20031064 Ver 1_Monitoring Report - Closeout_20140619

'166
UT TO TAR RIVER
ECEIVE
JUN 1 9 2014
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
EEP PROJECT #234
USACE 404 #: 200320964 DWQ 401 #: Issued by default
CLOSEOUT REPORT
Prniect Setting, & Classifications
County
Franklin
General Location
Louisburg
Basin
Tar - Pamlico
Ph sio ra hic region
Piedmont
Ecore ion
Northern Outer Piedmont
USGS Hydro Unit
03020101
NCDWQ Sub -basin
03 -03 -01
Thermal Regime
Warm
Monitoring Year -4
Nov 2009
Project Performers
July 2010
Source Agency
EEP
Provider
NA
Designer
Earth Tech
Monitoring Firm
Earth Tech; SEPI
Engineering
Plant remediation
Ecological Engineering
Property Holder
NCDENR Stewardship
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
1
overall Prniect Activities and Timeline
Milestone
Month -Year
Project Instituted
August 2002
Permitted
July 2003
Construction Completed
July 2005
As -built Survey
May 2006
Monitoring Year -1
January 2007
Monitoring Year -2
Dec 2007
Monitoring Year -3
Nov 2008
Monitoring Year -4
Nov 2009
Invasives Treatment and
Pine Thinning
July 2010
Supplemental Planting
Oct 2010
Culvert Area Repair
Oct 2010
Monitoring Year -5
Nov 2010
Additional Vegetation
Monitoring Transects
Fall 2013
SEPI Engineering and Construction
Closeout Report

Proiect'Setting%and Background Summary
" "The prbje&4s instituted in late 2002 and included about 1700 feet of an unnamed tributary to
the: T,ar,RiVer near Louisburg, NC in Franklin County. Land use in watershed in the early part of
the last century was primarily agricultural with conversion to urban land uses thereafter., At the
time of -plan development the watershed consisted of about 25% residential and urban with about
75% forested. Further development in the,project.headwaters was expected. The channel had
been straightened and had gullied and is neighbored on its right. side by a golf course with
Burnette road abutting the stream on the left There was significant bank erosion and undercut ,to
the point that the road was being undermined. The project involved a Priority II restoration of
1,792 linear feet of impaired channel to 1,937 linear, feet with improved pattern, dimension, and
profile for the purpose of improving aquatic habitat-and bed and bank stability. The stream has
been stable, but heavy thickets of loblolly pine had developed and were not counted in vegetation
plot tallies (approximately 70% of the project easement) leading to inadequate stem counts for
several plots. The pines were thinned substantially and those areas were remediated with
,supplemental plantings in October 2010. Transect,data collected by SEPI Engineering &
Construction in October 2013 shows a stem density of about 293-stems /acre -in the supplemental
planting areas. In general, the buffenhas the needed density within the easement boundary.
Goals and Objectives
This project has the following goals and objectives:
• Provide a stable stream channel that neither aggrades nor degrades while maintaining its
dimension, pattern, and profile with the capacity to transport its watershed's water and
sediment load.
• Improve water quality and reduceTurther property loss by stabilizing erodmg,stream banks.
• Reconnect the stream to its floodplain and /or establish a new floodplain at a lower elevation
• Improve aquatic habitat with the use of natural material stabilization structures such as root
wads, cross -vanes, woody debris,, and a riparian buffer.
•
Provide aesthetic value, wildlife habitat, and bank stability through the creation of a riparian
zone.
• Stabilize and enhance'the tributary and small drainage that enters the site.
Success Criteria
Vegetation: The final vegetative success measure will be the survival of 260 5 -year old planted
trees per acre at the end of the year 5 monitoring period. As indicated, sections of the site were
heavily dominated by loblolly pine and were thinned in 2010. Although not overly dense, a few
invasives noted in the figure below were also treated at this time. Transects run in 2013
UT to Tar River SEPI Engineering and Construction
EEP Project # 234 2 Closeout Report
March 20 14

indicated these areas were averaging about 300 stems per acre (See t'ransect locations in figure
below) Other areas that were previously meeting continued to develop.
Morphological: The restored reach should remain stable, or if changes occur the movement
should be in the direction of increased stability. There should be insignificant changes in,channel
cross - section and longitudinal profile from the as-built condition. The pool /riffle spacing should
remain constant. Pools should not be filling in or riffles starting'to change to pools. Pebble
counts should show a coarsening of the bed material. The morphological measurement did
indicate some enlargement in the lower 400 -500 feet as indicated by cross sections 4 and 5 with
some, apparent downcut in the profile in this are Some of what was observed in the latter
appears to be the deepening of pool features and bedform as compared to the somewhat
featureless bed at the project as -built phase. In addition-,the project did not exhibit any bank
erosion and in year 5 all of the structures were observed to be °maintaining grade.
Hydrological: At�least two bankfull events must be documented. Four overbank events were
confirmed between 2007 and 2010. This is a minimum estimate. The project was subject to
additional events capable of performing geomorphic work as well.
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
3 Closeout Report

Table 1.; Assets
UT'to Tar River
EEP Project #'234
March,2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
4 ,Closeout Report
I
UT tolar River
13792
Restoration
PII_
390
1,937
1:1'
1,937
UT'to Tar River
EEP Project #'234
March,2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
4 ,Closeout Report
I

/ P
w•C,
r �
Z
w
fr
i
Q
Z
2
U)
Y
U
L Z
LL
q
t,
m
.7 ti
i
w •V a
U- af o
e U C lb
a, o U
o m
., N T O O N
in � Z *
Mo
-- w
t O ii C E o U
N L c Z
O-
I E N
�Y c Y
C C
C
g�
co
r � • w � ~�N
+ LO t� a
rn a E
CL
Ab

art
�+ m
O
O Q N N
Q� Q cz t
zt
co
r
W
C R� o
v ' U T
CL
a.
w z z U 'S
•,
Fl rl �o
Q
�-
V
T Q
z
`
w w
'
QC
J
L
� Z
LL m
zi
o
�
C J
m •,W •�
ZVZ
W
V
s
tt
D
. � °
low
•
�jm
104'; �''
y
� p U
��
ca
�'
lC
7 UI 7 IA y
LL 'r V o W
•`
^•Q;?, --
`
.,
Vii. ..
E U Z
tJf C
.
1� *
LL
art
�+ m
O
O Q N N
Q� Q cz t
zt
co
r
W
C R� o
v ' U T
CL
a.
w z z U 'S
•,
Fl rl �o

Q
W
N
NOW a
wi...�i 4 IA d, J
Te a U
LL 2)
_ J
d
� � 5
V Q
C
� � O
a► �~ Ot V
N0
a�E o v LU
Z
E .�
N c
C �
Q� LL
a4 P4
LO
� m �
m
r
;;� C� '� V� C!r � VS•!/ �N
i '•••�
V
I• LO

00000
705L
ttt 00000�
m
! C& NN N N N
O N N
S.bl
NNNNN N
O'=A A.6N
v�s .16 .-
Obl
O N N
v��s
o
m
GEL
O N s7 .f1
to za mM25 C—ts
dddda.d
oe�
mm�mmm
rrrrrr
5zL
;` rrrrrr
o
I
OzL
{ ! I
G L L
L
_
Lz
I'
90L
OOL
5s
os
se
�
m
m' L
-
09
m
o M
Q
p
SL
OL O
m O
N
59
F
} +
55,
cd..
N
05
O
o
St,
G
I
Ob
O
SE
N V
n
V) pVj !
OE
y N I
CO) I
'SZ
O W
c
I
oz
U
V
_OL
E
I .I
5
!
0
.-
N (40e1) u014en013
(3001) u014cnel3
09L
0£ l
.�
0CDCD��0
99 L
�+
oI- c �,� 0
9Z 6
!
00000 _
N 0 0 0 0 0
ON N N N N
'0S1
��
0o,00,a
Ni00000
d1 N N N N N
O � tFJ �%a N N
O�1
Y
r A A N N
_
SK
�O'NN�
N
C9 i i
Obl
v� tb '-
!
O N l'7 l(J
GEL
Oe-NM� LL�
1 1
O ` `
`f0 W N l0 f0 l0
� N m 1p f0 W
m N
m m N m m m
rrrrrr
oel
>- -rrrrr
90L
szL
004
!
Ozl
S6
5 t L
O6
SOL
98
OO L
08,
ss
_
9L --
d
os
ui
AE wi
I
OL
ig
ix
09 y
993
�..r d
49 t
S..-
ate--
f0
09
9ti
m N
55
O N 1
I
O
OS
C wl
Ob
C —
i
�I
_
Sb
-� O!
9E
C
.o
c
I m
I
0b
m
i
0£
m ,�
sE
I
9Z
to H
I
of
` V)
�'
i i
OZ
o
!
5z
V
V
i
!
9l
U
U !
oz
I
�
,51
oL
0L
i,
g
I
5
0
N O 00
0
co
Es,
N N
N
(lee))
uol; Ia
(1331)
o;e 3
ua1N

!i
CL
�
§qf
:!§
§`
/[
E§
§$§
§2!�
,
® |
§
&
2;§
§
§ &
§R
/ &�(aG£/
!`Aq
!!
$
(;Aq�;
,+
§
`3/
!$
{
$
\e
0
0 0
§ \7
;
#C®
\\
§
§§§[§
§t[{§��
§2§2f�)2J0
>!
#
0
q;
27)%m7\,Se
,
|
a
�N
®}0\
k
�
k[k0
2�
-N
§2
ON®
\/
(§2§f§
;2§2§
})
J[§
2§
`j
>\
RE
2
j
�[=
/w
\zm©
!i
|
12,
2§[§§§
°2(/
i
2
!
/2
/G®\
°
§;f
§\
\r#7f
% )
«C§
\»
}
; �))#;®
,
,
>)
0
|,
2
77§Q�%
„ »Q
,
//
2
U)
�
�
§![�®�;
#�7
/
i°
°
|
r :ee000
—�!r
af
\,[
kk
\��!!!!
2!
\
\���\�
"So
!
§
|
E
k

UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
12 Closeout Report
Table 2: Verification of Bankfull Events
DData of
Date of
Method
Photo # (if
Collection
Occurrence
available)
See
1/3/2007
Unknown
Photographic — Near Bankfull; wrack lines
Monitoring
date in 2006
observed
Year 1
-
Report
6/4/2007
6/3/2007
Result of 1.5' rainfall event; wrack lines observed.
None
According to NCDC Station Coop ID 315123' -
Louisburg NC, 2.0 inches of precipitation fell over
10/1/2008
6/30/2008
this 24 hour'period'. It was, assumed, but not
None
verified, that this rainfall produced a bankfull
event.
.According to NCDC Station Coop ID 3,15123 -
Louisburg NC, 3.27 inches of precipitation fell
10/1/2008
9/6/2008
over this 24 hour period. It was assumed, but not
None
verified, that this rainfall produced a bankfull
event.
Unknown
Crest gauge reading of 1 foot 10 inches on gauge
Photo 5 in
Stream
date after
stick (bankfull datum set at 11 inches). Date of
Problem
January
over - bankfull flow'is unknown but most likely
Area
6/23/2009
, 2009 and
occurred during or just after the dates of March 1-
photolog
before June
39 2009 when 5.2 inches of snow, ice, and rainfall
(digital
22, 2009.
fell according to NCDC Station Coop ID 315123 -
submission
Louisburg NC.
only)
Crest gauge reading indicated bankfull event since
11/2/2010
Likely May
17, 2010
6/23/2009. Weather station data indicates storm
event exceeding 2.5 inches on May 17, 2010
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
12 Closeout Report

Tab le`5'Orl irial'I'lanti ig Plan
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Planted by
Species
Total
Number of
Stems
Black walnut
Juglans nigra
7%
152
Blackgum
Nyssa sylvatica
7%
155
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodafolra
7%
156
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
7%
156
Ironwood
Carpmus carohmana
7%
152
River birch
Betula nigra
8%
160
Serviceberry
Amelanchier arborea
7%
152
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis'
7%
157
Water oak
_ Quercusmgra
7%
152
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
7%
155
Elderberry
Sambucus canadensis
5%
98
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
4%
81
Spice bush
Lindera benzom
51/0
98
Tag alder
Alnus serrulata
5%
98
Wax myrtle
Myrica,cerifera
4%
81
Coral honeysuckle
Lonicera sempervirens
56/o
105
Native Herbaceous Species
willow oak
_ Broomsedge
Andropogon virgrnrcus
15%
NA
Deertongue
-Panicum clandestinum
20%
NA
Little blue stem
Schizachyrium scoparium
15%
NA
Sedges, fringed
Carex crinata
10%
NA
Virginia wildrye
Elymus virginicus
20%
;NA
Switch grass
Pamcum virgnricus
20%
NA
Woody Vegetation for Live Stakes
Black willow
Sala mgra
9%
622
Button bush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
23%
1501
Elderberry
Sambucus canadMsis
23%
1501
Silky dogwood'
Cornus amomum
23%
'1501
Silky willow
Salix sericea
23%
1501
Supplemental Planting Plan
Acres
1.5
UT to Tar River Propoied Planting Plan
scienlific Name
Common Name
Type
Density
Spacing
Number of
Individuals
Notes
Brrsdn ,rigra
river birch '
bare tout
300 stems
per acre
-Tux
APTfcet 12
on center
'ti, 'a'-- itei
ri`; ,randomly ,, y
staggereila "'�
0
a`througboat :
�lthc existing ti
�,operi artiits'k'
U
Celtesfaevrgasn
hackbein
bare root
50
Feasbrus nnrytvchraxr
green ash
g
bare root
50
Nyam syivarira
blackgom
bare root
50
Platarrits occrdeniolis
Sycamore
are root
so
ernts alcata ivr ragada+eroha
� i I• S
chrnyberk�nak
bare rant
50
Quemirs iugic
_
water aak
bare root
50
QuerOdfihedos
%illow oak
bare rout
Tout
490
y< } _
Datcela mgranaer
binti
container
20 sterns
per acre
p
Approti. 50'
legit on
canter
ll,be,
"751aaied j
?' ;ftlnnsthe,,3�
Frazrnur pertrrrvfvanrco
green ush
container
10
Qrrertusph+'llos
willow oak
container
1p
` Total 30 :ybolei�dary y
:�t'i`Y). 1'.l. i ?��± -- fi�leri�i'`: ���.�' RJR 'Z tyi„?r�✓ 'FbrY �Sd �'3ra•5 :„��� `C J:aV..+� �y,� .�T•r �4
". �. :.. rt4:. ... Syfn� ^l'....ty�Yil��i'J- ' "'Y ^i<r � ".x \i�•`.16 .:_= .S'."'„>�M :� t� -S;'w 1 �'S�'f'h.r �� ,D'�
UT to Tar River SEPI Engineering and Construction
EEP Project # 234 13 Closeout Report
March 2014

Table 6: Stems /Acre Planted in Vegetation Plots per Monitoring Year
Plot #
MYO
MY 1
MY2'
MY3
MY4
MYS
1
607
486
324
364
283
364
2
728
526
405
445
405
283
3
324
243
121
40
0
40
4
243
162
40
81
0
0
5
283
40
40
8'1
40
40
6
445
364
243
283
243
283
7
486
162
81
40
40
81
8
324
84
0
0
0
40
9
648
243
162
202
81
202
Site Average
454
256
157
171
121
148
*The areas during the monitoring,period that were failing were in zones,that were heavily dominated by pine.
The pine was subsequently'thinned and these areas were replanted in'2010. T,ransects performed by SEPI in
2013 (see map above) showed an average of '293 stems per acre (data below) in those areas that were
previously failing and supplemented.
Vegetation Transects for Supplemental Areas
River
Birch
Sugar
berry
Green
Ash
Black
Gum
American
Sycamore
Cherry
Bark Oak
Water
Oak
Willow
Oak
Plot Size
Density
Etz
Stems
per acre
Tran se ct
Tota I s
1
4
2
2
4
3
15
2500
261
2
8
1
4
13
1600
354
3
11
1
3
1
3
19
1600
517
4
2
1
1
2
5
21
13
1 2600
218
5
11
1
1
ILI
1
1 21
IL0201
85
6
il
81
11
11
1 41
15
-20001
327
UT to Tar River SEPI Engineering and, Construction
EEP Project # 234 14 Closeout Report
March 2014

EEP Recommendations and Conclusion
The stream channels�appear stable although what appeared to be'some level of downcut earlier in the
monitoring period was observed in the lower —400 feet of the profile. However, this is not evident on site and
the stream bed meets the culvert elevation, at-the very bottom. Some of what,is observed is the development of
pools and bedform compared to the somewhat featureless us- built, baseline profile. No structures were installed
in this 1_ower section, but all the structures° above it were reported to be holding grade. Approximately 1 % of the
project' footage demonstrated bank erosion in the form �of a, gignif cant cut'near the culvert at the top of the
project, which was repaired'in 2010 due to infrastructure concerns. Hydrological success criteria have been
met. The vegetation success criterion was not °met for, ;sevefal, plots during the standard 5 year monitoring
;period, but remedial,measures have appeared to have addressed these issues based on transect measurements in
2013.
EEP recommends that the site be closed as proposed.
Contingencies
No contingencies are proposed.
UT to Tar River
EEP Project #, 234 -
Mardh `2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
15 Closeout Report

jYt
s.
�y-
n
J
v

rt
Tt
t*
I
41,

Appendix A
Watershed Planning
This site was not in a targeted planning area
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
18 Closeout Report
J

Appendix B
Land Ownership and Protection
The site protection instrument for this mitigation project includes the following document(s), available at the
specified County Register of Deeds office:
Project Name
Grantor.Name
County
Property Rights
Deed /Page
Plat /Page
Acre
Lou�sburei,UT }ioTarjl
�e•�.. 9���„
wit+ s g^a:
Hit m1pwErw m R ac@ E
Greens HiII GouyynyyI$ry� °,,'
. Un�h`",'�'§
a" ,nq -An'll
F,r,�ganklm x
91�+1?ati
M ' &�E3Egd93Rpyl ",9iE&HmE a;�� '� ��� J� ° a �E S9
Conservation I�
1p ;3,04/07y1y�6i_l
Ecn °,H °'
2002/278.
RivesClub;slnc�rr
Easement
-�
Town of Louisburg
Franklin
Conservation
1309/0824
2002/278
1.08
Easement
This property will be transferred to the NC DENR Stewardship Program for long term management.
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering -and Construction
19 Closeout Report

Appendix C
Permits
0 •
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS F ILE C I
Wilmington District
Action ID: 200320964 County: Franklin
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Applicant
NCWRP
Attn: Cherie Smith
Address 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1619
Telephone Number 919- 733 -5208
Size and Location of Property (waterbody, Highway name /number, town, etc.): The site for the
proposed stream restoration is located along Bumette Road, which is located on the east side of NC Hwy
39, approximately 200 feet south of its intersection with U.S. Hwy 401, in Louisburg, Franklin County,
North Carolina.
Description of Activity: This permit authorizes excavation and the installation of in- stream structures
associated with the restoration of approximately 1700 linear feet of an unnamed tributary to the Tar River.
Applicable Law: X Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344) only.
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899) only.
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number
27 Nationwide Permit Number
Any violation of the conditions of the Regional General or Nationwide Permit referenced above may
subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order, and/or appropriate legal action.
This Department of the Army Regional General Permit or Nationwide Permit verification does not
relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal, State, or local
approvals /permits. The permittee may need to contact appropriate State and local agencies before
beginning work. If you have any questions regarding the Corps of Engineers regulatory program,
please contact Amanda D. Jones at telephone number (919) 876 - 8441 extension 30
Regulatory Project Manager Signature nAAAMA4�_' "Cl^
Date__ Jury :1, 2003 Expiration Date July 11, 2005
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORM, ETC., MUST BE ATTACHED
TO THE YELLOW (FILE) COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
UT to Tar River
EEP Project # 234
March 2014
SEPI Engineering and Construction
20 Closeout Report

�I
A
�ll
1LL
l�
I�
W
W
Q
1
Q
A
z
a
d
d'
F
O o
U
� J
� � O
a ao
N Q N
0 m
M
J N H O
0
E
m
'O^ c
IL
c ti m c
? CO o
al a y R
w ix U
vi
N
N
U
a
Q
Q
Q
s "011dsoyd ON
ua6on!N ON
(is) Aluo 3esyo
3ualalnN Joune
uollenaasaad
ysaeW lelseoo
luawaoueyu3
gsaepy lelseoD
uoileaac)
usaew lelseoo
uolleaolsaa
ysaeNl lelseap
uollenJaseJd
ueueduuoN
luawaoueyu3
ueueduuoN
uolleajo
ueueduuoN
uoileaolsaa
ueueduuoN
M
M
M
M
at
r
Oi
r
r
T
r
N
E
R)
Z
N
m
O
co
o
a
a`
CL
Q
U
O
5
Q
E
Z
co
0
C
0
0
Q
N
`
w
N
tll
y
lC
(n
�
d
D
V
V
m
.o
U
C
1c0
C
o
Z
.0
.
=
E
al
-
d
_m
Y
y
V
d
y
E
U
U
Q
U
U
c
c
d
`p
«�
c
c
m
R
m
m W
m
m
cca�
d
N
cc
'E
'E
H
m
F
E
c
c0�
7'm
0
m
m
U
W
aEi
aEi
m
m
Z
w
w
IY
IT
0
N
N
ch
a�
co
a�
m
a
d
J
1J
d
Q
m
w
w
E
O
C
0
co
0
c