates in the current TRANSTRUCT Database (June
2008), while VTANR assessment locations include structures assessed in this current effort (May
2010).
2.1 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR)
The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources has developed a Bridge and Culvert Assessment as
part of their Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment Protocols (VTANR 2009). This
assessment is typically included in the Phase 2 Stream Geomorphic Assessment and has been
typically performed on larger streams. Approximately one-fourth (27%) of the stream/road
crossings identified have been assessed (Table 5). Data collected describe location, dimensions
and materials of structure, channel information (approach angle, pools present, outlet drop,
avulsion paths, width, substrate type), condition (sedimentation, blockages, armoring, erosion),
and the surrounding area (valley slope, floodplain fill, vegetation type, wildlife signs). Photos
and GPS location are collected.
Table 5: Stream Crossings Assessed by VTANR Protocols

# Structures Assessed 44 8 25 7
% of Total Stream Crossings
Identified 27 24 29 18
The VTANR assessment is rapid, but collects enough information to red-flag structures that are
in disrepair or do not work well in their stream. The Vermont Culvert Geomorphic Compatibility
Screening Tool was developed to categorize culverts degree of compatibility with natural river
processes (Schiff, Clark et al. 2008). This tool evaluates structure size, slope, sediment and

debris continuity, approach angle, and bank erosion. At this time the screening tool does not
apply to bridges. Screening results for project culverts have been compiled for the watershed and
towns (Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9).
Aquatic organism passage was evaluated using the Vermont Aquatic Organism Passage
Screening Tool (Schiff, Clark et al. 2009). This screening tool uses three levels of analysis to
determine the expected level of passage (AOP Coarse Screen), the likelihood of improving
passage using structural changes (AOP Retrofit Potential), and the length of habitat reconnected
if passage were improved (AOP Habitat Connectivity Potential Screen). Bridges are assumed to
provide adequate aquatic organism passage and are not included in the screen. Results of the
Coarse Screen and Retrofit Potential Screens are shown with Geomorphic Compatibility results
(Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9).
The information provided by this assessment with results of screening tools can guide project
identification efforts. Users include a wide array of groups involved in river and habitat
restoration projects including: VTANR Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
VTANR River Management Program, Regional Planning Commissions, and local watershed
groups.
Data and screening tool results are stored online in the VTANR Data Management System
(DMS) and available for public viewing (https://anrnode.anr.state.vt.us/SGA/).

2.2 Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTRANS)
The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTRANS) maintains a Bridge Inventory System (BIS).
This inventory generally includes structures maintained by VTRANS. The BIS includes all long
(> 20 feet) and short (< 20 feet & > 6 feet) structures on Interstate, US, and State highways. It
also includes long structures on town highways (class 1, 2, 3, & 4). The database includes
information on location, structure type and material, size, clearance, qualitative condition, year
built and repaired, and cost of repair and replacement. VTRANS is the primary user of this
database.
Data is stored by VTRANS and periodically updated in the TRANSTRUC database maintained
by and available from VCGI.
2.3 Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT)
An effort managed by the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) in

collaboration with Towns has inventoried bridge and culvert locations. This inventory includes
GPS locations of culverts and limited descriptive information relative to the other databases.
Typically location, width, height, length, and general condition are collected. This database
includes approximately 90% cross-road and driveway/ditch drainage structures (Table 6). This
database is setup to be the local source of information for Towns.
Data is uploaded and stored in the Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool
(VOBCIT) database (http://apps.vtrans.vermont.gov/BridgeAndCulvert/). The CCRPC
coordinates the effort to keep this database up to date.
Table 6: Stream Crossings versus Other Crossings in VOBCIT

# Stream Crossings 99 25 55 14
% Stream Crossings 10 8 11 9
# Other Crossings 876 272 440 146
% Other Crossings 90 92 89 91
Selected structures within 50' of road/stream crossings - corrected to make sure two were not selected
2.4 Summary Database
A summary database was created to combine inventoried structure data for the LaPlatte River
watershed in one location. Each structure would either be included in the VOBCIT Inventory or
the VTrans BIS, but could also be included in the ANR Geomorphic Assessment. Data from the
ANR Geomorphic Assessment was linked to information in the VOBCIT or VTrans BIS using

structure number code. The resulting Excel database has one row per structure and columns
representing every possible field from the three individual inventories.
3.0 Meetings with Towns
Meetings were conducted with key personnel that maintain roads and crossing structures in each
town. Maps showing assessed culvert locations in the VTrans Bridge Inventory System,
VOBCIT Inventory, and ANR Geomorphic Assessment and all stream/road crossing locations
were discussed. General goals for the meetings were to introduce towns to the project, collect
feedback on current databases, get recommendations for specific structures that should be
assessed, and provide multi-objective design recommendations to improve public safety and fish
passage.
3.1 Town of Shelburne
On December 2, 2009, MMI met with Bernie Gagnon, the Public Works Director for the Town
of Shelburne. As Director of Public Works, Bernie is involved in all road work and makes
decisions on structure replacements, while overseeing work completed by the road foreman and
crew. The road foreman records all information about a new structure and submits to Bernie for
inclusion in updates to the VOBCIT Database. Errors in the culvert assessment databases and
differences in location between structure GIS layers have previously limited the utility of the
existing assessment data for structure management.
Shelburne is receptive to culvert replacement and retrofit for improving structure, fish passage,
and stream compatibility. With limited town budget, state or federal funds are important
incentives to upgrade problem structures. He recently coordinated replacement of a culvert on
Harbor Road over McCabe’s brook with state assistance that incorporated fish passage criteria.
The LaPlatte River meets Lake Champlain in Shelburne, just downstream of the confluence with
McCabe’s Brook. These two rivers have a few larger crossings around the village center.
The rest of the watershed is more rural and has small headwater stream crossings. The flat
gradient of the area reduces flood hazard risks and erosion. The bridge on Bay Road over the
LaPlatte River at the confluence with Lake Champlain is a problem worth assessing, but has
unique characteristics due to backwater from the lake. Of the other stream crossings in the
watershed none stood out as particularly problematic. It was discussed that a re-assessment of the
crossing of Harbor Road and McCabe Brook could be interesting due to the recent replacement
and inclusion of fish passage criteria. Other problem culverts exist in town, yet lie outside of the
Laplatte River watershed and thus are not part of this project.

3.2 Town of Charlotte
On December 10, 2009, MMI met with Hugh Lewis, Jr., the Road Commissioner for the Town
of Charlotte. We discussed the scope of the project and expressed that the goals of the meeting
were to gather information from the Town on problem structures and areas that could use
improvement. Junior was familiar with the VTrans and VOBCIT assessments, yet this
information is not a regular part of structure management in Charlotte. The ANR Geomorphic
assessment was explained and screening results for the assessed culverts was discussed.
The town generally increases culvert sizes as they wash out or need repair. This is a shift in
policy where structures use to be replaced with those of a similar or smaller size. Ditch culverts
would have been 12 inch diameter in the past, while now ditch culverts are typically 15 inch
minimum diameter and 18 inch minimum across a road. Most of the town structure work is
associated with smaller structures in ditches.
Charlotte’s portion of the LaPlatte River watershed is mostly headwater areas of McCabes
Brook, Bingham Brook, Mud Hollow Book and small tributaries of the LaPlatte River mainstem.
The headwater nature of the watershed means that a 19 of the 33 crossings in the Town are on
first order streams. Intermittent flow through structures is common, with high flows during
spring runoff events and no flow during summer months. Generally these structures function
well in terms of flood conveyance.
The town indicated that a table listing structures and giving a few key improvements to be made
would be referenced and used during rapid recovery should a structure fail. Outside funding
opportunities for replacement of structures is appealing for meeting multiple objectives for the
town and state. The Town has a history of applying for state funding for structure replacement,
sighting an example of four small stream crossings replaced last year. A followup meeting to
discuss findings of this study is welcomed by the town.
3.3 Town of Hinesburg
MMI met with Town of Hinesburg Highway Department road foreman Mike Anthony on
December 10, 2009. The project scope was explained and maps of the assessed structures were
used to guide conversation. Mike was familiar with both the VTrans Bridge Inventory and the
VOBCIT Databases. He and his crew inventoried four of their roads for the VOBCIT before
passing the task to the CCRPC. The town contributes to VOBCIT yet does not use this
information in regular structure management given its cumbersome nature.
Hinesburg generally has small steep headwater streams in the Southeast and larger lower
gradient streams in the Northwest. The smaller streams historically have eroded and contributed

large amounts of sediment to lower gradient streams. The sediment is leading to some flooding.
Problems are caused by increased beaver populations in the area in the past few years. Culverts
have been plugged and flooded by the beavers.
When replacing crossing structures the town works with VTrans to do a hydraulic study and then
often increases the diameter for a factor of safety. The town tries to get grants for replacement of
larger structures. They often use the 4 foot diameter round plastic culverts instead of a precast
concrete box.
General recommendations on design for replacement structures to meet safety, geomorphic, and
fish passage objectives would be helpful to the town. He thought he could easily implement
small changes to alignment, size, and elevation when a structure is replaced. A follow-up
meeting to discuss findings would interest the town.

4.0 Field Assessment
4.1 Assessment Plan
Specific structures were identified based on recommendations from the towns and review of the
databases. Some structures identified in the meetings were already assessed using the VTANR
Assessment and were marked for a short site visit. Other structures were marked to perform the
Vermont Bridge and Culvert Assessment. A total of fifteen structures were visited – five were
previously assessed, eight were assessed by MMI as part of this project, and two were simply
observed (Figure 10).
4.2 Assessment Results
Crossing locations were visited my MMI staff on March 23, 2010 during approximately bankfull
flood flows. During these field visits conditions were documented with notes and photos to
observe flood conditions. On May 18, 2010 crossing locations were visited again and either
assessed with the VTANR Bridge and Culvert Assessment or general conditions were observed.
Sites were photo-documented. A summary of site conditions at each crossing is included below.
ID # listed corresponds to the Structure Assessment Plan (Figure 10).
#0 - Shelburne – Bay Road over LaPlatte River
The Bay Road Bridge is located at the mouth of the LaPlatte River and is backwatered by Lake
Champlain (Photo 1a). Upstream abutments have spalling concrete. Concrete railings are
cracking. Steel beams have some corrosion (Photo 1b). The bridge top width of 83 feet is 106%
of the calculated bankfull width, although the riprap protecting the footings encroaches into the
flow area reducing the effective width to less than 100% of bankfull width. No aquatic organism
passage issues were identified.
Photo 1: Bay Road Bridge, a) looking upstream March 23, 2010 and b) looking east May 18, 2010.

#1 - Shelburne – Teddy Bear Access Road over McCabe’s Brook
The culvert under the Teddy Bear Factory Access Road appears to be a relatively new structure
in good condition. The structure is undersized, with a structure width of only 38% of the
measured channel bankfull width. There is some scour and erosion on the downstream side as a
result of the small size. This structure is an aquatic organism passage block during low flows.
The small outlet drop at the downstream end requires organisms to jump. The wide flat bottom
does not concentrate flows creating too shallow conditions, exacerbated by the flat long apron on
the upstream side. The embankment blocks the entire floodplain, connecting two high points.
This funnels all water through the culvert. Riprap is present in the upstream channel for 100 feet.
The tall embankment would make this structure difficult to replace.
a) b)
Photo 2: Teddy Bear Access Road Culvert, looking upstream a) March 23, 2010 and b) May 18, 2010.
#2 - Shelburne – Harbor Road over McCabe’s Brook
The Harbor Road crossing over McCabe’s Brook structure was recently replaced. During
approximately bankfull flows on March 23, 2010, water flowed at the top of the bridge opening
at the downstream end and just clearing the upstream end. Although passing this flow, the
structure seems undersized to be full during a bankfull flow event. Significant stormwater from
ditches was apparent. The water downstream of the structure was wide and flat, indicating that
the structure is partially backwatered at this level of flow. On May 18, 2010 water was ponded
through the structure and appeared to be backwatered by a small riffle downstream. The channel
in this location is low gradient and a semi-backwatered condition may be natural. There is no
obvious damage or incompatibles with geomorphic processes or aquatic organism passage at this
crossing.

a) b)
Photo 3: Harbor Road over McCabe’s Brook a) looking at upstream side from east March 23, 2010 and b) looking
upstream at outlet May 18, 2010.
#3 - Charlotte – Hinesburg Road over Bingham Brook
Bingham Brook flows under Hinesburg Road in a large plate arch culvert. Because this structure
projects from the fill without headwalls, some erosion and scour is occurring at the downstream
end. During bankfull flows, the fields upstream and downstream had wide, shallow wetland type
flow that adequately passed through the culvert. The large size of the culvert suggests it may
have historically been used as a cattle crossing. This structure could be improved for fish passage
by providing natural stream bed material throughout structure and concentrating low flows to
provide adequate depths. Generally this structure is in good condition with minimal deficiencies.
a) b)
Photo 4: Hinesburg Road over Bingham Brook a) looking at upstream end from the east March 23, 2010 and b)
looking at downstream end from the east May 18, 2010.

#14 - Charlotte – Hinesburg Road over Mud Hollow Brook
Mud Hollow Brook travels under Hinesburg Road in twin concrete culverts. During March 23,
2010 visit water flooded across upstream and downstream fields and culverts adequately passed
flows. The channel appears to have been straightened. Large pool downstream may be caused by
scouring flows, but also could have been dug out by landowner. Culverts are in good condition.
The presence of two pipes instead of one and lack of natural bottom sediment possibly reduce
aquatic organism passage. Additional deficiencies were not observed.
a) b)
Photo 5: Hinesburg Road over Mud Hollow Brook a) looking west at upstream end March 23, 2010 and b) looking
downstream at upstream opening May 18, 2010.
#4 - Charlotte – Guinea Road over Unnamed Tributary to Bingham Brook
An unnamed tributary to Bingham Brook travels under Guinea Road through two plastic culverts
(24 and 36 inch diameters). The small vegetated channel primarily functions as an agricultural
field drain. This area of the watershed has limited aquatic organism passage needs. Very little
flow was present during the May 18, 2010 visit. No damage or deficiencies observed.

a) b)
Photo 6: Guinea Road over Unnamed Tributary to Bingham Brook a) upstream end looking south March 23, 2010
and b) downstream end looking south May 18, 2010.
#5 - Hinesburg– Hayden Hill Road over Beecher Hill Brook
Beecher Hill Brook travels under Hayden Hill Road through at 4 foot diameter corrugated steel
culvert. The concrete headwall is undermined on the downstream side. Gravel and debris has
accumulated upstream. A scour hole and undermining is occurring at the downstream side. These
are both indicators that the structure is undersized. The structure width is 17% of bankfull
channel width as determined by a reach geomorphic assessment. A large amount of road and
embankment gravel is entering the stream with ditch runoff. A drop at the outlet impairs aquatic
organism passage at the structure.
a) b)
Photo7: Hayden Hill Road over Beecher Hill Brook a) looking at downstream side from west March 23, 2010 and
b) looking at downstream side from east May 18, 2010.

#6 - Hinesburg– Hayden Hill Road over Unnamed Tributary to Beecher Hill Brook
An unnamed tributary to Beecher Hill Brook passes through a culvert under Hayden Hill Road.
One 4 foot wide 2 foot tall arch culvert carries the main flow with a 2 foot HDPE overflow
culvert. The structure is undersized, 47% of bankfull channel width. The main culvert is
deteriorated with significant deformation. Sediment and debris are caught upstream. There are
signs of recent road overtopping. There is another culvert draining a wetland type area just
downstream, also under Hayden Hill Road. In the downstream channel there are massive
sediment bars of road gravel. The upstream channel has been straightened and bermed,
concentrating flows through the structure.
a) b)
Photo 8: Hayden Hill Road over Unnamed Tributary to Beecher Hill Brook a) looking at upstream side south
March 23, 2010 and b) looking downstream at outlet May 18, 2010.
#7 - Hinesburg– Leavensworth Road over LaPlatte River
The LaPlatte River travels under a bridge on Leavensworth Road. This structure is a relatively
new timber bridge. Leavensworth Road cuts across, an otherwise very wide flat floodplain,
blocking floodplain flows. The bridge alone will not pass high flows. The road overtops at the
lowest point in the road, where gravel has been washed off the surface into the field, as well as
through four overflow culverts (photo 9b). During the March 23, 2010 visit the bridge was
almost full and the overflow culverts were activated. The bridge has deep steel beams and a large
amount of riprap to protect footings, both limiting flow area under the structure. The bridge is
84% of the measured channel width. The upstream channel travels parallel to the road across the
floodplain then takes a sharp turn into the opening. This location will likely continue to cause
problems without realignment, enlarging the structure, or providing a stabilized road overtop
location. A small section of pavement at the low point in the road would alleviate continued
maintenance issues.

a) b)
Photo9: Leavensworth Road over the LaPlatte River on March 23, 2010 a) looking at the downstream side of the
bridge from the south bank March 23, 2010 and b) the downstream side of the four overflow culverts in floodplain
looking from the north.
#8 - Hinesburg– O’Neil Road over an Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River (M12S5.01)
An Unnamed tributary of the LaPlatte River travels under O’Neil Road, just south of the
intersection with Shelburne Falls Road. The channel in the area is low gradient with wetland type
features including vegetation growing in the channel. There is very little cover over the culvert.
The culverts are deformed, with one of the upstream lips folded up. The culverts were
completely submerged by ponded water in the downstream field on March 23, 2010 (Photo 10a)
and backwatered by a downstream riffle just enough to cover the culvert bottom during the low
flow observed May 18, 2010. Ponded water does not appear to cause damage.
a) b)
Photo10: O’Neil Road over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River a) looking at downstream side from the south
March 23, 2010 and b) looking downstream at inlet May 18, 2010.

#9 - Hinesburg– Shelburne Falls Road over unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River (M12S5.01)
An unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River travels under Shelburne Falls Road just west of the
intersection with O’Neil Road. The channel is low gradient and has wetland type characteristics.
The culvert appears to have good capacity and be in good condition. The field downstream was
flooded on March 23, 2010 (Photo 11a) and backing up water into the culvert, but still had plenty
of clearance. There is a scour pool present downstream that would suggest that the culvert is
undersized. A beaver dam on the downstream side of the culvert backwatered the structure on
May 18, 2010. There are no significant problems.
a) b)
Photo11: Shelburne Falls Road over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River a) looking at downstream channel
March 23, 2010 and b) looking at upstream inlet May 18, 2010.
#10 - Hinesburg– Leavensworth Road over unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River
A small unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River crosses under Leavensworth Road in an 18 inch
culvert. This culvert is severely undersized and causes the road to overtop regularly. On March
23, 2010 the road was overtopping (Photo 12a) and carrying road gravel into the downstream
channel. Upstream was ponded in the field. The channel upstream and downstream has wetland
characteristics. This location is not likely a high priority for aquatic organism passage. Unless
this structure is upgraded this will likely continue to be a maintenance issue and contribute
sediment to the downstream channel. One option is to stabilize the road surface to reduce erosion
of gravel into downstream channel.

a) b)
Photo12: Leavensworth Road over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River a) looking along the road from the east
March 23, 2010 and b) looking at upstream inlet May 18, 2010.
#11 - Hinesburg– Route 116 over an Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River (M13S3.01B)
An unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River crosses under Route 116 just south of the
intersection with Billings Farm Road. Two small channels converge at upstream side. Road
ditches contribute large amounts of runoff, gravel, and trash to this culvert. Debris, trash, and
gravel are accumulating upstream. The culvert has been deformed at the upstream side, further
reducing conveyance. This undersized culvert is causing scour at the downstream side. This
would be a very difficult structure to replace due to very high road embankment and heavily
traveled road. The culvert is perched and would support very limited aquatic organism passage.
The downstream channel has been ditched through the farm.
a) b)
Photo13: Route 116 over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River a) looking at downstream outlet March 23, 2010
and b) looking at upstream inlet May 18, 2010.

#12 - Hinesburg– Shelburne Falls Road over Unnamed Tributary to LaPlatte River (M13S3.01)
An unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River travels under Shelburne Falls Road between Route
116 and O’Neil Road. This culvert is undersized (34% of bankfull width) and has been
deformed. On March 23, 2010 the upstream side of the culvert was completely submerged and
water threatened to overtop the road at the low spot a few hundred feet to the west (Photo 14a).
The scouring flows exiting the culvert have created a large scour hole on the downstream side,
before the channel makes a hard bend. There is very little cover over the culvert so replacement
with a larger structure would require a wider structure.
a) b)
Photo14: Shelburne Falls Road over Unnamed Tributary to LaPlatte River a) looking west down road March 23,
2010 and b) looking upstream inlet May 18, 2010.
#13 - Hinesburg– Gilman Road over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River
An unnamed tributary to the LaPlatte River travels under Gilman Road, near the intersection
with Route 116. The culvert is in good condition and appears to have adequate capacity. The
channel upstream of this structure has been straightened through the pasture. In approximately
bankfull flow conditions observed March 23, 2010 the culvert was approximately one third full.
There are no obvious issues with this culvert.

a) b)
Photo15: Gilman Road over Unnamed Tributary to the LaPlatte River a) looking at downstream side March 23,
2010 and b) looking at outlet May 18, 2010.
5.0 Structure Improvement Matrix
The inventories described above give a range of information for different uses. As structures fail,
or are scheduled for routine maintenance and replacement Towns have little information
provided by these inventories to guide replacement. The VOBCIT and VTRANS structure
databases provide little information regarding structural or design deficiencies. The VTANR
assessment data provides information that can indicate possible conflicts with the river that may
cause premature washout or continued maintenance issues.
A summary matrix was created for the structures assessed by the VTANR methods (Appendix
A). Data has been summarized to highlight specific deficiencies in the structure and provide
general guidelines for future implementation. The majority of the structures are narrow relative
to channel width. The assessment also indicates that many structures have poor alignments.
6.0 Evolving Culvert Design Guidelines
Identification of key structures that may be contributing to channel instability, creating erosion
and flooding risks, or inhibiting aquatic organism passage at critical locations in the watershed
has been a focus for the VTANR. Culverts that have been assessed using the VTANR Bridge and
Culvert Assessment are ranked according to structure and channel characteristics to identify the
potential needs for improvement or replacement. Screening tools highlight specific deficiencies
that should be improved and are used in creation of the Structure Improvement Matrix.

Specific guidelines for design have been adopted by different states to make improvements once
structures have been identified as a priority or a replacement is necessary. The State of Vermont
has been proactive in creating a design manual for improving structures for aquatic organism
passage (Bates and Kirn 2009). Overarching recommendations include the culvert spanning 1.25
times the average natural channel bankfull width, embedding the culvert 20-40% of the height
into the stream bed to maintain natural bed materials, and limiting floodplain fill. Similar design
manuals have been developed in Massachusetts (MARSCP 2006), Maine (MEDOT 2004), and
New Hampshire (NHDFG 2007).
The United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) General Permit includes specific language
about crossing structure design. Regulation prohibits obstruction of aquatic organism passage.
Structures will prevent restriction of high flows and maintain low flows. The channel should
flow through the structure in a channel with natural stream bed material, bedform, alignment and
profile consistent with adjacent reaches. Within the structure, depth, velocity, and turbulence
should be similar to the nearby stream. The permit specifically refers to the Vermont Guidelines
for the Design of Stream/Road Crossings for Passage of Aquatic Organisms in Vermont (Bates
and Kirn 2009).
The Federal Highway Administration and Washington State University (WSU) are working
together to produce Hydraulic Engineering Circular 26: Design of Fish Passage for Bridges and
Culverts. This work in progress is intended to be a comprehensive manual for the design or
retrofit of a stream crossing to meet aquatic organism passage criteria. The California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has developed a comprehensive design guidelines Fish
Passage Design for Road Crossings: An Engineering Document Providing Fish Passage Design
Guidance for Caltrans Projects (Caltrans 2007).
7.0 Moving Forward
• As structures are washed out or severely damaged, replace with appropriate structures
using suggested improvements and design guidelines.
• Towns or watershed groups should seek available funding for improvement or
replacement of structures to achieve multiple objectives such as increasing public safety,
geomorphic compatibility, and fish passage. Multiple funding sources exist in Vermont
and the region for improvement of aquatic organism passage, maintenance and safety.
• Reporting will be shared with project partners and beneficiaries including the LaPlatte
Watershed Partnership, Towns, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission,
VTANR, VTrans.
• A watershed meeting will be held with stakeholders to review results and strategies for
improving structures.

8.0 References
Bates, K. and R. Kirn (2009). Guidelines for the Design of Stream/Road Crossings for Passage
of Aquatic Organisms in Vermont. Waterbury, VT, Prepared by Kozmo, Inc. with
Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife, Agency of Natural Resources.
Beyer, H. L. (2006). Hawth's Analysis Tools, SpatialEcology.com.
Caltrans (2007). Fish Passage Design for Road Crossings: An Engineering Document Providing
Fish Passage Design Guidance for Caltrans Projects. C. D. o. Transportation.
Sacramento, CA.
Hornby, D. (2008). RivEx. Southampton, UK, Duncan Hornby BSc(Hons), MSc
(contact@rivex.co.uk).
LWP (2007). Stream Corridor Plan for the LaPlatte River and Tributaries, Town of Hinesburg,
Vermont. Hinesburg, VT, LaPlatte Watershed Partnership, with support from VT DEC
River Management Program and Lewis Creek Association.
LWP (2008). Stream Corridor Plan Reaches M6-M11, Towns of Charlotte and Shelburne,
Vermont. Hinesburg, VT, LaPlatte Watershed Partnership, with support from VT DEC
River Management Program and Lewis Creek Association.
MARSCP (2006). Massachusetts River and Stream Crossing Standards. Amherst, MA, The
Massachusetts River and Stream Crossing Partnership including University of
Massachusetts Amherst, MA Riverways Program, and The Nature Conservancy.
MEDOT (2004). Maine Fish Passage Policy & Design Guide. Augusta, ME, Maine Department
of Transportation.
NHDFG (2007). New Hampshire Stream Crossing Guidelines (DRAFT - Not of Release).
Concord, NH, New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game.
Schiff, R., J. S. Clark, et al. (2008). The Vermont Culvert Geomorphic Compatibility Screening
Tool. Waterbury, VT, Prepared by Milone & MacBroom, Inc. with the VT DEC River
Management Program: 43.
Schiff, R., J. S. Clark, et al. (2009). The Vermont Culvert Aquatic Organism Passage Screening
Tool. Roxbury, VT, Prepared by Milone & MacBroom, Inc. with the VT Department of
Fish and Wildlife: 118.
Strahler, A. N. (1952). "Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography." Bulletin
of the Geological Society of America 63: 1117-1142.
VTANR (2009). Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment, Appendix G, Bridge and Culvert
Assessment, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. March 2009.

Appendix A – Culvert Improvement Matrix
Stream Geomorphic
Town Road Name Fish Passage Primary Defficiencies Future Corrective Actions
Name Compatibility
Failing Armoring and Erosion
Occuring. Embankment Blocks Stabilize banks, straighten
Charlotte DORSET ST LaPlatte River N/A N/A
Floodplain. Mild bend approach.
Approaching Structure.
When bridge replaced
Charlotte CARPENTER RD LaPlatte River N/A N/A Embankment blocks floodplain. maintain bankful opening and
as much floodplain as possible.
Structure width undersized (40%
Enlarge structure to 100%
bankful width). Mild bend
Mud Hollow Mostly bankful stream width,
Charlotte SPEAR ST Reduced approaching structure. Erosion
Brook Compatible straighten approach, and
occuring. Embankment blocks
stabilize banks.
floodplain.
McCabe's Mostly bankful stream width,
Charlotte LIME KILN RD Reduced approaching structure. Erosion
stabilize banks.
floodplain.
bankful width). Sharp bend
Mud Hollow Partially bankful stream width,
Charlotte SPEAR ST Reduced approaching structure. Erosion
stabilize banks.
floodplain.

bankful width). Mild bend Enlarge structure to 100%
approaching structure. Erosion bankful stream width,
Charlotte SPEAR ST LaPlatte River N/A N/A
occuring. Sediment accumulating straighten approach, and
upstream. Embankment blocks stabilize banks.
floodplain.
Restore natural channel
Bingham Fully Embankment blocks floodplain.
Charlotte HINESBURG RD Reduced bottom. Concentrate low
Brook Compatible No natural substrate
flows.
Mud Hollow Fully Two pipes at crossing. Use one structure. Restore
Charlotte HINESBURG RD Reduced
Brook Compatible Embankment blocks floodplain. natural channel bottom.
Bingham
Charlotte GUINEA RD N/A N/A Two Pipes at crossing. Use one structure.
Brook Trib
bankful width). Failing armoring
Partially bankful stream width,
Hinesburg GILMAN RD LaPlatte Reduced and erosion occuring. Mild bend
Compatible straighten approach, and
approaching structure.
stabilize banks.
Embankment blocks floodplain.
bankful width). Sediment Enlarge structure to 100%
accumulating upstream. Erosion bankful stream width,
Beecher Hill Mostly
Hinesburg BEECHER HILL RD Reduced occuring. Mild bend approaching straighten approach, and
Brook Incompatible
structure. Embankment blocks stabilize banks. Lower
floodplain. Cascade outlet with structure to eliminate drop.
drop.
Two pipes at crossing.
Beecher Hill Partially Embankment blocks floodplain. Use one structure. Stabilize
Hinesburg ROUTE 116 Reduced
Brook Compatible Sediment accumulating banks.
upstream. Erosion occuring.

bankful stream width,
bankful width). Failing armoring
Beecher Hill straighten aproach, stabilize
Hinesburg BEECHER HILL RD N/A N/A and erosion occuring. Mild bend
Brook banks. Relocate as possible to
approaching structure. Located at
move away from break in
break in valley slope.
valley sope.
accumulating upstream. bankful stream width,
Beecher Hill Partially
Hinesburg NORTH RD Reduced Downstream scour, erosion and straighten approach, and
Brook Compatible
failing armoring. Embankment stabilize banks. Lower
blocks floodplain. Cascade outlet structure to eliminate drop.
with drop.
Failing Armoring and Erosion
Hinesburg SILVER ST LaPlatte N/A N/A Occuring. Embankment Blocks Stabilize banks.
Floodplain.
bankful width). Scour, erosion
None, except bankful stream width and
Mostly and failing armoring occuring.
Hinesburg CHARLOTTE RD adult stabilize banks. Lower
Incompatible Embankment blocks floodplain.
salmonids structure to eliminate drop
Freefall outlet with drop. Culvert
and match channel slope.
slope lower than channel slope.
Mostly Structure width undersized (82% Enlarge structure to 100%
Hinesburg CHARLOTTE RD LaPlatte Reduced
Compatible bankful width). bankful stream width.
Structure width undersized (78% Enlarge structure to 100%
Hinesburg ROUTE 116 The Canal N/A N/A bankful width). Structure skewed bankful stream width. Realign
to roadway. to remove skew.
Mostly Structure width undersized (32% Enlarge structure to 100%

Hinesburg COMMERCE ST The Canal Reduced
Compatible bankful width). bankful stream width.

bankful width). Deformed, flow Enlarge structure to 100%
Partially
Hinesburg unnamed Reduced paths around structure. Scour bankful stream width. Use one
Compatible
and erosion occuring. Two pipes structure. Stabilize banks.
at crossing.
bankful width). Sediment
Partially accumulating upstream. Erosion
Hinesburg ROUTE 116 Patrick Brook Reduced bankful stream width, stabilize
Compatible occuring. Mild bend approaching
banks, and realign approach.
structure. Embankment blocks
floodplain.
bankful stream width, stabilize
LEAVENSWORTH bankful width). Erosion occuring.
Hinesburg LaPlatte N/A N/A banks, and realign approach.
RD Sharp bend approaching
Provide stabilized road surface
structure.
overflow location.
Partially bankful width). Scour and erosion
Hinesburg unnamed Reduced bankful stream width, stabilize
Compatible occuring. Mild bend approaching
banks, and realign approach.
structure.
bankful width). Deformed and Enlarge structure to 100%
SHELBURNE unnamed Mostly
Hinesburg Reduced erosion occuring. Mild bend bankful stream width, stabilize
FALLS RD M13S3.01 Compatible
approaching structure. banks, and realign approach.
bankful width). Deformed, scour Enlarge structure to 100%
MECHANICSVILLE Partially and erosion occuring. Mild bend bankful stream width, stabilize
Hinesburg Patrick Brook Reduced
RD Compatible approaching structure. banks, and realign approach.
Embankment blocks floodplain. Use one structure.
Two pipes at crossing.

Mostly bankful width). Erosion occuring. bankful stream width, stabilize
Hinesburg PARTRIDGE HILL Patrick Brook Reduced
Compatible Mild bend approaching structure. banks, and realign approach.
Two pipes at crossing. Use one structure.
bankful width). Erosion occuring. Enlarge structure to 100%
Fully Sediment accumulating bankful stream width, stabilize
Hinesburg O'NEIL RD unnamed Reduced
Compatible upstream. Mild bend approaching banks, and realign approach.
structure. Embankment blocks Use one structure.
floodplain. Two pipes at crossing.
bankful width). Scour occuring. bankful stream width,
Partially Mild bend approaching structure. straighten approach, and
Hinesburg RICHMOND RD Patrick Brook None
Compatible Embankment blocks floodplain. stabilize banks. Lower
Freefall outlet with drop. Culvert structure to eliminate drop
slope lower than channel slope. and match channel slope.
SHELBURNE unnamed Mostly bankful width). Erosion occuring. bankful stream width,
Hinesburg Reduced
FALLS RD M12S5.01 Compatible Mild bend approaching structure. straighten approach, and
Embankment blocks floodplain. stabilize banks.
bankful stream width,
straighten aproach, stabilize
Hinesburg POND BROOK RD Patrick Brook N/A N/A approaching structure.
banks. Relocate as possible to
move away from break in
Locacted at break in valley slope.
valley sope.

Unnamed None, except accumulating upstream. Erosion bankful stream width, realign
Partially
Hinesburg ROUTE 116 Tributary to adult occuring. Mild bend approaching approach, and stabilize banks.
Compatible
LaPlatte River salmonids structure. Embankment blocks Lower structure to eliminate
floodplain. Freefall outlet with drop.
drop.
Tributary to Enlarge structure to 100%
HAYDEN HILL RD Partially bankful width). Sediment
Hinesburg Beecher Hill Reduced bankful stream width. Use one
W Compatible accumulating upstream. Erosion
Brook structure. Stabilize banks.
occuring. Two pipes at crossing.
accumulating upstream. Scour bankful stream width and
HAYDEN HILL RD Beecher Hill Mostly
Hinesburg None and erosion occuring. stabilize banks. Lower
W Brook Incompatible
Embankment blocks floodplain. structure to eliminate drop
Culvert slope lower than channel and match channel slope.
slope. Freefall outlet with drop.
Unnamed Enlarge structure to 100%
LEAVENSWORTH Partially bankful width). Scour and erosion
Hinesburg Tributary to Reduced bankful stream width and
RD Compatible occuring. Embankment blocks
LaPlatte River stabilize banks.
floodplain.
Unnamed When replaced ensure same
Hinesburg GILMAN RD Tributary to N/A N/A No obvious deficiencies. or larger size culvert and
LaPlatte River embed in channel bottom.

bankful width). Erosion occuring. Enlarge structure to 100%
McCabe's Partially Embankment blocks floodplain. bankful stream width, realign
Shelburne SHELBURNE RD Reduced
Brook Compatible Mild bend approaching structure. approach, and stabilize banks.
Culvert slope lower than channel Match channel slope.
slope.
bankful width). Sediment
accumulating upstream. Erosion
bankful stream width, realign
McCabe's Partially occuring. Embankment blocks
Shelburne BOSTWICK RD Reduced approach, and stabilize banks.
Brook Compatible floodplain. Mild bend
Lower structure to eliminate
approaching structure. Culvert
drop and match channel slope.
slope lower than channel slope.
Cascade outlet with drop.
Mild bend approaching structure. Straighten approach. Relocate
Shelburne FALLS RD LaPlatte N/A N/A Embankment blocks floodplain. as possible to move away from
Located at break in valley slope. break in valley sope.
of bankful width). Embankment
McCabe's Mostly Structure replaced since
Shelburne HARBOR RD Reduced blocks floodplain. Mild bend
Brook Compatible assessment. Re‐assess.
approaching structure. Three
pipes at crossing.
Shelburne SHELBURNE RD LaPlatte N/A N/A Erosion occuring. Stabilize banks.
Embankment blocks floodplain. When bridge replaced
Shelburne BAY RD LaPlatte River N/A N/A Concrete cracking. Backwater maintain bankful opening and
from lake. as much floodplain as possible.

Teddy Bear of bankful width). Scour and
McCabes Mostly bankful stream width and
Shelburne Factory Access None erosion occuring. Embankment
Brook Compatible stabilize banks. Lower
Road blocks floodplain. Freefall outlet
structure to eliminate drop.
with drop.
of bankful width). Erosion
bankful stream width and
St. Mostly occuring. Embankment blocks
ROUTE 116 Unnamed Reduced stabilize banks. Lower
George Compatible floodplain. Culvert slope lower
structure to eliminate drop
than channel slope. Cascade
and match channel slope.
outlet with drop.
St. Mostly of bankful width). Scour and bankful stream width and
unnamed Reduced
George Compatible erosion occuring. Two pipes at stabilize banks. Use one
crossing. structure.
of bankful width). Erosion
St. Partially bankful stream width and
ROCKY RIDGE CIR unnamed Reduced occuring. Embankment blocks
George Compatible stabilize banks. Lower
floodplain. Cascade outlet with
structure to eliminate drop.
drop.
of bankful width). Erosion Enlarge structure to 100%
St. Partially
unnamed Reduced occuring. Embankment blocks bankful stream width, realign
George Compatible
floodplain. Mild bend approach, and stabilize banks.
approaching structure.

Appendix B – Structure Summary Database
Attached as electronic file (PDF).
LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study

Figure 1: Road/Stream Crossings in the Laplatte River Watershed
BARSTO W
RD
EXECUTIV
S BROWNELL RD
E
RID
"
E DR GE
HI
RD CH
LL
RIS
D TM
DR
RD
D
AS
R RD
NE R
Y BU L N CHRIST
WILLISTON
BA LN TTE MAS HILL RD
AC K
CO
DR
RN
UT
LIN
BU R
D
RD
H AR BO
OND
ON
5.2,3.3
HR
RS
SH EL
UT
E
ADIR
0.3,0
PIE
D
SO
R RD
HR
E HA
BEAVER CR
US
W
TE R
APPL
D
LE EW O O
RB
ILL R
0.3,0 Y BE D LN
HOES LN RD AR
GA
N GA
0.1,0 0.4,0
E TO
ER R D WN
H
SU
T
EE E0.2,00.1,0 WEB S 0.6,0 LN
OA K
RD
BISHO P
EEK RD
3.1,1.8 BELIVEAU RD
AC O R N
E E
RICHMOND
RD
E
QUARRY RD
WILLO W
SHELBURNE
RM
D EP D BR O O K
RD
OT R R LN
2.2,1.6
D ER
K FA
LN
ST. GEORGE
Y
S G ATE
R
E 0,0 A
LaP l att e R iv e
BARN VIEW RD
OL
C
RD 0.3,0 D
TA
ND FA
MA E
DUCK PO 2,0.1 1,0 RM
E
VIS
TERA EE 0.2,0 RD
RO
D
RD
D
L LN
RD
CY
MA RT E
SO N R
0.2,0 LE D E
2A
RE R
U TE
LN 0.3,0 GE D
RG
HIL L R
C C ESS
0.5,0
RO UTE
E ER
BU
BEEB
0.7,0 E
116
ST U
0.7,0
FALLS
LM
TH O M P
ES
r
EE LN PA
RD
HIN
MO NA RCH RD
E PO N D 0.1,0 H
S PA
E LN
BO ST
PO N D A
C SW
IRISH HILL RD 0.1,0 ER
BUSHEY DR
AM
FR O
HEATHER LN
1.2,0 0,0 P
FO REST RD
RD
EN M
E 0.8,0 PR
0.7,0.7 BACO N D
R E E HARD LN D
0.8,0 7.2,3.7 0.2,0 MO UN T PRITC
W ICK
E
GS E
RD 0.1,0 E 0.4,0 EE SHOR E LN 0.3,0
AN S
T C H ER 0.5,0 D
ILL R
E
PINE
CO L FLE
E E RIVERVALE RD E
E MA GEE H
Lake Champlain
TI LN 0.6,0 E
RD E
ND
LA K E
FA RM
RD
THOM AS RD 1.1,0
SH O
E
0.3,0 0,0 0,0
BUTTERNUT LN
0.3,0 D
0.2,0.2 E DR
E0,0 0.4,0
E E
AIR PAR
RD
RE D
E WE
RD
E 3.5,1.4 0.1,0 2,1.4
0.6,0
EE0.5,0 E
RIDG EF IE
K
SH
R
IC
E
0.1,0 0.6,0 E
0.2,0.2 E
TW
EL
1.2,0
K RD
0.6,0
rook
S E 0.1,0 E
BU
BO EE0.3,0 2,0 E RD
E
K
LN
E
RN
4.7,2.3 ROO
PL DB
LD
Patri ck B
L
0.5,0 PO N
AI
E RY
TT
FA
E 2.3,1.1
RD
O 0.5,0
CK E
CA
0.2,0
LL
E HI 2.1,0 0.5,0
S
E 0.4,0 E
RD
NAT URES WY
D RD
0.5,0 0.3,0 E W E
E 0.4,0
0.4,0 RD
BIRC
E
MON
E 0.3,0 E
RD
E AC 0.2,0 0,0
E 3.2,0 0.9,0 E 6,1 PL
DORS
DR
PO N D
1.9,1.2 0.2,0
HW O
0.2,0 0.4,0
RICH
E 0.2,0.2 0.8,0 E
TH 42
EEE
D
10.2,4.2 E 0.8,0
GR EEN
E
E TH A N 0.3,0 E
WOO DL AN
RDE 0.1,0 0.1,0
RD
OD D
ET S T
0.2,0 0.3,0 L CVU RD 0.2,0 0,0 0.1,0 E
HILL S
E 11.4,4 0.1,0 0.2,0 EI E E 0.1,0 ND TEXAS HILL RD
MOUNT PHILO RD
0.7,0 ON 0.5,0.5 E EE E
M cCa be's B
0.1,0.1
E E E La 1.4,0 E E PO
R
EEE 0,0 0.1,0 0.2,0 0.4,0
FERN RD
B
1.9,0 Pl R
A LL E N
EEEE E
U SH R D
E
at
PO INT
0.1,0.1
PIET T
8.2,4.8 E E
NO RT
E te 0.5,0.5 E
E AV
E Ri SR
D BE
G
OR CHAR
ve r RIG 2.2,0.5
E M EA
HW Y
H RD
0.6,0.5 HINESBURG
RD
1.1,0.6
Beec her Hill Bro

ro o k E
Potential Habitat Reconnection
E
rook
DOW
E
0.2,0.2
D
SPEAR
Distance (miles) shown for both Total 0.3,0 0.1,0 1.3,0 2.3,0
ollow B
RD
RD E 0.6,0
19
M ES
CHARLOTTE
RD
E
Upstream Network and Upstream
EE E
CHURCH HILL RD
HOL
TH
4.2,0 0.9,0.3
E 0.1,0 0.2,0
ST
0.4,0
Mainstem. Calculated Distances to E 0.3,0
0.8,0 0.3,0
MUT TO
Mu d H
E 0.7,0 0,0
E
12,3.4 0.3,0 0.1,0
E E
Next Upstream Crossing.
ok
E 0.9,0 E E
0.1,0
MUR P
3.5,0 D E EE 0.5,0 0.5,0.1 0,0
TE R
N
G RD LO T
E
HILL D
HINES B
UR E CHA
R E E 0.2,0 E 0.1,0 0.3,0
SILVER ST
HY
E0.1,0 0.3,0.3 0.5,0
E E E0.6,0
RD
BALDWI N RD
R
6.9,2 0.1,0
RD
E E
E E0.1,0 EE0.8,0 0.7,0.7 0.1,0 0.5,0
Stream/Road Crossings E0.9,0.4
4.1,1
CB
0.3,0 E0,0
LA K E R
ollow Brook
E 0.1,0
RE
E RE E E
E E 2.3,0.4 E 1.4,0.1 E
S
BEAN RD
River (By Stream Order)
K A CRE
TR
TA
DR
G SIDE
SU N SE
UC 0.7,0
MO RN IN E
I
E
LL
D
K RD
LN BURRIT T
WHALLEY
E
N
LIN
Bin g
CO
ROOT R
D
FERRY R
LYNRIC
T RD
LN
dH
HIL
DR
0.4,0 RD D LR
D PO N D DR
ha
D
Mu
MA LLAR ON
W
m
NP
RD
VI E
Bro
R O
HE
1
W
0.1,0 E RD
PRINDL RD
ok
Lakes and Ponds R D

E GA
R EN
0.7,0 0,0
U NTAIN 0.6,0
E MO
E E0.4,0
RD
LaPlatte River Watershed PEAS 1.4,0 EE

0.9,0
E
DG
E 1.3,0
W RD
E
RI
Y RD
Town Boundary R SE BA
LU C Y
C O N VE
E D
HINES R
ME ADO
HAPA
HIGBEE RD ATER RD
S LN
RD DRINKW RD
ASH E ISHAM RD HO LLO W
Roads TH 2 7
CAT C
W
SIDE D
N
RL DE LE W
ED A IL E RD ER
GE
ON E M IS C
AL C R EE
GILM AN
0 0.5 1 2 EN T
IN RU K RD
INS ED
S N
E RD
R
GU
Miles
LN
RD
PO INT
IN
S RD
PSO N
R O SC O
EA
TH O M
RD
GE
MO UN TA
RD
TU R K
D
RI
RD
D
S FN A B
TO ER
MONKTON STARKSBORO
EY L
L
S FN TY
N
Figure 2: Assessed Culverts in the Laplatte River Watershed
#
"
Shelburne Bay EXEC UT IVE
GO VE RN
CH AL OU
S BROWNEL L RD
DR R ID
GE
E
FARM DR RD
HI
D CH
SU TT ON
ROS EWOOD DR
R
LL
Y # R IS
RD
TM
BA
RD
DR
AS
RD
RD
X LN
LN
O RS LN
BU CHR ISTM AS HIL
RG E
D
LN L RD
AC K
TT E
WILLISTON
ON
DR
NE R
CO RN
LIN UT
NY
EO
RD
ON
O ND
D
W
CO
KE
HR
BU R
ST G
N
RS
GA
TE
H IL L
WW(
AD IR
UT
TE
E DR
PIE
SH EL
EAD O W
RD
RD
ROCK Y RD
LO N G M
SO
H AR BO
W
MAP LE
WWE
W
RD
D R EW LN QU
AI
H
L
US
W
R RD
Y APPL
RD
BEAV ER CREEK RD
RB
H AW EW OO
L EY D LN
GA
BE
H ILL
HOE S LN RD
W W AR
PH ILL
E
W TO
SU
WN
WW
CA
W
OA K
LN
EE EW
BO
RD
EL
W T ER
IP L N
RD
W EBS BISH O P # WW
LN
OS
AG
R
E
W AD YD BELIVEA U RD
WE
E
KEL
W OR
ST
R
(
LN
E
RICHMOND
BA
D
RR
TU RTLE
RD
QUA RRY RD
W
M
E
OL
T H EIM
WW D EP AY W IL
R
OT LO
RD
FA
MAE CK FAR M
RD WB
DR
RO
WWW(
ST. GEORGE
OK
S GATE
E
C
W W LN
DR
LN
LN
W
TI
W SHELBURNE
WW W OL
BAR N VIEW R
LE
W W Shelburne
TA
ST
LIM ER IC K
DU CK PO ND D FA
H
RD
E W W
VIS
AT
WW RM
OOL
EW Pond RD
RD
E
WE
WWW
LN
SC H
L LN
G
RD
W W E
W MAR TE
D
LE D
CES S RD
UR
Y
RE R
RD
GE
RD
AC
H IL L D
HEML OC K
SB
W
FA LL S
R
E
TR
P SO N
R
E W
NE
W E
BEEB
ST U
E W
W LM
HI
W W W PA
2A
E W
PO ND AC
RD
LN
S PA
T
E
TH O M
W W W PON D RD
E LN
CH
OOD C
W W
R OU TE
W W WW WW IRIS H H ILL RD
R SW
BUSH EY DR
WW
W LN PE
W W
FO REST RD
WW
W WWW (
E IU M
AM
FR O
HEATH ER LN
WW
W
W D
W WWW
PR
EN M
E TT R IL L
W W W (E WW MA R S BACO N DR (
E TR H AR D
LN D
W ILD W
W
W E C
GS E
(W W W EW ( Lake E MO U N
T PR IT
A NS
E
W
WW W E SH OR E
LN
RD
Lake Champlain WE
WW W E
W TI LN (
RIV ERVALE RD LE R
D
H IL L
RD ILL
W E EWWWWWWW EE H
ND
E W E Iroquois M ITE
RD
RD W W W W TU MB MA G SH
LA KE W W H AY D YN
A
E THOMA S RD W
W SHELBU RNE HINE SBURG RD ER
WWWWWW W WWWWW
RD
M
W W WWW WWWWW
BUTTERNUT LN
W
WE W C E LN RD
AN
D
E W DR
WAK E ROBIN DR
W EU STA ED SH O RE H
ON
E
W E
AIR PARK
W PINE O
W WE LL
(E W W W WWWW
SO UTHVIE
HM
O
E W DR
WOOD RUN
RD W W
(E # W RUN
RIDG E FIE
E
R IC
K
W W E W E WW KO ZAS R
D
IC W WW EWW WW
W W EED RD
Patrick Brook
BE
W W W
ST E E W (
RD
W W EW
AC
BO W W
W
E W LaP lat te RiverEE GOBB LE R LN
W RD
HR
W E OK
LN
W
LD
W WW WW WW IR ISH RD DB
RO
D
L
W W ID OW PL PO N
AI
RD ( E W WW W
T
W W WW Y
E W W
W OR
AT
CROW HILL RD
W W
SUNSET LN E
E CK
C
(
E
W W
W W W HI BILL ING S FAR M RD
W E WW
RD
W E W W
W
W
NATURE S WY WW W E RD
E
W (
E W
LN
SF
E W PL AC
GE
O RT
EWWWWW W LIM E KI
LN RD WWWW
W SH
WW W W W
ET
YR W
E R ID
D
W WE
E W W EL D
NS
W W W BU ER
BIR C
W W E
W W
W W AC
RD
SU
E W W W W W RN PL
AU B
W W W E WW W E
k
W
D OR S
W W W # EW WW FA
HWO
DR
PO N D
WW W W
oo
(
WWE
E WE W E
(WW W W W WW W LL
Br
S
W WW W (
E WW WWW W
WOOD LAND
WE W W W WW
W E RD
TH 42
WW W# WW W
OD D
LE D G
W WW
ET ST
E
W WW
WW # WW
GR E EN
W
WW WW WWE
lo w
W (
E (
E
W
W W
W W
W W W W
WW LR
D PAR TR ID PI RD
P RD
W G E H IL
E
W # W EI ET
EW EWWW W E
W W WWE# ( L
TER RD
D
WWWWW ON D ND
RD
ETH A N
W E TE
ol
W W #E
W
R
CARPEN UR RD
TEX AS HIL L
WWWW
E
MOUN T PHILO RD
EW E E
WWWW
SR
W EE WWWW WWE CV RD PO
WOO
( WW
dH
EW W W WW W W
BISH O
BU
MEC HA NICSVILL E
W W W CLA RK RD
EEWW W R
EN O
FE R N
W
W
((
E
WW (
EW VE
S H RD
WW W E
Mu
W WE W EA
D LN
W
ALL EN
WWE WW E
W
PIETT
B
( (
E
RD
W W W W
OR CH A RD
RO
W
HINESBURG
E ME
W
McCab
HWY
W W W
UT
WW E
W W
W (EWWWWWWWW
E1
(
AD
W
W W (
E
WW W
16
D W
LA KE R
OW R
Bee
# W W W
RD
e's
VTrans Bridge Inventory System (15) W

W W W W LE AVENS WORT H RD
(
che NORT H RD
RD
LA GO O
W E
19
W W E
W ( W
WE
W W W E CK
Bro ok
W E
WW W W W
TH
W RO
CHURCH HILL RD
W W E
rH
#
CHARLOTTE W
H
W WW TTE RD H IG
VOBCIT Local Inventory (975) W W (
W CH AR LO
N RD
EW
SPEA R
W W (
WW WW WW(
WWW E
E W
ill B
E LL RD W
WWW W WW W WW W LL RD W
HAYD EN HI
MU T TO
W W E W E
W WW EW W W W BU CK HI
WW
WW
WW
W W W
W W W E
W W E W
(
W
rook
W WW
W W W
VTANR Geomorphic Assessment (44)
W k W E
ST
( o W W (
EW EWW
W
W W W
VALL EY
MU R P
o W W
N H ILL
Br
W E
LAV
W
W W ow WWWW
W E
WW
W W W WE
W W WW W W E E
(
W H IN E SB
URG RD EC
O
IGN
l W W
SILV ER ST
H Y RD
l W NO
Stream/Road Crossings (165) W
Ho
W W W
D
VIEW DR
M
E W WW W
E
E
W E
R
W d
W W WW W E FARM RD R HILL RD U
H IL
WWW W
D
W E
W FL ET CH ER BEEC HE
MUSE UM
W WW (
EE RD
CB R
W
W W W E W WW
LR
WEW WWW WEWW W W
Dams W(
E W W
Mu
W WW W E W
D
W
BAL DW IN RD
# W W W W EW
W (
E
WW W W (
E ( E
RE
# W WWW W W WEW W
EW WEW W W
RD
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order

W W E
W RE
D
WWW W W W
BEAN RD
W W
S
W D
TA
W W DR TR
K AC RE
W W E W G SID E
IL
E
SU NSET
UC
W W W W MO R N IN LN K
LN
W W E ET
BITT ER SW
W WWWW
W LN RD
E BU RR ITT
Pl W
La
W W W a LIN
LYN RIC
# W W W
ROOT RD
RD C
FERR Y W OL
Bin
W
RD
W NH
W W LN ILL
t te
GU
W W IN DR OW RD
DR
W W W R D
gh
W W PO ND RD
IN
MAL LARD ND
W
Ri v
BO W W
am
EA
E W O
1
VIE
WN W NP
LN W O
RD
W ER
er
W
W
Br
W H
Lakes and Ponds W (
W PR IN D LE
RD BR O
oo
W W W W N
RD OK
SID
E W
OL D R
WY
k
COL W ILL IAM S

W W
WW W W W GA
RE EL
N
LA KE
W W
LaPlatte River Watershed
RD RD
W N TAIN
W MO U D
W W
E
O UT
E ON EW
RD
PEAS W MEA D FA RM RD
EP E
W
RD
W FI R WE
E
WW
E 11 6
W E
W
DG
E W
W RD
Town Boundary W WWW W OK
E
RI
W W
W B RO
W WEW AM
LU C Y
GH
BIN
RD
W HINE S RD
MEA D O
Roads
W WW
PAW
ATER RD
S
HIG B EE RD DR IN KW
ASH E RD
LN
IS HAM RD HOL LOW RD
HA
TH 27
W SID E
Last Updated May 26, 2010
TC
CA
IL E R D
W D EE LE W
ON E M IS C
DR
RR
GE
0 0.25 0.5 1
WW
WWWW R EE
GILM AN
UN KR
TURKE Y LN
W LN D
IN S ED
Miles
W
E RD
SO N S PO IN T
RD W
W
TH O MP W
RD
RD
MO U N TA
R OS C O
E
T RD RD ID
G
NS PO IN OA
D
BR
O MPS O
EAST TH T R
LE
SF
TY
N
S FN
#
WWWW
W
W
WW W W (
W(WWW (
Figure
WWW3: Assessed Charlotte Culverts in the Laplatte River Watershed
W W
WW E
E E
(
E W
W
W E
W
(
Lake Champlain WE
WWW W WW E
W (
E
W W
W W
W E
W E
"
LA KE
RD W
W W
W
WWWWWW
W
THO MA S RD E W
WE
SHEL BURN E HINE SBUR
G RD
W WWW W
WWWW
SHELBURNE W E W RD
W EUSTAC E LN E
( WE
W
W WE
ED
RD
AIR PARK
E W SO UTHVIE
W DR E
NE
(
E W EE SIMMONS DR
UR
W W W
RIDG E FI
EL B
W W EED RD
RD
W W
BE
E W
W WW E
SH
PO PL
AC
AR D
R
HR
E
EL
E
W GOBB LE R LN
W L a Pla tt e R iver E
D RD
D
WW E
W
W IR ISH RD
W
DR W W ID OW WW D PL
O BIN W (
E W E
W IL LR RY
BO STW
ER WH W KO
WAK RO H IC E
WW C
MR
D
W (
E
W
WW S FA
R
IC K R D
W W IN G E
W E W W BILL
W
W WW
RD
NATURE S WY
WEWWW
WW W (
E
PLOU F
R TY LN RD W W
FO LIM E KI
S
E WW
W WE
RD
BO U TI
W W SH
WWW
N PASTURE LN
W W E
W EL
FE FA
RD
CROS SWIND DR W BU
E W WE RN W W
HA
W
N RD
W E TH 18
W W W W FA
RM
D
WE
D OR S
LL
OR
W
KR
CT W(
WWEE
W W ( S
LN
EAST
RY
WWE WW RD
AC
W E
W W W
W
TH 42
ET ST
W
AR
W (
EW WWW RD
M
( W
MOUN T PHILO RD
IL
R IV ER
E
W
TA
E
W ON E
WW #
HIL LS PO IN
W ECARPEN
W WE TE R RD W W
W
WWW
W EEW WW W WEW WW
VIEW D
RD
GR E EN
W
WWW
ETH A N
CLA RK RD
EW
( W WW W W W W W EEWW C VU
WW W (
EW
W WE
W E
R
BU
T RD
ALL EN
SPEA R
WW (
RO
WWE
S H RD
UT
W ( (
E
E1
W
HWY
W
ST
W
16
ok
W
Bro
LN
D R IFT W
McCab
SN O W W W
W
low
LA
KE W W ( (
E WWWW
Hol
R
D
W
W WW
W
W
Mud
# W
e's
W W
W
EW
Bro ok
W W LE AVEN S WORTH RD (
W W
NIG HT RU N RD
W E
W (
E
WWWE
W W WW WW
W
W W # W E
CHARLOTTE
CHURCH HILL RD
HINESBURG (
W CH AR LOTT
D W E RD
N H ILL
R
W W
E WWWW (
W W WWW
E
PATTO N
W W M U T TO W W
WWWWW W
MU T T
W
W W
W W
WW W
W W W
W W W
W WW W W
W
W W
ON H
WOO DLAN D WY W W
(
E
OO D S
W W
MU R P
VALL EY
W
ILL D
W E
W WE
W WW W W
W
W WW WWW
WWW WW W
H Y RD
WIND SWEP T LN
R
W W W W W
k
VIEW DR
roo W
W
wB
W
ollo
W W WW HILL RD RM RD
W
MU S
JA CKSO N
W W WWWW
W WW W WW
W RG RD
FL ET C
H ER FA
W
Mud H
WWW E
E UM
W IN E SBU
W
W WW W W(E W H W
W
RD
W W
BAL DW IN RD
W (
EW W W W
LA KE R
# W WEW W WW
WW W W
W
RE
W W W W
VTrans Bridge Inventory System (3)
W
D
WWWEHO W W B
RE LA W W
TA
LYN RIC K AC RE
BEAN RD
W
D
ME
W D CK
IL
ST W W DR
G SID E TR D
LN
W EA W W MO R N IN UC O G
SU NSET
D
W E ET LN W
VOBCIT Local Inventory (297) WW WW
DR K L
W BITT ER SW LN N T RD
W BU R R IT W
W W W W
# W W W W
RD
W
ROOT RD
RD
S
FERR Y W
( W
gha
W
Bin
W
GU
W W W
Stream/Road Crossings (33)
IN
E
mB
EA
BO E W
RD
WN
rook
LN W W
W
Dams
# W W
W WW
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order PR IND LE RD
N W
IN L E RD W
R OB W ILL IAM S
WY WW W RE
N W W
COL
W GA W W
W
W RD
W
ST W UN TA IN RD
ON
D W
O PEAS E MO W E
NE EP W
R ID
W
W
W FI R W
WWW
GE
AL W E WE
WWW W W
L RD
LN W
RD
K
1
W OO W
BR
WILDW OOD W E RD M W
Lakes and Ponds WE
SE B AY
RD W W S TO C
KB R ID G G HA
CANNON POINT RD
ER BIN
LU C Y
C ON V N
W AD OW L
R ME
U PPE
LN S
HIG B EE RD ATER RD
DR IN KW
WY ASH E RD
ON IS HAM RD
MM TH 27
MEA DO W
CO
Town Boundary CATC HA PAW
RD
D
W
FA R M R
Roads
SIDE DR
IS LA N D IL E R D
ON E M D EE
O LD TO
WN T RL WWW WWW
RD
RR
UN
U PPER E W LN
IL
IN S ED GE
M
BL A
AL
F W
W
H
CK W
E RD
SO N S PO
IN T R D W
0 0.25 0.5 1 TH O MP W
ROS CO
IL LO
MO UN TA
Miles RD
W LN
O NS PO
IN T RD AD
O MPS TO
EAST TH
SF
N
SF
N #
W W
Figure 4: Assessed Hinesburg Culverts in the Laplatte River Watershed

W
W
WW W W
"
W POND RD LN
W
R RD
H
BEEB E
W WW WW LO ST
RD RC
E 2A
PE
MO NAR CH RD
(
OA K HILL
E
E
W
PAL M
WW SW
BUSHEY DR
R OU T
AM
(
LN
E
FR O
PR
EN M
RD
LN
W W D SH
C H AR D E ER
D IM IC K
FO REST
T PR IT
Lake
GS E
A NS
( MO U N
RD
M
IR AN
AY C RE LN
( LE EW Iroquois E SH O H
ND
RD
W O
W E LL
RD
E
W RD
EW
PIN E
B LE O
W
SHELBURNE
W
T UM W WW
H AY
E W G RD
W W WW R
D
SH O
SHEL BURN E HINE SBUR W W W
WE WW W WWW W W
RD
W W W
RE D
W
D
W W WW
W
R
E
D
LL
RD
E
ON
ER
ED
HI
R
W
BUTTERNUT LN
WE W W
HM
E
W
CH
W
GE
E
R IC
AN
W WW
MA
# W
AL
N
E SIMMONS DR U
E WWW E
W OO D
SR
W WW
AV
RD
W KO
W
W ZA W
W
W W EED RD
RE
E W
W WWW
RUN
(
E
SH O
W W
E W
SW
LaPl at te R iver E
Patrick Brook
E
W W W RD
W
W OK
SU N S
W E IR ISH RD RO
W W ID OW WW
IL L
R D
YP
L WWW WWW
WPO N
DB W CATTAIL LN
W H
W OR WW
ET LN
OW K
W CR H IC E
SUNSET LN E
W W
W BILL ING S FAR M RD WW R
D W
W
W
W
Y
W WW
W W E O
N
WIN DSW EP T WY
W TH
E RD
E
WW AN
W (
E WW WWWE PL A
CE
RD W
W
G
W W
PLOU F
E R ID
W RD
W W
W SH
WWW
BO U TIN
W E
W W E
N PAST URE LN
AC
AU B
EL W
FE FA R
W WE BU PL W
RN W WWW W O O D LN W
ST
W W E TH 18
W W ILD W W
W FA W W E W WWW
E
BIR CHW OO D DR
#
AN
PO ND RD
WE
RD
MO LLY
D OR S W
W OO DL AN
M
W LL
W ( S W
RD
LN
WW RD
W (
E
WWW WE W
W W WW
WW WW
JO U
W WW WWWWW WW W W W WW
ET ST
TH 42
W WW # W
WY
E
W
WW
WWW
WW W W
(
WE
W WWW RD WW # WW W
W LD
LN W
W W
LE D G
D DR
IL W PAR TR ID E
R IV ER
EW 32
BISHO P RD
ON
E # G E H IL NA PI
W TER RD W W
W
W WW WWW WE (
#
E
W EEWWWWWE EW TH
L
MC
DO ET
TE RD
D
W E WW W #
E
W WW CARPEN WW W ND TEX AS HILL
RD
WW W WE
SR
WWW RD
WOO
VIEW D
R
EEW
EW
( W W E W
WWW
W W CV
U
W D W PO
EWW
EN O
W W W
MECHA NICSVILLE RD
R ED P
W R
E E
TH U N D
W VE
( (
D LN
W
W W E
WW E E
W
E
W EA
E
R
FER N
W B
WWEW ( W W E
W
IN E R
W
ER D R
( (
E
RD
W
D
W
PIETTE
W HA
ok
HINESBURG
WK W
RO
W
Bro
W LN W E
UT
W W RD
W
E WWWWWWWWWE
low
W W
M EAD O
CO LL
E1
( W MM HI
LE AVEN
ER
(
Hol
W CE EN
16
ST W YD
W
WW W(
W
EW HA
Mud
W RD
W CHARLOTTE IC W Y W
S W O RT
R ED R
Bee
F W
W W
EW
(
che
W
19
WE WE
H RD
W E W WW WW
LA GO O
W W (
E
WWW W
TH
rH
NIG HT RU N RD W
LAV IGN E HIL

# W E W
ill B
N RD
LYMAN MEADOW
LL RD E
W WWWWW ( CH AR LO
TTE RD WW W(E
W W BU CK HI
(
E W W WW
E W
W W
rook
W W
NORT H RD
W W E W W
E E LL RD HAYDEN HILL RD W
FRIENDS HIP LN
W W W W W W BU CK HI
L RD
W W W
VTrans Bridge Inventory System
W (8)
E
W E W W WW W
W W W E
WWW W
WEW W (
E
W
W
WOO DLAN D WY W
W (
E EWW W
VOBCIT Local Inventory (495)
W W W E
VALL EY
W WW RD
E WE W W
W E
(
E OB SER
VATO RY
W H IN E SB
URG RD
WWWWW WWW
W WW W E W
W EC
( W
SILV ER ST
O
W W
VIEW DR
W W W NO
WW WW FAR M R
D
W
W E W WEW WE W
E HILL RD
M
O
U
RD
Stream/Road Crossings (87) E
W BEEC HE R
WW (
E
WW
RD
E W WW FL ET C H ER W
W W E
W W W
CB
W W
W W
E E
W W
# Dams W W W E
W
BAL DW IN RD
W W W
W (
E (
W
WE E
W
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order W
W BL
W
W W E
W
W
BEAN RD
W RE AC W
D K W
W
W TR
UC
DO
G E
W E W
LN W
WW WW
LN K
W ER SW E ET T RD W
BITT LN
BU R R IT E TE LN
La
W W W at BISS
O N ET
te
Pl
W W LIN
1
C OL
NH
Ri
W ILL
Lakesghaand Ponds
W W RD
ver
LN
Bin
W IN DR OW W
W MAL LARD
PO ND RD
W
m
W
W
Bro
GILM AN RD
ON D RD
W ON P
ok
W H ER
W
Town Boundary PR IN D LE
RD
WW BR O
W
(
W
W
W OK
E RD W W SID
W EL
EN W
Roads
WW W GA
R N
W
OL D R
W W
W
W EW
O U TE
W E
W MEA D FA RM RD
EW
W E
WWW
11 6
SPEA R ST
0 0.25 0.5 1W W W WE
CATCH A PAW
W
Miles
W E
RAVEN HILL RD
W
W A N DR
MU LL IG
W HINE S RD
RD
DR IN KWAT
ER RD W W
HOLLOW RD
Figure 5: Assessed Shelburne Culverts in the Laplatte River Watershed
"
CHARLES RD
AV
MIDL AN D
MART IN DA
PENN Y LN
EAGLES RES T RD
OA K HILL
DR
WINDMILL BAY RD
W ILD R
ST
IN
O SE C
IR
SOUTH BURLINGTON
TK
SPEA R
LE RD
CA
RD
CLE ARWATER RD G
JU NIP ER RD
H IN E
HUN TER S WY
#
RD
WOODB IN E RD RD
SBU
LA KEVIE W DR Y
OR
LL
PINEH URST DR T
RG
HI
C
K SH RS FA
TAMARAC SE
NT
RD
E
AN CT
DR HE
SA
RD
G ER O W C
CHEESE FA CTORY LN
H ED
EA
PHEAS ANT HILL LN
C H AM
CH
P LA IN
PH
DR
SH ER ID
BARSTO
BIR
W DR W RD
W ESTVIE
TU R K
DR
Shelburne Bay
ID E
EY R
D
NE R
HS
CH ALOUX LN
VE
S BROWNELL RD
DG
RT
CO
L BU R
FARM DR
NO
SU TT ON
RS
GO VE RN
#
IN E
SH E
R OS E
MA R
DORS ET
OR S LN
DR
MO RSE
BAYFIEL D DR
RD
WOO
LN
TH 7 CO
PO IN T VI
LIN
DR
D DR
ST
W TH 2
ON
ER CIR
COLL AM
RS
LN
EW DR
PIE
R
W W(
E NN
A KE
DR
BUTTER NUT LN
I EAD O W
W RD SP LO N G M
BAY ND DR
W E RICH M O
E RD WW D EE
R RU
N DR
AT
NG
H AW ST. GEORGE
STO N E
H AR BO
L EY
FA
FO X R
BEAV ER CREEK RD
H OE S UN RD RD
R
LN
MS
E
W
IP L N
BOU RG EA LN
G AT E LN
TE
R RD
W
AD
WIND R DG
W
PH ILL
DR
EE
N
W
EL
W RD RD #
T ER BISH O P
E E W EBS
AG
W
LN
DR
ST
Y
N
AD
AC O R N
R
D
KE
(
BA
OL
TU R TL E
M
R
FA
LN
WW
RD
D EP
OT
LN
RD
MAE CK FARM
R
WW W
T IC D
QU A RR Y RD
E RD
(
E
W W
WWW LN
ATH L E
S GAT
LL
DR
ST
W HI
W T Shelburne
BAR
VISTA
E
OOL
W W RS
DUC K PON D RD
EE WW
W DO Pond
NV
SC H
D AVIS AV
IEW
W
SHELBURNE
FL ET CH
ER LN
FA LL S
RD
S TO
RO
W
D
KE W COU NTR Y LN W
ER
L
TR SL
UT
N H IL
HERITA GE LN AC N
YL
RD
UR
E1
N
AST
16
O
CES S RD
E
RD
FA LC
VTrans Bridge Inventory System (4) E W
SP
W
P SO N
W
NORT HERN
E R W W
W
PO ND AC
TE R
TH O M
W
W VOBCIT Local Inventory (160) E W ES R
D
EW W IR IS
HH W
SID E
W ILD W
W IL L PON D RD
RD W WW
W W W
HT S DR
WILDW OO D CT
WWW W
H IL L

WW W WW
MO NAR CH RD
( RR LN (
E
OOD D
KIMB A
W
LL T E
W
WWW W IU M
W
BUSH EY DR
W
E TT R
D
EEWWW
W( TR
IL L
(
E
FR O
MA R S
W
Stream/Road Crossings (38) W WW W BACO N DR
HEAT HE
IC K R D E
W
E B O S TW W
GS E
RD
WWW
(
E
W W
W (
H ER WE
WWW C YN W E
W
ND
Dams
FL E TC
IC K R
D O SU (
R LN
# C OL LIM E
R
E
W
RE W
W D R TI LN RIV ERVALE RD
W
W
E
W BL
E
RD E
LA KE
RD W
W W TU
M

Y
RD
THO MA S RD HA E W SHELBURNE HINE SBURG RD

W
W WWWWW
RM
W W
WE WW W WWW
MO U N
WW W
K FA
W E W
W RD
WE
W E
TW IC
EUSTAC E LN
T PH IL
D
EE
(
E W W W
AIR PARK
BO S
E
O
R
W SOUTHVIE W DR
1
BIN D
(
RD
E EE SIMMONS DR
DR
Lakes and Ponds W W W

E RO
W
RD
BE
E RD
RIDG E FI
P PLE
S R ID G W
W W W EED RD
AC
E W W E
WAK
WAK E
HR

C R ABA
RD W
FA R M
N AL D
D
E
EL
MC D O E
GOBB LE R LN
W W E
D RD
La Pl att e R i ve r
R O BIN
W E
W W
Town Boundary W
W W E W ID OW
IR ISH RD
WW
LN
W (
E W
W OW
H IL W LR
D
Roads WW CR
(
E
W
Y
W
SO AR
W
EN H W

W
W E W WW
W W
WW
IN G H
E S WY
W
N AL L
N ATU R WW W
HINESBURG
W
0 0.25 0.5 1 WE W W
AW K
W W
CHARLOTTE W
LN RD
PLOU F
LIM E KI
E TH A
Miles WW
W WE
GR E EN
SH
E W EL
LN
BU
E
BO U TIN
W W W
N PASTUR E LN
RN
FE FA R
CROS SWIND DR W
E E
BU
W W WW FA
EW LL
S H RD
W
W W W W S
RD
RD
M LN
W(
E W E
W
(
WWE
WWE W
W W
W WW
W E
W W
W W(
E
W W
#
Figure 6: BARSTO W
RD
SOUTH BURLINGTON
RD
S BROWNELL RD
Vermont Culvert Geomorphic
EXECUTIV
E
E DR RID
ON
Shelburne Bay GE
HI
RD CH
LL
NY
RIS
TM
Compatibility Screening Tool
DR
#
RD
D
KE
AS
RD L N CHRIST
NE R
N BU MAS HILL RD
TTE
AC K
OL
DR
C RN
and Vermont Aquatic Organism

UT
LIN
D
BU R
RD
OND
ON
HR
RS
SH EL
Passage (AOP) Screening Tool
N
E
UT
GA RD
"
ADIR
BAY
WILLISTON
PIE
TE
SO
HR
RD E
Results for Assessed Culverts
BEAVER CR
US
APPL
D
H AR BO
EW O O
RB
ILL R
D LN
in LaPlatte River Watershed

HOES LN BE
AR
GA
TO
E WN
H
N
SU
LN
RICHMOND
D
R RD
EL
ER R
OA K
RD
EE EE WEB S
T
BISHO P
EEK RD
#
AG
BELIVEAU RD E
RD
ST
ACORN LN
44 of 165 (27%) total E
QUARRY RD
" WILLO W
"
RM
D
D EP D BR O O K
RD
OT R R
OL
LN
stream/road crossings have SHELBURNE
D ER
K FA
AY
S G ATE
R
been assessed using the ANR E
"
Shelburne
BARN VIEW RD
OL
D
ST
C
LIM ER ICK
ST. GEORGE
ND RD D
TA
FA
MA E
DUCK PO
protocol (May 2010) Pond RM
OOL
E
VIS
RD
EE E
RO
D
RD
LN
D
LN
RD
L
MA RT E
SC H
SO N R
LE D
RE R
U TE
GE
Y
D
RG
HIL L
AC
R
FALLS
Geomorphic Compatibility
C C ESS
RD
E ER
2A
BU
E
TR
BEEB
116
ST U
LM
TH O M P
ES
E
RO UTE
E RD LN PA
RD
HIN
MO NA RCH RD
E PO N D H
S PA
Fully Compatible
E LN
BO ST
PO N D A
IRISH HILL RD RC SW
FO REST RD
BUSHEY DR
" PE AM
FR O
HEATHER LN
E
EN M
RD " PR
MA R S E TT E
" E
" HARD LN D
MO UN T PRITC
W ICK
E W LN
GS E
Mostly Compatible
RD SH AD O E E SHOR E LN D
AN S
C H ER E
" " ILL R
L FLET
E E E
" CO TI LN RIVERVALE RD H
G EE
"
E SH
RD E Lake MA
ND
LA K E E
FA RM
MO UN
ER
RD
THOM AS RD SHELBURNE HINESBURG RD
EE Iroquois M
Partially Compatible
BUTTERNUT LN
" D AN
E SIM
E DR H
AIR PAR
RD
T PHIL
ESO UTHVIE
MO
NS WE O
LL
RD E
" W DR
Mostly Incompatible EE E DR O
RIDG EF IE
# W
" IC
K E
" D E R
O RD
TW WEE D R E D
K RD
BO
S E E D E
"
Fully Incompatible E LaPlatte Riv E OOK
R
LN
"
er E IRISH R
D E DB
R
LD
PL
L
WIDO W PO N
AI
Y
E HUNTINGTON
TT
R
SUNSET LN E
E
"
RD
KO
Bridge E
CA
" HI
C BIL LIN GS FARM RD
E
D
"
W
E
GE R
NAT URES WY E
D RD
LN
Aquatic Organism Passage E E
N RD SH
" W
LIM E KIL
N PAST
E
ET
RD
E RID
EL
E E
BIRC
RD
MON
E
NS
BU C
E E E RN LA
SU
P
Full
DORS
MO L LY
DR
PO N D
E
AU B
HW O
# E
RICH
URE L N
E FA
TH 42
E
E EE
" " LL
D
E
GR EEN
S " E ok
# rick Bro
WOO DL AN
#
E # Pat
OD D
ET S T
R D RD RD
Reduced E
P RD
" IL
W
RD
E
" E
E # E# E D E E ND TEXAS HILL RD
R ED
ON UR
Y
"E
E EE CV E PO
R
MECHANICSVILLE
"E
FERN RD
EE
BISHO
B
NO RT
R
EE E
U SH R D
P IN
None, Except Adult Salmonids "E E
PIET T
" " AV
E EE E SR
D BE
ER
E
McCab
"
H RD
" G
OR CHAR
LN RIG
E M EA
D
DRIFT
None SN O W
E
Beecher Hill Brook

" E
"
e's
D E
D
LA K E R
"
D
SPEAR
OW R
#
Bridge
Bro ok
RD
RD
LA G O O
LEAVENSWORTH RD
E
19
CK
" E " E
EE
CHURCH HILL RD
RO
TH
D
Stream/Road Crossings
# E RD H
ST
E CH ARLO TTE HIG
E
N RD
" W
HILL RD
MUT TO
E
" E
"
La E E BUCK HIL L RD
W
EE HAY DEN
ok " E
Dams HINESBURG " P lat E E E
MUR P
# E
w
Bro
ollo
N
dH URG RD E EE EC
HILL D
HINES B E E ON
te
"
SILVER ST
HY
OM
Riv
Mu
E "E E
E E OU
MUS EU
RD
D
BALDWI N RD
R
er
RD
E
CB R
"E
E CHARLOTTE EE
EE
LA K E R
E
RE
E
M
# " RE " E" E

E E E
S
BEAN RD
RD
K A CRE
TR
TA
R
SIDE D
SU N SE
D
G
1
UC E
MO RN IN E
ILL
K RD
LN BURRIT T E
Lakes and Ponds
N
LIN
CO
ROOT R
RRY RD
LYNRIC
T RD
FE
# LN
ha HIL
GU
DR
Bing
RD RD LR
Town Boundary D PO N D D
IN
MA LLAR ND
W
PO
EA
mB
E
D
VI E
N
RO
rook
HE
RD
Roads
W
E RD
PRINDL RD "
OL D R
E R EN
IN RD GA
UNTA
LaPlatte River Watershed E MO
RD
O
PEAS OOK R
D
EE E
U TE 1
A M BR
E
BING H E
DG
AOP Retrofit Potential Screen

E
W RD
E
RI
16
E
LU C Y
(strong-moderate-weak swimmers/leapers)
D
HINES R
ME ADO
HAPA
ATER RD
HIG BEE RD
S LN
RD DRINKW
H High ASH E
TH 2 7
ISHAM RD
H O LL
OW R
D
CAT C
W
SIDE D
M Medium DE
E TH
IL E RD ER LE W
GE
ON E M IS C
R EE
GILM AN
RU K
AN
RD
INS ED
E RD
L Low
N
R
LN
A LL
RD
PO INT
PSO N S RD
TURKEY
R O SC O
Last Updated May 26, 2010 TH O M

EN
RD
GE
MO UN TA
RD
0 0.25 0.5 1
D
RI
HW
S FN AD B
TO R
Miles
DR
Y
LE
STARKSBORO
VT R O U
LN
PA LM E
D TY
PA RK R
VER
STATE
#
MONKTON
LLI
R
TE 11 6
INN RD
DO
LN
E
E E
E
Figure 7: E
"
E
RD
SO UTHVIE
W DR E
Vermont Culvert Geomorphic E
NE
RD EE SIMMONS DR
"
RIDG EF IE
K
UR
IC D

TW WEE D R
BE
SHELBURNE
WAKE
E LB
BO
S PO PL E E
AC
AR D
R
SH
HR
GOBBLER LN
E E
LD
latte River E
RO BIN
LaP E
D
D
IRISH R
RD
WIDO W LR
D PL
"
E E HIL RY
LN
W KO
RO HIC E
C
E
"
in Charlotte, VT NAT URES WY
E
YR
D E
"
P LO U F
FO
R T
LIM E KIL
N RD
E E
RD
SH
BO UTIN
S E
N PAST URE LN
EL
8 of 33 (24%) total E BU
RD
FE FA R
E
"
RN
HA
stream/road crossings have E E
FA
RD
DORS
C
E LL
OR
been assessed using the ANR
ML
CT " S
EA S TR Y
E E EE
" RD
TH 4 2
protocol (May 2010)
ET S T
E
RIVER
R D "
E
"
R RD ON
E IL E
TE
C AR PEN
Geomorphic Compatibility E E
GR EEN
E TH A N
E
VIEW D
"EE
MOUNT PHILO RD
CLARK R
D E
Fully Compatible
E
"
EE
SPEAR
B
A LL E N
R
" E
U SH R D
"
McCab
" E
"
Mostly Compatible
HW Y
ST
"
e's
LA
Partially Compatible KE
Bro ok
" "
R
D
#
" Mostly Incompatible
RD
LEAVENSW ORTH
LA G O O
" Fully Incompatible NIG HT RUN RD
EE
" E
#
CHURCH HILL RD
N RD
" Bridge E
"
MUT T
Aquatic Organism Passage ok
WOO DLAND WY
HINESBURG
Bro
N HILL
Full
MUR P
ow
VA LLEY
E RD
oll E C H AR
LO T T E
dH
HY
DR
Reduced
VIEW D
Mu
RD
FARM RD
FLETCHER
None, Except Adult Salmonids
MUS EU
R
G RD
HIN ES BU R
" E
E
None
BALDWI N RD
M
LA K E R
E
"
RD
RE
#
E
D
Bridge HO E RE
BEAN RD
TA
ME D
CHARLOTTE
S
D
R TR
I
S SIDE D
LL
K A CRE
TE G
MO RN IN UC
SUNSET
AD
N
T LN K
ERSW EE
DR LN RD
E BITT BURRIT T
LYNRIC
RO OT RD
#
Dams
D
RD
# FERRY R
Bin
ha
GU
g
IN EA
m
BO E
Bro
WN
RD
LN
ok
E RD
PRINDL
IN LN RD
1
ROB
CO L W ILL IA MS W Y E R EN
GA
Lakes and Ponds R D
U NTAIN RD
E MO ND
PEAS
RD
O
Town Boundary FIR
EP
E
DG
E KR
D E
RI
OO
Roads WILDW OO D W AM
BR
GH E
CANNO N POINT RD
BIN
LU C Y
N
LaPlatte River Watershed AD OW L
D
R ME
WR
U PPE
S LN
HIG BEE RD ATER RD

DRINKW
APA
AOP Retrofit Potential Screen MON
WY ASHE RD
MEADO W
COM
CH
TH 2 7
(strong-moderate-weak swimmers/leapers)
CAT
H High D
FA R M R
SIDE DR
ISL AND IL E RD
ON E M D EE
M Medium O LD T O
W N T RL
RD
RR
UN
GE
U PPER IL
E L N
B LA C
M
INS ED
L Low AL
F
E RD
INT R D H
O N S PO
K W IL
Last Updated May 26, 2010 THO M PS

MO UN TA
R O SC O
0 0.25 0.5 1
LO W
RD
Miles O M PS O N
S P O INT
RD
SFN
TO
A D
LN
EAST TH
SFN #
E
Figure 8: WILLISTON RICHMOND

PALMER RD
OL D C O
BEEB
Vermont Culvert Geomorphic POND RD
LO S T
RD CH
LN
MO NA RCH RD
E LN
OA K HIL
R
2A
PE SW
U N TY L
E
" AM
BUSHEY DR
PR
R O U TE
FOREST RD
FR O
D
EN M
E
"
A R D LN
DIM ICK
ITCH
SHELBURNE E
L
U N T PR
GS E
N
AN S
ST. GEORGE
MO
RD
"
" L RD E H IL
L RD
RICHMOND
ND
RD
E E E HIL Lake MA G
E
PINE
R E LN
RD
YN A
M IT
Iroquois
E
Results for Assessed Culverts E
D
SHELBURNE HINESBURG RD SH
SH O
ER
E SH O
M
in Hinesburg, VT
AN
RE D
RD
BUTTERNUT LN
E D HO
WE LL
R
O
W
N # RD
WO O D
RU
25 of 87 (29%) total A S E
"
D K OZ E
WEE D R
stream/road crossings have E E
RUN
"
been assessed using the ANR E
latte Ri E K RD
LaP2010) ve r
protocol (May E DB
ROO
RD PL PO N
E HIL
L RY CATTAIL LN
OW KO
HIC E
Geomorphic Compatibility CR
SUNSET LN E
D
R
BIL LIN GS FARM RD N
Y
E TH
O
RD
W
" Fully Compatible RD
E
AN
LN
E
" CE E
GE
P LA
D RD
T
SE
E RID
W
RD
Mostly Compatible
N
SH
BO UTIN
RD
SU
N PAST URE LN
MON
" EL E K
E BU LA
C
RE
E
BIRC
AU B
RN P C
TH 1 8 ST
RICH
Partially Compatible E E A
HINS
E EC
E IL
D
" FA
RD
DORS
HW O
# W N
PO N D R
E" LL
DR
S SE
DA L
RD
E E
"
OD D
D
Mostly Incompatible ok
TH 4 2
#rick Bro
Pat
ET S T
WOO DL AN
" E
E RD
LE D G
RD E"
32
PA RT RID
E
R
IL E G E HILL PI
RD
P RD
E # E# E E ET
ON TH
Fully Incompatible TER RD
D
D #
" TE
C AR PEN R ND
EW O
" E E E
E E TEXAS HI LL
RD
SR
E VU RD
C PO
BISHO
" E
MECHANI CSVILLE RD
R ED P
EN O
R
EEEE E
O D LN
VE
Bridge E E
" " EA
HUNTINGTON
FE R N
" E
E B
INE RD
"
Aquatic Organism Passage E
"
S RD
PIET TE
RD
"
RIG G HA E
WK RD
LN LL
Full E HI
Beecher Hill Brook

M EAD O
E
" CE S
T EN
" ME R YD
COM HA
Reduced E
"
W RD
RD
LEAVENSW ORTH E
"
19
LA G O O
EE
" E E
LAVIGN E HI
TH
STELLA RD
HINESBURG E
HEM LOCK HILL RD

#
None BUCK HIL L RD
E
N RD
E
" E
" E
"
RD W
IL L RD W HAYDEN HILL
CHICKA
Bridge E BU C K H E E
LL RD
La E E
P E
"
Stream/Road Crossings " latte
E EE
DEE LN
E R E
E RD
LO T T E VATO R
Y RD
G RD E C H AR OB SER E
ive
UR E E
HINES B
"
Dams
r
#
SILVER ST
CHARLOTTE E E
CB RD
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order FARM RD
E HI LL RD OU RD
FLETCHER BEECHER "E E ECO NO M
E E
EE
BALDWI N RD
E
" E
E
E"
NO RTH RD
E
1
RE
BEAN RD
D R O U TE
116
Lakes and Ponds TR
UC E E
T LN K
BITT ERSW EE LN RD
BURRIT T E T E LN
O N ET
Town Boundary BISS
LIN
CO
LN
Roads WINDRO
W LN
HIL
LR
GILM AN RD
D
R D P O ND RD
MA LLA
LaPlatte River Watershed OND
RD
ON P
H ER
AOP Retrofit Potential Screen PRINDLE
RD
BR O
"
(strong-moderate-weak swimmers/leapers) EN
RD
O KS
IDE
LN
OL D R
R
H High GA
STARKSBORO
O
M Medium ME AD FARM RD
EE
U TE 1
E E
L Low
16
D
E
H ILL R
Last Updated May 26, 2010 AN D R

MUL LIG
0 0.25 0.5 1 HINES R
D
RAV EN
D
Miles
WR
ER RD
RINKW AT
APA
D
ISHAM RD HO LLO W RD
TH 27
CH
CAT
#
Figure 9: SHRS
PINEHURST DR
D
TA MARACK
Vermont Culvert Geomorphic SOUTH BURLINGTON
LR
R
ROW D
RD
HIL
C H AM H ED G E

PLAIN
CH
D
RY R
NT
DR BARSTO W C TO
BIR
DR EFA
SA
W RD
WES TVIE
DR
ES
CHE
EA
DE
PH
WILLISTON
SI
CR
S C O VE
H
OW
Shelburne Bay
RT
N
S BROWNELL RD
RD
NO
RM DR
D TTO N FA
GO VERN
R SU
ER
Y
#
BA
D
MA RIN
NE R
R O SE
in Shelburne, VT MO RS E
D R
O RS LN
BAYFIELD DR
RD
BU R
W OO
LN
TH 7 CO
PO INT VI
SH EL
LIN
DR
TH 2
D DR
7 of 38 (18%) total
ON
ER CIR
CO LLAM
"
LN
RS
stream/road crossings have
EW DR
ER
PIE
E
" AK
been assessed using the ANR S PI
NN
LO NG M
EAD O W
DR
protocol (May 2010)

TE
RD
E D EE
R RU
N DR
ST. GEORGE
GA
Geomorphic Compatibility
N
HAW
S TO N E
H AR BO
Fully Compatible
BEAVER CREEK RD
FO X R LE Y
FA
" HOES LN UN RD RD
R
E
MS
BO URGEA LN
G ATE L
R RD
Mostly Compatible
TE
"
WI ND RDG
AD
N
EE
PH
EL
D
ER R RD
DR
BISHO P
N
T #
Partially Compatible WEB S
IL L
E E
AG
"
LN
IP
D
ST
DY
N
AC O R N
LN
LA
R
KE
D
BA
Mostly Incompatible E
"
OL
"
M
R
FA
LN
RD
QUAKER SMITH PT RD D EP
Fully Incompatible
TURTLE LN
" OT R
D
MA ECK FARM
SHELBURNE
QU ARRY RD
E RD
DR
" Bridge
E
"
LE
T IC
I LL
LN Shelburne
DR
S G AT
H H
AT ET Pond
BAR
Aquatic Organism Passage
ST
RS
VISTA
DUCK POND RD
E DO
NV
OOL
EST
IEW
Full
SC H
OK CHU
ES RCH
RO
ST
RD
TR LN
SPEAR ST
U TE
AC
Reduced
YL LE D
N GE
HIL L
RD
RD
116
E
FALLS
E
C C ESS
NO RT HERN
PSO N
R
E
TE R
RD
McCab
TH O M
E IRI S
PO N D A
D
WES R
None E HH
WILDW
SIDE
IL L RD
OD CT
RD PO N D
HTS DR
D
MR
e's
MO NA RCH RD
FA R
HILL
N
Bridge ICK ML
BUSHEY DR
TW I U
Bro ok
O
IL L
OD DR
BO S TT R D TR
E
FR O
WILDW
E
MA RS R
"
BACO N D E
HEATHER
ICK RD E
GS E
E B O S TW
LN
CHE
R RD
E E
"
E
RT
ET RD
ND
FL ICK
COL LIM ER TI LN RIVERVALE RD
Dams E D
E
E ER
OC K
# M BL
LN
RD TU
LA K E HAY
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order THOM AS RD E SHELBURNE HINESBU
RG RD
E E D
EUSTACE LN
E E E DR
WE
E
AIR PAR
"
SOUTHVIEW DR
E
1
E" EE SIMMONS DR
Lakes and Ponds

K RD
RIDG EF IE
GE RD D
S RID WEE D R
PO PL E E
BE
AR D
Town Boundary R
AC
EGOBBLER LN E
LD RD
HR
L aP
lat te River E E
Roads
D
D
IRISH R
DR WIDO W D
E ROB
IN "
E E HIL
LR
WAK RO
W
LaPlatte River Watershed C
E
"
AOP Retrofit Potential Screen E
(strong-moderate-weak swimmers/leapers) NAT UR
ES WY HINESBURG
E
P LO U F
N RD
H High E LIM E KIL
E SH
CHARLOTTE
BO UTIN
DORS
N PASTURE LN
E EL
M Medium
FE FA R
CROSSWIND DR BU
E E RN
E
ET S T
FA
L Low
RD
LL
ML
E"
MOUNT PHILO RD
S
E EE
" RD
N
GR EEN
Last Updated May 26, 2010 E
TH 4 2
E TH A N
0 0.25 0.5 1 IL R
D E
"
Miles
RIVER
E
B
" E E
ON
U SH R D
A LL E N
TER RD
C AR PEN E E
E
VIEW D
" EE
E
HW Y
D
CLARK R
E
"
R
E "
" E
"
#
SOUTH BURLINGTON
Figure 10:
BARSTO W
RD
RD
S BROWNELL RD
EXECUTIV
E
E DR RID
ON
Shelburne Bay GE
HI
Structure
RD CH
LL
NY
RIS
TM
DR
#
RD
D
KE
AS
RD L N CHRIST
NE R
N BU MAS HILL RD
Assessment Plan
TTE
AC K
OL
0
DR
C RN
UT
LIN
D
BU R
RD
OND
ON
HR
RS
(
!
SH EL
N
E
UT
GA RD
ADIR
BAY
WILLISTON
PIE
TE
SO
HR
RD E
BEAVER CR
US
APPL
D
H AR BO
EW O O
RB
ILL R
BE D LN
HOES LN AR
GA
TO
E WN
H
N
SU
LN
RICHMOND
D
R RD
EL
ER R
OA K
RD
EE EE WEB S
T
BISHO P
EEK RD
#
AG
BELIVEAU RD E
RD
ST
ACORN LN
2
E
QUARRY RD
!
( WILLO W
"
RM
D
D EP D BR O O K
RD
OT R R
OL
LN
SHELBURNE ER
D
K FA
AY
S G ATE
(
!
R
E
!
( Shelburne
BARN VIEW RD
OL
D
ST
C
LIM ER ICK
ST. GEORGE
ND RD D
TA
FA
MA E
DUCK PO Pond RM
OOL
E
VIS
RD
EE E
RO
D
RD
LN
D
LN
RD
L
MA RT E
SC H
SO N R
LE D
RE R
U TE
GE
Y
D
RG
HIL L
AC
R
FALLS
C C ESS
RD
E ER
2A
BU
E
TR
BEEB
116
ST U
LM
TH O M P
ES
E
RO UTE
E RD LN PA
RD
HIN
MO NA RCH RD
E PO N D H
S PA
E LN
BO ST
PO N D A
IRISH HILL RD RC SW
FO REST RD
BUSHEY DR
PE AM
FR O
HEATHER LN
E
EN M
RD !
( PR
MA R S E TT E
! E
!
( HARD LN D
MO UN T PRITC
(
W ICK
E W LN
GS E
RD SH AD O E E SHOR E LN D
AN S
C H ER E
!
( !
( ILL R
L FLET
CO
RD E E TI LN RIVERVALE RD E E !
(
E Lake MA G EE
H SH
ND
LA K E E
FA RM
MO UN
ER
RD
THOM AS RD SHELBURNE HINESBURG RD
EE Iroquois M
BUTTERNUT LN
AN
! 1
D
E SIM
E DR H
AIR PAR
RD
T PHIL
ESO UTHVIE
MO
NS WE O
LL
RD E
( W DR
EE E DR O
RIDG EF IE
W
K (
!
E #
SH
IC
WEE D R
D E R
O RD
TW E D
EL
K RD
S E E E
BU
BO
!
(
RD
E LaPlatte Riv E OOK
LN
RN
er E IRISH R
D E DB
R
LD
PL
L
WIDO W PO N
AI
Y
E
11 HUNTINGTON
TT
R
FA
SUNSET LN E
E
!
(
RD
KO E
CA
LL
C
E HI
D
!
(
W
E
GE R
E
RD
NAT URES WY
D RD
LN
LIM E KIL
N RD (
!
E W E
N PAST
E
ET
RD
E E 9
E RID
E E
BIRC
RD
MON
E
NS
C
E LA
SU
P
( 8
DORS
MO L LY
DR
PO N D
AU B
HW O
# E
RICH
URE L N
E
(
!
TH 42
E
E EE
! !
D
( E
GR EEN
!
# rick Brook
( E
WOO DL AN
#
E # Pat
OD D
ET S T
D RD
(
! 12
E R
P RD
!
( IL
W
RD
E
!
( EE # E# E D E E ND TEXAS HILL RD
R ED
ON UR
Y
!
(E E
E EE 7 CV PO
R
MECHANICSVILLE
(E
FERN RD
E E
BISHO
B
NO RT
R
(
! EE E
U SH R D
P IN
(E E
PIET T
!
( !
( AV
E ! EE E SR
D BE
ER
!
(
E
McCab
!
(
H RD
LEAVENSWORTH RD
!
( G
OR CHAR
LN RIG
E M EA
D
DRIFT
SN O W
E
Beecher Hill Brook

E
!
(
10
!
(
e's
D E
D
LA K E R
!
(
D
SPEAR
OW R
#
E 5
Bro ok
RD
RD
LA G O O
E
19
CK
!
(
Structure Assessment Level E!
(
EE
CHURCH HILL RD
RO
TH
D
# E RD H
6
ST
ARLO TTE HIG
CH
(
!E E
N RD
MUT TO
Assessment
E
!
( E
!
(
La E E BUCK HIL L RD
W
!
( ok P
E E EE
(
!
HINESBURG ( lat E
MUR P
w E!
Bro
ollo
N
(
! Look dH URG RD E EE EC
HILL D
HINES B E E ON
te
!
SILVER ST
(
3
HY
OM
Riv
Mu
E (E E
E E OU
14
MUS EU
RD
D
Completed ANR Assessment
BALDWI N RD
R
er
RD
E
CB R
! !
CHARLOTTE
(
EE
!
( EE
EE
LA K E R
( 13 E E
RE
Stream/Road Crossings (
!
E
M
# RE ! !
( E
E E E E
S
BEAN RD
RD
K A CRE
TR
TA
R
SIDE D
SU N SE
D
G UC
MO RN IN (
!
E E
ILL
K RD
BURRIT T
Dams LN E
N
# LIN
CO
ROOT R
RRY RD
LYNRIC
T RD
FE
# LN
Rivers, Thickness by Stream Order ha HIL
GU
DR
Bing
RD RD LR
D PO N D D
IN
MA LLAR ND
W
PO
EA
mB
E
D
VI E
N
RO
rook
HE
RD
W
E RD
PRINDL RD !
(
OL D R
E R EN
IN RD GA
UNTA
4
1
E MO
RD
O
PEAS OOK R
D
EE E
U TE 1
Lakes and Ponds A M BR
E
BING H E
(
!
DG
W RD
E
RI
16
E
LU C Y
Town Boundary HINES R

D
ME ADO
HAPA
ATER RD
HIG BEE RD
S LN
RD DRINKW H O LL
ASH E ISHAM RD OW R
TH 2 7
Roads
D
CAT C
W
SIDE D
DE
E TH
IL E RD ER LE W
GE
ON E M IS C
R EE
GILM AN
RU K
AN
RD
INS ED
E RD
N
R
LN
A LL
RD
PO INT
PSO N S RD
TURKEY
R O SC O
TH O M
EN
RD
GE
MO UN TA
RD
0 0.25 0.5 1
D
RI
HW
S FN AD B
TO R
Miles
DR
Y
LE
STARKSBORO
VT R O U
LN
PA LM E
D TY
PA RK R
VER
STATE
#
MONKTON
LLI
R
TE 11 6
INN RD
DO
LN

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study, 9-2010

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study, 9-2010

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... iii

1.0 Project Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1

2.0 Existing Databases .............................................................................................................. 4

3.0 Meetings with Towns .......................................................................................................... 8

4.0 Field Assessment .............................................................................................................. 11

5.0 Structure Improvement Matrix ......................................................................................... 21

6.0 Evolving Culvert Design Guidelines ................................................................................ 21

7.0 Moving Forward ............................................................................................................... 22

8.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix A – Culvert Improvement Matrix ................................................................................ 24

Appendix B – Structure Summary Database ................................................................................ 32

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study i

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study ii

Three bridge and culvert databases exist in Vermont including:

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study iii

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study iv

Table 1: Length of Rivers and Roads

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 1

Table 3: Road/Stream Crossings Identified

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 2

1.2 Goals and Objectives

1.3 Regulatory Framework

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 3

1.4 Collaborative Study Approach

• Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC)

2.0 Existing Databases

• Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR) Bridge and Culvert Assessment

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 4

2.1 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (VTANR)

Table 5: Stream Crossings Assessed by VTANR Protocols

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 5

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 6

2.3 Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT)

An effort managed by the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) in

Table 6: Stream Crossings versus Other Crossings in VOBCIT

2.4 Summary Database

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 7

3.0 Meetings with Towns

3.1 Town of Shelburne

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 8

3.3 Town of Hinesburg

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 9

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 10

4.1 Assessment Plan

4.2 Assessment Results

#0 - Shelburne – Bay Road over LaPlatte River

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 11

#2 - Shelburne – Harbor Road over McCabe’s Brook

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 12

#3 - Charlotte – Hinesburg Road over Bingham Brook

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 13

#4 - Charlotte – Guinea Road over Unnamed Tributary to Bingham Brook

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 14

#5 - Hinesburg– Hayden Hill Road over Beecher Hill Brook

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 15

#7 - Hinesburg– Leavensworth Road over LaPlatte River

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 16

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 17

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 18

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 19

LaPlatte River Watershed Culvert Study 20

5.0 Structure Improvement Matrix

6.0 Evolving Culvert Design Guidelines