20160372 Ver 2_Year 1 Monitoring Report (Buffer)_2019_20200213

ID#* 20160372 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/13/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/13/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands W Buffer r- Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
LINDSAY CROCKER
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20160372
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Stony Fork
County: Johnston
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Stony_Fork_97085_MY1_2019.pdf 21.53MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* lindsay crocker
Signature:*
4`-�r'er<4 helm-Ao

Monitoring Report MY01

Stony Fork Restoration Site
Upper Neuse River Basin - 03020201
Monitoring Year 01
DMS Contract 6830

DMS Project Number 97085
DWR #: 2016-0372
USACE Action ID: 2016-00875
Johnston County, North Carolina

Prepared for:
NCDMS, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

Monitoring Data Collected: 2019
Date Submitted: January 2020
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 2019-MY01

Monitoring and Design Firm

Prepared by:

KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]

Project Contact: Tim Morris
Email: [e-mail]

KCI ASSOCIATES OF N ORTH C AROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 7, 2020
To: Lindsay Crocker, DMS Project Manager
From: Adam Spiller, Project Manager
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Subject: MY-01 Monitoring Report Comments
Stony Fork DMS #6830, Contract 006830
Neuse River Basin CU 030202018
Johnston County, North Carolina

Please find below our responses in italics to the MY-01 Monitoring Report comments from NCDMS
received on January 29, 2020 for the Stony Fork Restoration Site.

Digital Comments:
1. Report has asset table for Cedar Branch, not Stony Fork.
KCI Response: This error has been corrected.

2. Please provide DMS with excel files used to create visual assessment tables.
KCI Response: These have been added to the digital deliverables.

3. Note that in the cross-section figure for XS14 the legend has MY1 listed as 0%.
KCI Response: This error has been corrected

Report Comments:
1. Asset tables Project Component/Reach ID does not match MY0 report, the riparian buffer credit
is missing, and the numbers don’t match. These tables should be the same every year. Update to
show MY0 table.
KCI Response: This error has been corrected.

Sincerely,

Adam Spiller
Project Manager

E NGINEERS • S CIENTISTS • S URVEYORS • C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGERS
4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 2019-MY01
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1
Monitoring Results........................................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................. 3
References ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

Appendix A – Background Tables
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 6
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History .......................................................................................... 7
Table 3. Project Contacts .............................................................................................................................. 8
Table 4. Project Information ......................................................................................................................... 9

Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data
CCPV .......................................................................................................................................................... 12
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Assesment......................................................................................... 17
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment ................................................................................................ 23
Photo Reference Points ............................................................................................................................... 24
Vegetation Plot Photos ................................................................................................................................ 28

Appendix C – Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species ...................................................................... 33

Appendix D – Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary ................................................................................................... 36
Table 9. Cross-section Morphology Data Table ......................................................................................... 44
Cross-section Plots ...................................................................................................................................... 47
Pebble Counts ............................................................................................................................................. 63

Appendix E – Hydrologic Data
Bankfull Verification and Precipitation Plot ............................................................................................... 72
Table 10. Verification of Stream Flow ....................................................................................................... 73
Table 11. Stream Flow Criteria Attainment ................................................................................................ 73
Stream Flow Example Photos ..................................................................................................................... 74
Stream Flow Verification and Precipitation Plots ....................................................................................... 76

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 1 2019-MY01
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Stony Fork Restoration Site (SFRS) was completed in May 2019 and restored a total of 6,810 linear
feet of stream and 949,747 square feet of riparian buffer under the Neuse Buffer Rule (NCAC Rule 15A
02B.029). The SFRS is a riparian system in the Upper Neuse River Basin (03020201 8-digit cataloging
unit) in Johnston County, North Carolina. The site’s natural hydrologic regime had been substantially
modified through the relocation and straightening of the existing stream channels, impacted by land
clearing, and cleared of any riparian buffer. This completed project will restore impacted agricultural and
timber lands to a stable stream ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer and floodplain access.

The SFRS is protected by a 24.4 acre permanent conservation easement, held by the State of North Carolina.
The site is located approximately 5.5 miles north of Benson, NC. Specifically, the site is 0.2 mile west on
Elevation Road from its intersection with Federal Road (SR-1331).

The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) published the Neuse River Basin Priorities
in 2010. These were updated in for the Neuse 01 cataloging unit (CU) in 2015 due to extensive mitigation
needs and changes in watershed conditions since 2010. The project 14 digit CU (03020201150010) was
identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the updated priorities. The goals and priorities for the
SFRS are based on the information presented in the Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities: maintaining
and enhancing water quality, restoring hydrology, and improving fish and wildlife habitat (NCEEP, 2009).
The project will support the following basin priorities:
- Managing stormwater runoff
- Improving/restoring riparian buffers
- Reducing sediment loading
- Improving stream stability

The goals for the project are to:
- Restore channelized and agriculture impacted streams to stable C/Cb channels.
- Restore a forested riparian buffer to provide bank stability, filtration, and shading.

The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Relocate a channelized stream to its historic landscape position.
- Install cross-sections sized to the bankfull discharge.
- Create bedform diversity with pools, riffles, and habitat structures
- Plant the site with native trees and shrubs and an herbaceous seed mix.

Project planting and construction were completed in May 2019. The SFRS involved restoration and
establishment of a functioning stream ecosystem with 6,810 linear feet of stream restored by re-meandering
the stream and by tying the bankfull elevation to the historic floodplain where feasible. The entire site was
planted to establish a forested riparian buffer. The site was constructed as designed with no major
modifications from the design plan. The monitoring components were installed in May 2019. Four
automatically recording pressure transducer stream gauges that take a reading every 10 minutes were
installed in the upper third of T1, T1-A, T2 and T3 to document flow within those reaches. Cameras were
installed in the vicinity of each of these gauges and set to record a short video once a day to provide
additional verification of flow. An additional automatically recording pressure transducer stream gauge was
installed near the bottom of the main stem (SF3) to record the occurrence of bankfull events. To determine
the success of the planted mitigation areas, seven 10 m x 10 m permanent vegetation monitoring plots were
established. An additional five 10 m x 10 m random vegetation monitoring plots were sampled as well. The
locations of the planted stems relative to the origin were recorded within the permanent plots and the species
and height of each planted stem were recorded for all plots. Any volunteers found within the plots were
also grouped into size categories by species, but separate from the planted stems. Twelve permanent photo
reference points were established and will be taken annually. Sixteen permanent cross-sections (eight riffle
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 2 2019-MY01
cross-sections and eight pool cross-sections) were also established and a detailed longitudinal profile of the
stream was taken. Wolman pebble counts were performed at all of the riffle cross-sections. The cross-
section measurements will be repeated in future monitoring years, but the longitudinal profile will only be
repeated if there are concerns about bed elevation adjustments. Reports will be submitted to DMS each
year.

Vegetative success criteria for the stream mitigation is 260 woody stems/acre after five years, and 210
woody stems/acre after seven years. Trees in each plot must average seven feet in height at Year 5 and ten
feet in height at Year 7. Volunteer species must be present for a minimum of two growing seasons and must
be a species from the approved planting list to count toward vegetative success. A single species may not
account for more than 50% of the required number of stems within any plot. A minimum of four bankfull
events must also be recorded during the monitoring period. All project streams must show a minimum of
30 continuous days of flow within a calendar year for three out of the first four years of monitoring. Bank
height ratios (BHR) should not exceed 1.2 and the entrenchment ratios (ER) should be 2.2 or greater. BHR
and ER at any measured riffle cross-section should not change more than 10% from the baseline condition
during any given monitoring interval (e.g. no more than 10% between years 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 5, or 5
and 7). Visual assessments will also be used to identify problem areas.

Vegetative success criteria for the areas proposed for riparian buffer credit is 260 woody stems/acre at the
end of five years of monitoring. Trees in each plot must average seven feet in height at Year 5. There should
be a minimum of four native hardwood tree species, with no species accounting for greater than 50% of the
stems. Volunteer species must be from the approved planting list to count toward vegetative success.

MONITORING RESULTS
The first-year vegetation monitoring was conducted November 5, 2019. The site averaged 946 planted
stems/acre across all 12 plots. All thirteen plots had greater than 260 planted stems/acre. Including
volunteers, the site averaged 1,072 total stems/acre. In general the site is well vegetated, with widespread
herbaceous coverage and healthy planted stems.

The stream gauge near the bottom of SF3 did not record any bankfull events in 2019. All four stream flow
gauges recorded at least 30 consecutive days of flow. The gauges on T1 and T1A recorded 60 consecutive
days and 182 consecutive days respectively, while the one on T2 recorded 85 days and the one on T3
recorded 55 days. The gauge data was further backed up by the cameras on site. Based on the video
recordings obtained from the cameras, T1A had flow for a maximum of 46 consecutive days, T2 had flow
for a maximum of 84 consecutive days, and T3 had flow for a maximum of 55 consecutive days. The camera
on T1 was obscured by moisture that got inside of the lens for most of the year. The difference in the
numbers obtained from the cameras compared to those obtained from the gauge is largely due to the cameras
becoming obscured by vegetation, or moisture on the lens for parts of the year.

The longitudinal profile was not repeated for the first-year survey because the baseline survey found that
the stream was constructed as designed, and there were no concerns about bed elevation adjustments. The
first-year cross-section survey found that the dimensions of the stream are as designed, with some small
variation as is typical for stream restoration projects. The monitored cross-section data have been calculated
by adjusting the bankfull elevation to maintain the baseline bankfull area for each cross-section.
o
o
o
ooo
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
oooo o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
ooo o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
o
o
o
oooo o
o
o oo
o
ooo
o
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
oooo o
o
oo
o
oo
o
o o
o
o
o
o
o
oo
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o
oooooooo ooo oooooo oooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
o
oo o
o o
oo
o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
o
oo o
oo
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o o
oo
o
o
ooo
o
oooo
o
o
o
o
oo
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o o ooo
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo
o o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
ÊÚ
§¨¦40
§¨¦95
50
27
242
242
£¤301
BENSON
B l a c k Creek
ÊÚ
WAKE
JOHNSTON
WAYNE
NASH
SAMPSON
HARNETT
WILSON
ÊÚ Project Site Location
County Boundary
Major Roads
Minor Roads o Airports (none within a 5-mi radius)
Major Rivers and Streams
Cities and Towns Elevation RdFederal RdÜ 0 10.5 Miles
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP, STONY FORK RESTORATION SITE, JOHNSTON COUNTY, NC
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 4 2019-MY01
REFERENCES

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities
2009. Raleigh, NC. Last accessed 1/2016 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=705d1b58‐cb91‐451e‐aa58‐
4ef128b1e5ab&groupId=60329

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2014. NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement
Program. 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines. Last
accessed1/2016 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=60409&folderId=18877169
&name=DLFE‐86604.pdf

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring
Guidelines. Last accessed 6/2015 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=60409&folderId=18877169
&name=DLFE‐86606.pdf

NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team. 2010. NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM)
User Manual, version 4.1. Last accessed 11/2012 at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=76f3c58b-dab8-4960-ba43-
45b7faf06f4c&groupId=38364

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Fourth Approximation. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC.

Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture. Soil Survey of Randolph County, North Carolina. 2006
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 5 2019-MY01

APPENDIX A

Background Tables

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 6 2019-MY01
*Mitigation Plan footage used for credit calculations. **Crossings have been removed from creditable linear footage for all project streams

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Mitigation Credits

Stream Riparian
Wetland
Non-riparian
Wetland Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE R RE
Linear
Feet/Acres 6,405 405 450,285 sf 499,462 sf
Credits 6,405 181 425,434 59,904
TOTAL
CREDITS 6,586 480,338
Project Components
Project
Component
-or-
Reach ID
Stationing/
Location
Existing
Footage/
Square Footage
Approach
(PI, PII
etc.)
Restoration
-or-
Restoration
Equivalent
MP
Restoration
Footage*
As-built
Restoration
Footage
Mitigation
Ratio
SF1 10+00 – 21+55 1,235 PI/PII R 1,155 1,155 1:1
SF2 21+55 – 49+54 2,453 PI R 2,707** 2,714** 1:1
SF3 49+54 – 56+08 618 PI R 624** 624** 1:1
T1 100+00 – 105+10 365 PI/PII R 510 510 1:1
T1A 150+00 – 151+59 47 PI/PII R 159 159 1:1
T2-1 200+00 – 203+34 327 N/A EII 334 334 2.5:1
T2-2 203+34 – 206+71 326 PI/PII R 337 337 1:1
T2-3 206+71 – 215+26 780 PI/PII R 855 855 1:1
T3-1 300+00 – 300+71 72 PI/PII EI 71 71 1.5:1
T3-2 300+71 – 301+29 82 PI/PII R 58 58 1:1
Buffer
Restoration
TOB to 100’
N/A 413,194 N/A R 413,194 413,194 100%
Buffer
Restoration
101-200’
N/A 37,091 N/A R 37,091 37,091 33%
Buffer
Enhancement
TOB to 100’
N/A 74,802 N/A E 74,802 74,802 50%
Buffer
Preservation
TOB to 100’
N/A 424,660 N/A P 424,660 424,660 10%
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 7 2019-MY01

Activity or Report Data Collection Complete
Actual Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan September 5, 2018
Final Design - Construction Plans Oct. 15, 2018
Construction Grading Completed May 3, 2019
Planting Completed May 6 2019
Baseline Monitoring/Report May 2019 July 2018
Vegetation Monitoring May 9, 2019
Stream Survey May 15, 2019
Year 1 Monitoring November 2019 January 2020
Vegetation Monitoring November 5, 2019
Stream Survey November 11, 2019
Table 2. Project Activity & Reporting History
Stony Fork Restoration Sites, DMS Project #97085

Component Summation
Restoration Level Stream
(linear feet)
Riparian Wetlands
(Acres)
Non-Riparian
Wetlands
(Acres)
Buffer (square feet)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 6,405 450,285
Enhancement 74,802
Enhancement I 71
Enhancement II 334
Creation
Preservation 424,660
(175,029 allowable for credit)
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL CREDITS 6,586 480,338
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 8 2019-MY01

Table 3. Project Contacts
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Design Firm KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Construction Contractor Fluvial Solutions, Inc.
Stony Fork and T3 PO Box 28749
Raleigh, NC 27611
Contact: Mr. Peter Jelenevsky
Phone: [phone]
Construction Contractor KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction
T1, T1A, and T2 4505 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
PO Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
Contact: Mr. Charlie Bruton
Phone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers

KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 9 2019-MY01

Table 4. Project Information
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Project Name Stony Fork Restoration Site
County Johnston County
Project Area (acres) 24.4 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.) 35°26'55.0"N, 78°31'18.5"W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Coastal Plain
River Basin Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03020201 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03020201150010
DWQ Sub-basin 03-04-04
Project Drainage Area (acres) 497 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area 5%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Managed Herbaceous Cover 53% (262 ac), Mixed Hardwoods/Conifers 31% (150 ac), Low
Density Developed 9% (42 ac), Medium Density Residential 5% (24 ac),
Transportation/Impervious 3% (13 ac)
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters Stony Fork T1 and T1A T2 T3
Length of reach (linear feet) 3,141 412 1,433 154
Drainage area (acres) 497 12 150 29
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial Intermittent Perennial Intermittent
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification C; NSW C; NSW C; NSW C; NSW
Stream Classification (exisiting) G4c G4 G4 G4
Stream Classifcation (proposed) C4 C4 C4 C4
Evolutionary trend (Simon) Channelized, Stage III Channelized, Stage III Channelized, Stage III Modified with
pond, Stage III
FEMA classification None None None None
Existing Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.33 (WA and WE) 0.06 (WB) 0.14 (WC and WF)
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Bottomland Hardwood
Forest Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh
Mapped Soil Series Gilead sandy loam Bibb sandy loam Bibb sandy loam
Drainage class Moderately Well
Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained
Soil Hydric Status Non-hydric Hydric Hydric
Source of Hydrology Surface Water Stream Floodplain Stream Floodplain
Restoration or Enhancement Method N/A N/A N/A

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 10 2019-MY01

Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States – Section
404 Yes Yes 404 permit
Waters of the United States – Section
401 Yes Yes 401 permit
Endangered Species Act No N/A N/A
Historic Preservation Act No N/A N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA)
No N/A N/A
Fema Floodplain Compliance No Yes
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 11 2019-MY01

APPENDIX B

Visual Assessment Data

^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
Start SF1
T2-1
SF2
T2-2
T1 T1A
T3-1 T3-2
T2-3
SF3
Sheet 1
Sheet 4
Sheet 3
Sheet 2
4
6
5
3
2
1 75
2 83 4916121 0 14134
5
6
7
2
3
1
R1
R5
R4
R2 R3
Source: Google Earth, 2018
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW STONY FORK RESTORATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NC ±0 300150
Feet
Stream Mitigation
R (6,405 lf / 6,405 SMCs)
EI (71 lf / 47 SMCs)
EII (334 lf / 134 SMCs)
Buffer Mitigation
R 0-100'(413,194 sf / 413,194 credits)
R 101-200'(37,091 sf / 12,240 credits)
E (74,802 sf / 37,401 credits)
P (424,660 sf / 17,503 credits)
Project Easement
Cross-Sections
^_Photo Points
Flow Gauge
Camera
Bankfull Gauge
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
Overview
^_
^_
Star t SF1
SF2
T1 T1A
T3-1 T3-2
27+0026+0025+0024+0023+0022+0021+0020+0019+0018+0017+0016+0015+0014+0013+0012+0011+0010+003 0 1 +0 0
3 0 0 +0 0
151+00
1
5
0
+
0
0
104+00103+001 0 2 +0 0
101+00100+0029+0028+002
1 1
2
3 491211
1 0
4
1
R1
R5
Source: Google Earth, 2018
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW STONY FORK RESTORATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NC ±0 10050
Feet
Stream Mitigation
R (6,405 lf / 6,405 SMCs)
EI (71 lf / 47 SMCs)
EII (334 lf / 134 SMCs)
Buffer Mitigation
R 0-100'(413,194 sf / 413,194 credits)
R 101-200'(37,091 sf / 12,240 credits)
E (74,802 sf / 37,401 credits)
P (424,660 sf / 17,503 credits)
Project Easement
Cross-Sections
^_Photo Points
Flow Gauge
Camera
Bankfull Gauge
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
SH EET 1 of 4
^_27+0042+0041+0040+0039+0038+0037+0036+0035+0034+0033+0032+0031+0030+0029+0028+0044+0043+003
5
6
3 42
3
R2
R3
Source: Google Earth, 2018
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW STONY FORK RESTORATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NC ±0 10050
Feet
Stream Mitigation
R (6,405 lf / 6,405 SMCs)
EI (71 lf / 47 SMCs)
EII (334 lf / 134 SMCs)
Buffer Mitigation
R 0-100'(413,194 sf / 413,194 credits)
R 101-200'(37,091 sf / 12,240 credits)
E (74,802 sf / 37,401 credits)
P (424,660 sf / 17,503 credits)
Project Easement
Cross-Sections
^_Photo Points
Flow Gauge
Camera
Bankfull Gauge
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
SH EET 2 of 4
^_
^_
T2-3
SF3
42+0041+0056+0055+0054+0053+0052+0051+0050+0048+0047+0046+0045+0044+0043+00214+00213+00
2 1 2 +0 0211+00210+00209+0049+00215+00208+00207+0020 6 +0 0
6
5 75
6 816157
6
3
R4
Source: Google Earth, 2018
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW STONY FORK RESTORATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NC ±0 10050
Feet
Stream Mitigation
R (6,405 lf / 6,405 SMCs)
EI (71 lf / 47 SMCs)
EII (334 lf / 134 SMCs)
Buffer Mitigation
R 0-100'(413,194 sf / 413,194 credits)
R 101-200'(37,091 sf / 12,240 credits)
E (74,802 sf / 37,401 credits)
P (424,660 sf / 17,503 credits)
Project Easement
Cross-Sections
^_Photo Points
Flow Gauge
Camera
Bankfull Gauge
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
SH EET 3 of 4
^_
^_
T2-1 T2-2
T2-3
SF3
51+0050+0048+00214+00213+00
2 1 2 +0 0211+00210+00209+0049+00215+00208+00207+002 0 6 +0 0
205+00
204+00203+00202+00201+00200+004
5 7161514135
6
7
R4
Source: Google Earth, 2018
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW STONY FORK RESTORATION SITEJOHNSTON COUNTY, NC ±0 10050
Feet
Stream Mitigation
R (6,405 lf / 6,405 SMCs)
EI (71 lf / 47 SMCs)
EII (334 lf / 134 SMCs)
Buffer Mitigation
R 0-100'(413,194 sf / 413,194 credits)
R 101-200'(37,091 sf / 12,240 credits)
E (74,802 sf / 37,401 credits)
P (424,660 sf / 17,503 credits)
Project Easement
Cross-Sections
^_Photo Points
Flow Gauge
Camera
Bankfull Gauge
Vegetation Monitoring Plots
Success Criteria Met
Success Criteria Not Met
SH EET 4 of 4
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 17 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID SF1
Assessed Length 1,155
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 18 18 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 17 17 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)17 17 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 17 17 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 17 17 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 5 5 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 5 5 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 5 5 100%
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.5 5 100%
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number of
Unstable
Segments
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 18 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID SF2
Assessed Length 2,802
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 36 36 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 35 35 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)35 35 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 35 35 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 35 35 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 8 8 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 8 8 100%
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.8 8 100%
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 19 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID SF3
Assessed Length 618
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 9 9 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 8 8 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)8 8 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 8 8 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 8 8 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 1 1 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 1 1 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 1 1 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 1 1 100%
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.1 1 100%
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 20 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID T1
Assessed Length 365
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 13 13 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 12 12 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)12 12 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 12 12 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 12 12 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 4 4 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 4 4 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 4 4 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 4 4 100%
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.4 4 100%
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 21 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID T2
Assessed Length 1,433
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 27 27 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 26 26 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)26 26 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 26 26 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 26 26 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 7 7 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 7 7 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 7 7 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 7 7 100%
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.7 7 100%
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 22 2019-MY01
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#97085
Reach ID T3
Assessed Length 154
1. Bed 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 3 3 100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 2 2 100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)2 2 100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 2 2 100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 2 2 100%
2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion 0 0 100%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
and are providing habitat.
0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%
0 0 100%
3. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. N/A N/A N/A
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. N/A N/A N/A
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. N/A N/A N/A
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) N/A N/A N/A
4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.N/A N/A N/A
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
Totals
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4.Thalweg Position
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 23 2019-MY01
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project# 97085
Planted Acreage 24.4
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous
material.0.1 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%
2. Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels
based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria.0.1 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%
0 0.00 0.0%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are
obviously small given the monitoring year.0.25 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%
0 0.00 0.0%
Easement Acreage 9.5
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Easement
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale).1000 SF Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%
5. Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons
at map scale).none Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%
Total
Cumulative Total
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 24 2019-MY01

Photo Reference Photos
PP1U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP1U – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP1D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP1D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP2U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP2U – MY-01 – 11/8/19
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 25 2019-MY01

PP2D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP2D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP3U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP3U – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP3D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP3D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 26 2019-MY01

PP4U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP4U – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP4D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP4D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP5U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP5U – MY-01 – 11/8/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 27 2019-MY01

PP5D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP5D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP6U – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP6U – MY-01 – 11/8/19

PP6D – MY-00 – 5/15/19 PP6D – MY-01 – 11/8/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 28 2019-MY01

Permanent Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 1 – MY-01 – 11/5/19
Vegetation Plot 2 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 2 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Vegetation Plot 3 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 3 – MY-01 – 11/5/19
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 29 2019-MY01

Vegetation Plot 4 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 4 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Vegetation Plot 5 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 5 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Vegetation Plot 6 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 6 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 30 2019-MY01

Vegetation Plot 7 – MY-00 – 5/15/19 Vegetation Plot 7 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 31 2019-MY01

Random Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos

Vegetation Plot R1 – MY-01 – 11/5/19 Vegetation Plot R2 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Vegetation Plot R3 – MY-01 – 11/5/19 Vegetation Plot R4 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Vegetation Plot R5 – MY-01 – 11/5/19

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 32 2019-MY01

APPENDIX C

Vegetation Plot Data

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 33 2019-MY01
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum ) 1 1 1 1 5 5
Black Willow (Salix nigra ) 2
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis )
Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica ) 2 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 1 1
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda )
Oak (Quercus sp.) 1 1
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana )
Pin Oak (Quercus palustris ) 2 2 1 1
Red Maple (Acer rubrum ) 3 2 2
River Birch (Betula nigra ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3
Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum ) 6 6 1 1 1 1
Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata )
Sugar Berry (Celtis laevigata)
Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxi ) 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
Sweet Bay (Magnolia virginiana ) 1
Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua ) 6
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis ) 3 3 6 6 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1
Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera ) 3 9 3 3 2 2
Water Oak (Quercus nigra )
White Oak (Quercus alba ) 1 1 1 1 3
Willow Oak (Quercus phellos ) 4 4 2 2 6 6 5 5 1 1 3 3 2 2
Unknown 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
18 29 15 17 16 22 16 16 9 15 12 12 14 14
7 9 4 5 7 8 7 7 6 9 8 8 7 7
728 1,174 607 688 647 890 647 647 364 607 486 486 567 567
Current Plot Data (MY01 2019)
Table 7. Stem Count by Plot and Species
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Plot 06 Plot 07Plot 01 Plot 02 Plot 03 Plot 04 Plot 05
Species
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
1 1
0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025
1 1 1 1 1

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 34 2019-MY01
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum ) 7 7 1 1
Black Willow (Salix nigra ) 2
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis ) 1 1 2
Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica ) 5 5 4 4 2 2 25 25 29 29
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda ) 1 1 2
Oak (Quercus sp.) 1 1 18 18
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana ) 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4
Pin Oak (Quercus palustris ) 3 3 1 1 7 7 3 3
Red Maple (Acer rubrum ) 3 3 1 1 4 11 2
River Birch (Betula nigra ) 1 1 4 4 4 4 17 17 2 2
Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum ) 8 8 10 10
Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata ) 2 2 2 2
Sugar Berry (Celtis laevigata) 2
Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxi ) 1 1 7 7 7 7
Sweet Bay (Magnolia virginiana ) 1 1
Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua ) 2 8
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis ) 1 1 11 11 11 11 1 1 40 40 9 9
Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera ) 2 2 3 3 1 1 14 20 14 14
Water Oak (Quercus nigra ) 1
White Oak (Quercus alba ) 6 6 1 1 3 3 12 15 1 4
Willow Oak (Quercus phellos ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 30 30 3 3
Unknown 4 4 199 199
11 12 11 11 23 23 26 26 11 15 182 212 296 307
4 5 6 6 5 5 7 7 7 10 15 20 12 17
445 486 445 445 931 931 1,052 1,052 445 607 910 1,060 1,480 1,535
8 8
0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.200 0.200
1 1 1 1 1
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
Table 7. Stem Count by Plot and Species
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
MY01 (2019) MY00 (2019)Plot R1 Plot R2 Plot R3 Plot R4 Plot R5
Species
Current Plot Data (MY01 2019) Annual Means

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 35 2018-MY01

APPENDIX D

Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 36 2018-MY01
Table 8a. SF1 Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 7.2 14.8-18.8 9.7 9.3 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 8.7 >50 100 >80 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.9 1.3-1.8 0.7 0.8 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2 1.9-2.4 1.1 1.2 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 6.4 25 7.0 7.0 1
Width/Depth Ratio 8.1 9.0-14.0 13.5 12.2 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 >2.5 10.3 8.7 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.9 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 30-55 30-55
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 20-29 20-29
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 9.6-13.6 9.6-13.6
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 93-132 93-132
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 3.1-5.7 3.1-5.7
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 23.40 31.55 40.95 17
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.009 0.013—0.035 0.009-0.015 0.0031 0.0141 0.0137 17
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 21-46 12.47 28.73 41.34 17
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 5.6-7.3 44.28 68.72 142.01 17
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 3/40/57/0/0/0 0/4/90/7/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.15/1.2/2.2/7.5/11/-0.4/7.1 Gravel Gravel 9.4/16/22/33/53/70

Channel length (ft) 1235 1155 1155
Drainage Area (SM) 0.27 1.49 0.27 0.27
Rosgen Classification G4c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.009 0.005 0.009 0.01
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 37 2018-MY01
Table 8b. SF2 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 5.0-10.0 14.8-18.8 11.3 12.2 12.4 12.6 2
Floodprone Width (ft) 7.4-14.5 >50 100 53.3 67.0 80.7 2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.0-1.4 1.3-1.8 0.8 0.9 0.95 1.0 2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.3-2.2 1.9-2.4 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 2
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 6.9-8.9 25 9.4 10.6 11.6 12.5 2
Width/Depth Ratio 3.7-11.2 9.0-14.0 13.5 12.8 13.5 14.1 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4-1.5 >2.5 8.8 4.2 5.4 6.6 2
Bank Height Ratio 1.6-2.1 1.0-1.2 1.0 1 1 1 2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 37-65 37-65
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 22-33 22-33
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 9.3-13.1 9.3-13.1
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 105-148 105-148
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 3.3-5.8 3.3-5.8
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 17.58 39.07 86.38 36
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.003-0.008 0.013—0.035 0.009 - 0.015 0.0021 0.0118 0.0256 36
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 24-52 12.51 28.83 52.39 34
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 5.2-7.4 43.01 81.44 178.86 34
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 20.3/30/49.8/0/0/0 5/8/54/33/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.33/0.61/1.2/6.2/9.8/0.3/5.5 Gravel Gravel 5.9/31/45/61/98.5/140

Channel length (ft) 2453 2802 2802
Drainage Area (SM) 0.41 1.49 0.41 0.41
Rosgen Classification G4c—G5c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.008 0.005 0.008 0.008

* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 38 2018-MY01
Table 8c. SF3 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 10.5 14.8-18.8 12.6 11.6 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 14.4 >50 100 92.4 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.2 1.3-1.8 0.9 1.1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.3 1.9-2.4 1.4 1.7 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 12.5 25 11.8 12.9 1
Width/Depth Ratio 8.9 9.0-14.0 13.5 10.4 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 >2.5 7.9 8.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.0 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 46-77 46-77
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 28-35 28-35
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 11.7-14 11.7-14
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 148-176 148-176
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 3.7-6.1 3.7-6.1
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 7.4 35.2 52.4 7
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.006 0.013—0.035 0.01 0.0032 0.0075 0.0175 7
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 35-62 12.4 33.9 39.7 7
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 6.7-8.0 92.0 103.1 114.4 7
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 10/0/0/0/0/0 21/21/40/18/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 1.1/6.0/8.3/12/15/-0.7/3.3 Gravel Gravel 0.06/0.77/16/29/70/120

Channel length (ft) 618 654 654
Drainage Area (SM) 0.84 1.49 0.84 0.84
Rosgen Classification G4c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.006 0.005 0.008 0.006
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 39 2018-MY01
Table 8d. T1 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 3.4 14.8-18.8 5.0 4.2 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 4.5 >50 50 45.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 1.3-1.8 0.4 0.2 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 1.9-2.4 0.6 0.5 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 0.9 25 1.9 0.9 1
Width/Depth Ratio 12.7 9.0-14.0 13.5 18.6 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 >2.5 10 10.8 1
Bank Height Ratio 4.5 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 23-37 23-37
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 11-17 11-17
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 11.6-14.4 11.6-14.4
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 58-72 58-72
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 4.6-7.4 4.6-7.4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 4.53 18.2 29.1 11
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.035 0.013—0.035 0.014-0.04 0.00 0.024 0.045 11
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 11-29 7.29 40.2 65.6 11
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 6.2-8.8 35.7 45.7 60.3 11
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 10/3/21/66/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) Silt-Clay Gravel Gravel 37/65/78/94/130/170

Channel length (ft) 365 510 510
Drainage Area (SM) 0.02 1.49 0.02 0.02
Rosgen Classification G5 C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.0 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.035 0.005 0.020 0.019
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 40 2018-MY01
Table 8e. T2-1 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft) 4.5-5.7 14.8-18.8 5.0
Floodprone Width (ft) 5.7-30.7 >50 50
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8-1.7 1.3-1.8 0.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2-2.1 1.9-2.4 0.6
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 3.6-9.4 25 1.9
Width/Depth Ratio 3.4-5.4 9.0-14.0 13.5
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3-5.4 >2.5 10
Bank Height Ratio 1.5-4.1 1.0-1.2 1.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 25-40 25-40
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 12-15 12-15
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 14 14
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 70 70
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 5.0-8.0 5.0-8.0
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.009-0.020 0.013—0.035 0.016
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 6-16
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 6.4-8.0
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) Silt-Clay Gravel Gravel

Channel length (ft) 327 334 334
Drainage Area (SM) 0.23 1.49 0.04 0.04
Rosgen Classification G5c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.014 0.005 0.012
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 41 2018-MY01
Table 8f. T2-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built

Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 4.5-5.7 14.8-18.8 7.6 9.7 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 5.7-30.7 >50 50 43.4 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8-1.7 1.3-1.8 0.6 0.6 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2-2.1 1.9-2.4 0.8 1.0 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 3.6-9.4 25 4.3 5.8 1
Width/Depth Ratio 3.4-5.4 9.0-14.0 13.4 16.4 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3-5.4 >2.5 6.6 4.5 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.5-4.1 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 28-45 28-45
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 16-23 16-23
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 11.2-11.8 11.2-11.8
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 85-90 85-90
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 3.7-5.9 3.7-5.9
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 20.0 29.0 56.7 6
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.009-0.020 0.013—0.035 0.014 0.01 0.018 0.028 6
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 14-24 10.8 17.6 22.8 6
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 5.7-6.6 47.0 48.8 51.2 6
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 6/45/15/33/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) Silt-Clay Gravel Gravel 26/35/42/51/74/110

Channel length (ft) 326 337 337
Drainage Area (SM) 0.23 1.49 0.15 0.15
Rosgen Classification G5c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.014 0.005 0.012 0.011
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 42 2018-MY01
Table 8g. T2-3 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 4.5-5.7 14.8-18.8 9.0 8.6 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 5.7-30.7 >50 50 80.9 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8-1.7 1.3-1.8 0.6 0.7 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2-2.1 1.9-2.4 1.0 1.2 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 3.6-9.4 25 5.8 6.0 1
Width/Depth Ratio 3.4-5.4 9.0-14.0 13.9 12.3 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3-5.4 >2.5 5.6 9.4 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.5-4.1 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 32-45 32-45
Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16—87 18-23 18-23
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 3.5—12.9 10.2-11.1 10.2-11.1
Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66—191 92-100 92-100
Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 3.6-6.0 3.6-6.0
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 25.8 33.6 38.9 15
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.009-0.020 0.013—0.035 0.012-0.015 0.002 0.014 0.024 15
Pool Length (ft) * 14—33 12-34 8.48 35.6 91.4 14
Pool Spacing (ft) * 2.7—7.1 5.1-7.0 45.7 57.3 77.4 14
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 4/7/65/24/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.031/0.13/0.21/2.0/6.1/0.1/8 Gravel Gravel 18/35/45/77/120

Channel length (ft) 780 855 855
Drainage Area (SM) 0.23 1.49 0.23 0.23
Rosgen Classification G5c C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.014 0.005 0.011 0.011
* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to channelization / lack of bed diversity
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 43 2018-MY01
Table 8h. T3 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built

Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 4.2-4.8 14.8 5.0 5.2 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 5.0-5.9 >50 50 38.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4-0.6 1.3-1.8 0.4 0.4 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6-0.7 1.9-2.4 0.6 0.7 1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 1.9-2.6 25 1.9 2.1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 6.9-12.6 9.0-14.0 13.5 13.0 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 >2.5 10 7.2 1
Bank Height Ratio 3.2-3.4 1.0-1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) ** 60 16-26 16-26
Radius of Curvature (ft) ** 16—87 11-14 11-14
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) ** 3.5—12.9 8.6-9.4 8.6-9.4
Meander Wavelength (ft) ** 66—191 43-47 43-47
Meander Width Ratio ** 4.1 3.2-5.2 3.2-5.2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 34.3 36.9 39.5 2
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) ** 0.013—0.035 0.0025 0.006 0.0098 0.014 2
Pool Length (ft) ** 14—33 7-15 38.43 1
Pool Spacing (ft) ** 2.7—7.1 4.2-5.4
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 8/67/25/0/0/0 9/15/58/19/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) N/A Gravel Gravel 0.3/8.2/18/35/72/140

Channel length (ft) 154 129 129
Drainage Area (SM) 0.05 1.49 0.02 0.02
Rosgen Classification G4 C4 C4 C4
Sinuosity 1.0 1.3 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.007 0.005 0.0016 0.005
** :channel affected by former pond
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 44 2018-MY01
Dimension and Substrate
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 206.8 206.7 206.6 206.6 192.5 192.5
Bankfull Width (ft) 12.6 11.7 9.3 11.0 12.6 11.9
Floodprone Width (ft) - - >80 >80 53.3 53.2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.0 1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.9 2.0 1.2 1.1 1.6 1.7
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 11.5 11.5 7.0 7.0 12.5 12.5
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 11.5 11.9 7.0 7.1 12.5 13.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio - - 12.2 17.3 12.8 11.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio - - 8.7 7.2 4.2 4.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio - - 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0
d50 (mm) - - 22 32 38 46
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 192.0 191.9 182.1 182.2 181.7 181.8
Bankfull Width (ft) 12.5 13.0 12.2 13.6 12.0 13.1
Floodprone Width (ft) - - >80 >80 - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.2 1.1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.9 2.1 1.4 1.3 2.4 2.4
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 13.6 13.6 10.6 10.6 14.5 14.5
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 13.6 14.5 10.6 10.1 14.5 14.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio - - 14.1 17.4 - -
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio - - 6.6 5.9 - -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio - - 1.0 1.0 - -
d50 (mm) - - 52 44 - -
Table 9. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Cross-Section 1 (Pool)
Station 13+58, SF
Cross-Section 2 (Riffle)
Station 13+85, SF
Cross-Section 3 (Riffle)
Station 22+44, SF
Cross-Section 4 (Pool)
Station 26+17, SF
Cross-Section 5 (Riffle)
Station 35+12, SF
Cross-Section 6 (Pool)
Station 41+94, SF

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 45 2018-MY01
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 176.0 176.0 175.3 175.2 207.0 206.9
Bankfull Width (ft) 11.6 13.4 13.5 14.5 5.5 5.9
Floodprone Width (ft) >90 >90 - - - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.1 1.0 1.5 1.4 0.7 0.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.7 1.6 2.7 2.7 1.1 1.1
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 12.8 12.8 20.7 20.7 3.7 3.7
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 12.8 13.2 20.7 21.4 3.7 4.0
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 10.4 14.0 - - - -
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 8.0 6.8 - - - -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 - - - -
d50 (mm) 16 29 - - - -
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 207.1 207.1 198.4 198.3 198.4 198.3
Bankfull Width (ft) 6.2 5.5 6.0 5.8 7.5 7.3
Floodprone Width (ft) 38.0 39.4 >60 >60 - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.2 1.2
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 4.8 4.8
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.6 4.8 5.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 17.7 13.7 18.3 17.1 - -
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 6.1 7.2 10.9 10.9 - -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.1 - -
d50 (mm) 18 20 78 75 - -
Cross-Section 10 (Riffle)
Station 96+69, T3
Cross-Section 11 (Riffle)
Station 99+07, T1
Table 9. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Cross-Section 7 (Riffle)
Station 42+58, SF
Cross-Section 8 (Pool)
Station 57+19, SF
Cross-Section 9 (Pool)
Station 57+44, T3
Cross-Section 12 (Pool)
Station 99+25, T1

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 46 2018-MY01
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 188.4 188.4 187.9 187.9 180.9 180.8
Bankfull Width (ft) 11.3 12.7 9.7 11.8 11.8 11.7
Floodprone Width (ft) - - 43.4 46.8 - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.1 1.8 1.9
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 9.3 9.3 5.8 5.8 11.2 11.2
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 9.3 8.7 5.8 5.3 11.2 11.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio - - 16.4 24.0 - -
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio - - 4.5 4.0 - -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio - - 1.0 0.8 - -
d50 (mm) - - 42 16 - -
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 180.7 180.7
Bankfull Width (ft) 8.6 9.9
Floodprone Width (ft) >80 >80
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 0.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2 1.1
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 6.0 6.0
Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 6.0 5.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 12.3 16.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 9.4 8.3
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0
d50 (mm) 45 44
Table 9. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary
Stony Fork Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Cross-Section 13 (Pool)
Station 252+25, T2
Cross-Section 14 (Riffle)
Station 225+97, T2
Cross-Section 15 (Pool)
Station 226+04, T2
Cross-Section 16 (Riffle)
Station 252+25, T2

Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 208.48 206.71
5.0 207.86 11.5
11.5 207.32 11.9
17.2 207.14 11.7
25.8 207.01 ---
32.9 207.04 ---
40.6 207.00 2.0
46.4 206.88 1.0
48.7 206.66 ---
50.4 206.33 ---
51.3 206.12 ---
52.1 205.68 204.7
53.0 205.10
54.1 204.76
55.3 204.75
56.2 205.03
57.3 205.50
58.0 206.05
58.9 206.34
59.5 206.60
60.0 206.77
60.9 206.81
62.7 206.85
63.4 207.06
64.0 207.30
65.9 207.59
69.5 207.47
74.7 207.17
81.2 206.79
85.9 206.53
88.2 206.54
88.3 206.96
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
W / D Ratio:
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.28
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS1
204
205
206
207
208
209
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS1, Pool, SF
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 208.28 206.57
0.0 207.91 7.0
5.0 207.69 7.1
11.0 207.34 11.0
15.4 207.06 207.7
18.3 206.89 79.3
21.6 206.64 1.1
25.8 206.57 0.6
28.5 206.52 17.3
34.0 206.56 7.2
38.3 206.72 0.9
42.4 206.62 205.4
43.8 206.56
45.0 206.14
46.5 205.85
47.0 205.70
47.7 205.59
48.3 205.42
48.8 205.45
49.5 205.47
50.0 205.55
50.4 205.47
51.0 205.69
51.8 205.93
52.5 206.14
53.5 206.46
54.7 206.50
57.4 206.57
60.4 206.48
64.3 206.37
65.8 206.40
67.1 206.74
70.6 206.72
77.3 206.80
83.6 206.59
83.7 207.04
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS2
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.28
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
205
206
206
207
207
208
208
209
209
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS2, Riffle, SF
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 195.49 192.45
-0.1 195.30 12.5
8.9 194.99 13.2
13.0 194.68 11.9
14.5 194.49 194.1
19.6 193.42 53.2
24.6 193.02 1.7
31.1 192.56 1.0
35.3 192.55 11.4
38.1 192.55 4.5
39.4 192.06 1.0
40.8 191.41 190.8
41.5 191.30
42.0 191.27
42.3 190.90
43.5 190.93
44.7 190.76
45.3 190.81
46.2 190.81
47.1 191.15
48.1 191.66
49.4 192.13
49.9 192.31
50.4 192.49
51.7 192.60
55.6 192.63
59.9 192.79
63.2 193.11
68.1 193.83
69.8 194.31
70.9 194.16
70.6 194.52
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS3
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.46
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS3, Riffle, SF
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 195.37 191.92
0.0 194.91 13.6
4.5 194.64 14.5
4.6 194.62 13.0
9.0 194.28 ---
11.7 193.91 ---
17.8 192.96 2.1
21.4 192.50 1.1
24.0 192.41 ---
24.8 192.28 ---
25.4 191.98 ---
26.7 191.35 189.9
27.0 191.13
28.0 190.30
28.7 190.21
29.6 190.03
30.4 189.85
32.2 190.36
33.3 190.72
34.0 191.05
35.1 191.26
37.6 191.73
38.7 191.95
39.7 191.97
44.8 192.17
49.9 192.13
53.2 192.53
56.3 192.72
62.8 192.95
65.9 193.33
65.9 193.32
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS4
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.46
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS4, Pool, SF
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 183.19 182.17
0.1 182.51 10.6
7.2 182.27 10.1
15.4 182.51 13.6
24.2 182.63 183.5
29.2 182.32 80.7
30.4 182.24 1.3
31.2 182.24 0.8
32.2 181.92 17.4
33.3 181.65 5.9
34.2 181.17 1.0
35.4 180.87 180.9
36.7 180.98
37.1 180.89
38.0 180.93
38.9 180.89
39.7 180.87
40.3 181.24
41.3 181.34
42.7 181.83
43.8 182.11
45.1 182.17
49.1 182.16
55.0 182.41
62.4 182.62
69.9 182.41
76.5 182.48
80.7 183.28
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS5
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.46
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
180
181
182
183
184
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS5, Riffle, SF
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 183.40 181.75
3.4 182.65 14.5
9.3 182.31 14.3
11.5 182.05 13.1
15.1 181.98 ---
19.0 181.72 ---
20.6 181.80 2.4
21.2 181.77 1.1
22.0 181.59 ---
22.9 181.21 ---
23.5 180.99 ---
23.9 180.53 179.4
24.5 180.34
25.5 179.40
26.5 179.49
27.5 179.79
29.0 180.15
29.6 180.33
30.7 180.87
31.6 181.10
33.6 181.68
35.9 181.87
38.3 181.88
42.7 181.77
51.1 181.89
57.8 182.32
68.6 182.38
74.2 182.50
77.2 182.58
81.1 183.18
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS6
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.46
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS6, Pool, SF
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 177.93 175.99
6.3 176.61 12.8
12.4 176.25 13.2
21.5 176.07 13.4
28.9 175.97 177.6
34.8 176.20 90.8
37.5 176.23 1.6
38.5 176.10 1.0
39.9 175.81 14.0
41.8 175.03 6.8
42.5 174.77 1.0
43.6 174.41 174.4
44.5 174.41
45.4 174.37
46.5 174.65
47.3 174.71
48.1 174.77
49.5 175.18
51.0 175.46
52.5 175.93
55.6 175.88
62.8 175.86
70.5 176.03
78.2 176.23
85.1 176.55
92.3 176.88
92.4 177.52
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS7
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.83
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
174
175
176
177
178
179
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS7, Riffle, SF
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 176.50 175.21
0.1 175.87 20.7
8.4 175.49 21.4
20.6 175.47 14.5
29.9 175.43 ---
41.2 175.09 ---
42.5 175.17 2.7
43.7 174.97 1.4
45.2 174.46 ---
46.6 174.14 ---
47.9 173.72 ---
49.3 173.04 172.5
50.5 172.66
52.0 172.55
53.3 172.88
54.2 173.44
55.0 174.02
56.0 174.60
57.2 174.98
58.4 175.26
59.2 175.43
61.3 175.34
68.6 175.58
75.6 175.99
81.1 176.63
81.0 177.63
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS8
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.83
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS8, Pool, SF
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 210.75 206.94
0.1 210.20 3.7
5.5 209.95 4.0
8.5 209.87 5.9
9.9 209.68 ---
12.3 208.91 ---
15.4 208.29 1.1
18.8 207.44 0.6
21.6 207.25 ---
24.1 207.13 ---
25.5 207.07 ---
26.3 206.88 205.9
26.8 206.78
27.2 206.55
27.8 205.94
28.5 205.89
29.2 205.88
30.0 205.99
30.9 206.39
31.2 206.71
31.5 206.87
32.4 207.01
33.3 207.03
35.2 207.02
38.0 206.99
43.1 207.16
47.4 207.52
49.8 207.94
53.8 208.16
57.1 208.61
60.7 208.80
60.7 209.38
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS9
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.04
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS9, Pool, T3
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 209.79 207.10
0.2 209.13 2.2
2.6 208.98 2.1
4.5 208.84 5.5
7.6 208.64 207.8
13.0 208.26 39.4
19.1 207.94 0.7
24.8 207.65 0.4
29.5 207.45 13.7
33.8 207.41 7.2
37.8 207.35 0.9
40.6 207.30 206.4
41.3 207.22
41.7 207.15
42.8 206.76
43.2 206.71
43.7 206.44
44.2 206.47
44.7 206.56
45.4 206.58
45.9 206.71
46.7 206.83
47.3 207.07
48.0 206.97
49.7 206.93
52.0 207.04
54.5 207.13
57.6 207.34
63.2 207.89
69.7 208.20
72.2 208.30
72.0 209.07
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS10
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.04
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
206
207
208
209
210
211
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS10, Riffle, T3
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 199.19 198.27
0.2 198.66 2.0
5.2 198.58 2.6
10.9 198.73 5.8
16.0 198.59 199.0
21.4 198.52 63.7
28.4 198.31 0.7
33.8 198.39 0.3
35.3 198.38 17.1
36.7 198.10 10.9
37.4 198.17 1.1
38.1 198.00 197.5
38.4 197.62
39.2 197.53
39.7 197.72
40.3 197.72
40.8 197.99
41.6 198.19
42.4 198.33
43.0 198.47
45.2 198.48
48.7 198.32
53.8 198.61
58.8 198.65
66.4 199.22
69.7 199.59
72.4 199.43
72.5 199.90
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS11
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.02
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
197
198
198
199
199
200
200
201
201
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS11, Riffle, T1
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 199.27 198.32
-0.1 198.87 4.8
4.8 198.77 5.5
11.8 198.69 7.3
19.1 198.51 ---
26.3 198.47 ---
32.9 198.50 1.2
37.2 198.46 0.7
39.2 198.37 ---
40.7 198.35 ---
41.3 198.39 ---
42.0 198.19 197.1
42.9 197.96
43.3 197.94
44.0 197.60
44.8 197.40
45.3 197.22
46.2 197.10
47.0 197.25
47.5 197.63
47.9 197.78
48.4 198.13
49.3 198.46
50.7 198.45
52.4 198.58
55.0 198.82
57.1 199.29
61.0 199.52
65.4 199.67
71.3 199.71
75.2 200.03
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS12
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.02
Date:11/8/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
196
197
198
199
200
201
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS12, Pool, T1
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 190.29 188.43
0.1 189.66 9.3
6.6 189.04 8.7
17.1 188.41 12.7
27.5 188.47 ---
33.5 188.27 ---
34.5 188.48 1.4
35.3 188.17 0.7
36.5 187.81 ---
38.0 187.40 ---
38.9 187.41 ---
40.0 187.39 187.0
40.8 187.26
41.5 187.10
41.9 187.07
42.4 187.04
42.9 187.20
43.4 187.45
43.8 187.68
45.5 188.35
46.9 188.40
49.5 188.59
52.7 188.98
57.6 189.61
62.4 189.98
62.5 190.62
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS13
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.14
Date:11/11/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
186
187
188
189
190
191
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS13, Pool, T2
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 190.47 187.94
4.5 189.10 5.8
6.8 189.24 5.3
10.0 188.62 11.8
15.6 188.49 189.0
23.3 188.22 46.8
30.1 188.09 1.1
32.0 187.84 0.5
33.3 187.86 24.0
34.4 187.75 4.0
35.4 187.43 0.8
36.1 187.02 186.9
36.7 186.99
37.1 187.04
37.9 186.88
38.6 186.87
39.1 186.91
39.4 187.02
39.7 187.30
40.6 187.32
41.8 187.77
42.1 187.94
42.7 187.92
43.6 188.01
44.3 188.19
46.8 188.32
50.4 188.38
53.3 188.81
56.5 189.30
60.8 189.49
62.4 189.80
62.5 190.64
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS14
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.14
Date:11/11/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS14, Riffle, T2
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 183.66 180.82
4.6 182.28 11.2
11.7 181.70 11.8
18.4 181.60 11.7
27.2 181.22 ---
33.2 180.95 ---
36.2 180.86 1.9
37.4 180.80 1.0
38.4 180.58 ---
39.2 180.39 ---
40.8 180.06 ---
41.6 179.76 179.0
42.5 179.58
43.2 179.62
43.9 179.36
45.0 179.07
45.5 178.98
46.2 178.96
46.7 178.97
47.5 180.10
47.9 180.29
49.0 180.94
49.4 181.19
50.9 181.20
53.5 181.26
55.0 181.66
56.8 181.84
62.4 181.96
69.8 181.90
76.6 181.90
76.7 182.57
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS15
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.22
Date:11/11/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS15, Pool, T2
Bankfull MY00 MY01
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 183.72 180.74
4.5 182.29 6.0
7.5 181.97 5.8
12.6 181.45 9.9
19.0 181.22 181.8
24.7 181.13 81.6
29.7 180.89 1.1
33.8 180.90 0.6
34.6 180.85 16.3
35.5 180.64 8.3
36.5 180.29 1.0
37.1 180.19 179.7
37.4 180.03
38.1 179.73
39.0 179.72
39.8 179.75
40.6 179.65
41.3 179.72
41.8 179.94
42.7 180.30
43.6 180.61
44.1 180.76
45.1 180.69
47.6 180.58
49.4 180.56
52.1 180.73
55.1 181.10
58.5 181.23
60.0 181.42
64.7 181.45
71.7 181.45
78.8 181.49
90.4 181.41
Thalweg Elevation:
Total Cross-Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull Area
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Date:11/11/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
Drainage Area (sq mi):0.22
River Basin:Neuse River
Site:Stony Fork
XS ID XS16
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Stony Fork, XS16, Riffle, T2
Bankfull Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 7
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 3
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 3
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 2
Very Fine 2 - 4
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 2
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 8
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 3
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 11
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 11
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 11
Very Coarse 45 - 64 14
Small 64 - 90 C 14
Small 90 - 128 O 10
Large 128 - 180 B 1
Large 180 - 256 L 1
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 6.3 mean 22.6 silt/clay 7%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 19 dispersion 3.8 sand 8%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 32 skewness -0.14 gravel 60%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 50 cobble 24%
Total 102 D84 81 boulder 0%
D95 110 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 1 Riffle - MY-01
Size (mm) Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 2 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 3
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 4
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 3
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 2
Very Fine 2 - 4 8
Fine 4 - 5.7 G
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 2
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 4
Medium 11.3 - 16 V
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 6
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 11
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 8
Very Coarse 45 - 64 16
Small 64 - 90 C 20
Small 90 - 128 O 11
Large 128 - 180 B 6
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 3 mean 16.5 silt/clay 3%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 26 dispersion 8.7 sand 9%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 46 skewness -0.37 gravel 53%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 65 cobble 36%
Total 104 D84 91 boulder 0%
D95 130 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 3 Riffle - MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 3 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 1
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 4
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 1
Very Fine 2 - 4 1
Fine 4 - 5.7 G
Fine 5.7 - 8 R
Medium 8 - 11.3 A
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 6
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 10
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 12
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 18
Very Coarse 45 - 64 20
Small 64 - 90 C 20
Small 90 - 128 O 9
Large 128 - 180 B 3
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 18 mean 38.7 silt/clay 1%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 33 dispersion 2.2 sand 6%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 44 skewness -0.07 gravel 63%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 59 cobble 30%
Total 106 D84 83 boulder 0%
D95 120 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 5 Riffle - MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 5 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 1
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 1
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 3
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 1
Very Fine 2 - 4 8
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 10
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 5
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 10
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 12
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 8
Very Coarse 45 - 64 15
Small 64 - 90 C 14
Small 90 - 128 O 5
Large 128 - 180 B 4
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B 1
Small 362 - 512 L D16 8 mean 25.0 silt/clay 1%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 18 dispersion 3.2 sand 6%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 29 skewness -0.07 gravel 69%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 49 cobble 23%
Total 100 D84 78 boulder 1%
D95 130 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 7 Riffle -MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 7 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 7
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 1
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N 3
Coarse .50 - 1 D 3
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 5
Very Fine 2 - 4 5
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 3
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 10
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 5
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 4
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 7
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 10
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 12
Very Coarse 45 - 64 16
Small 64 - 90 C 9
Small 90 - 128 O 2
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 1.2 mean 8.3 silt/clay 7%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 7.6 dispersion 9.8 sand 13%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 20 skewness -0.30 gravel 70%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 35 cobble 11%
Total 103 D84 57 boulder 0%
D95 80 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 10 Riffle - MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 10 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 9
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N 1
Coarse .50 - 1 D
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S
Very Fine 2 - 4
Fine 4 - 5.7 G
Fine 5.7 - 8 R
Medium 8 - 11.3 A
Medium 11.3 - 16 V
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 9
Very Coarse 45 - 64 18
Small 64 - 90 C 25
Small 90 - 128 O 25
Large 128 - 180 B 12
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 39 mean 68.4 silt/clay 9%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 60 dispersion 1.8 sand 2%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 75 skewness -0.06 gravel 27%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 93 cobble 62%
Total 100 D84 120 boulder 0%
D95 160 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 11 Riffle -MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 11 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N 17
Coarse .50 - 1 D 17
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 12
Very Fine 2 - 4 2
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 1
Medium 8 - 11.3 A
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 1
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 2
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 1
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 6
Very Coarse 45 - 64 9
Small 64 - 90 C 14
Small 90 - 128 O 14
Large 128 - 180 B 5
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.49 mean 6.9 silt/clay 0%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 1.1 dispersion 19.3 sand 45%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 16 skewness -0.24 gravel 23%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 58 cobble 32%
Total 102 D84 96 boulder 0%
D95 130 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 14 Riffle - MY-01
TypeSize Distribution
Note:
Size (mm)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 14 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 1
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 3
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 4
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 2
Very Fine 2 - 4 7
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 1
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 6
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 3
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 6
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 4
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 13
Very Coarse 45 - 64 24
Small 64 - 90 C 16
Small 90 - 128 O 7
Large 128 - 180 B 3
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 3.7 mean 17.1 silt/clay 1%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 25 dispersion 6.8 sand 9%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 44 skewness -0.36 gravel 64%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 56 cobble 26%
Total 101 D84 79 boulder 0%
D95 120 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 16 Riffle - MY-01
Size (mm) Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size - Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Stony Fork
XS 16 Riffle
As Built
MY01
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 71 2018-MY01

APPENDIX E

Hydrologic Data

0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
178
179
180
181
182
8-May-1917-May-1926-May-194-Jun-1913-Jun-1922-Jun-191-Jul-1910-Jul-1919-Jul-1928-Jul-196-Aug-1915-Aug-1924-Aug-192-Sep-1911-Sep-1920-Sep-1929-Sep-198-Oct-1917-Oct-1926-Oct-194-Nov-1913-Nov-1922-Nov-191-Dec-1910-Dec-1919-Dec-1928-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Stream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Stony Fork Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Stream Gauge SF Main
Rainfall Sensor Depth Stream Bed Elevation Stream Stage Elevation Bankfull Elevation
Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 73 2018-MY01
Table 10. Verification of Stream Flow
Stony Fork Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Gauge Camera
Reach Dates Achieving
Maximum
Consecutive
Days
Dates Achieving
Maximum
Consecutive
Days
T1 Aug. 14 – Oct. 12 60 Camera obscured by vegetation for
most of the year 5
T1A May 9 – Nov. 6 182 Sept. 21 – Nov. 5 46
T2 Aug. 14 – Nov. 6 85 Aug. 14 – Nov. 5 84
T3 May 31 – June 29,
Aug. 14 – Oct. 7 55 May 8 – July 2 55

Table 11. Stream Flow Criteria Attainment
Cedar Branch Restoration Site, DMS Project #97085
Greater than 30 Days of Flow/Max Consecutive Days
Reach MY-01
2019
MY-02
2019
MY-03
2020
MY-04
2021
MY-05
2022
MY-06
2023
MY-07
2024
T1
(Gauge) Yes/60
T1
(Camera) No/5*
T1A
(Gauge) Yes/182
T1A
(Camera) Yes/46
T2
(Gauge) Yes/85
T2
(Camera) Yes/84
T3
(Gauge) Yes/55
T3
(Camera) Yes/55
*Camera obscured for much of the year

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 74 2018-MY01
Stream Flow Example Photos
T1 – 7/25/2019 T1 – 11/5/2019

T1A – 9/13/2019 T1A – 10/24/2019

T2 – 8/30/2019 T2 – 10/16/2019

Stony Fork Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 97085 75 2018-MY01

T3 – 5/9/2019 T3 – 6/30/2019

0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
203
204
205
8-May-1917-May-1926-May-194-Jun-1913-Jun-1922-Jun-191-Jul-1910-Jul-1919-Jul-1928-Jul-196-Aug-1915-Aug-1924-Aug-192-Sep-1911-Sep-1920-Sep-1929-Sep-198-Oct-1917-Oct-1926-Oct-194-Nov-1913-Nov-1922-Nov-191-Dec-1910-Dec-1919-Dec-1928-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Stream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Stony Fork Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T1 Stream Flow Gauge
Rainfall Sensor Elevation Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera)Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation
60 Days
Camera obscured
Camera
installed
July 25, 2019
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
201
202
203
204
8-May-1917-May-1926-May-194-Jun-1913-Jun-1922-Jun-191-Jul-1910-Jul-1919-Jul-1928-Jul-196-Aug-1915-Aug-1924-Aug-192-Sep-1911-Sep-1920-Sep-1929-Sep-198-Oct-1917-Oct-1926-Oct-194-Nov-1913-Nov-1922-Nov-191-Dec-1910-Dec-1919-Dec-1928-Dec-19RainfallStream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Stony Fork Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T1-A Stream Flow Gauge
Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Sensor Depth Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera)
182 Days
Camera obscured Camera malfunction
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
187
188
189
190
8-May-1917-May-1926-May-194-Jun-1913-Jun-1922-Jun-191-Jul-1910-Jul-1919-Jul-1928-Jul-196-Aug-1915-Aug-1924-Aug-192-Sep-1911-Sep-1920-Sep-1929-Sep-198-Oct-1917-Oct-1926-Oct-194-Nov-1913-Nov-1922-Nov-191-Dec-1910-Dec-1919-Dec-1928-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Stream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Stony Fork Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T2 Stream Flow Gauge
Rainfall Sensor Depth Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Bankfull Elevation Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera)
85 Days
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
205
206
207
208
209
8-May-1917-May-1926-May-194-Jun-1913-Jun-1922-Jun-191-Jul-1910-Jul-1919-Jul-1928-Jul-196-Aug-1915-Aug-1924-Aug-192-Sep-1911-Sep-1920-Sep-1929-Sep-198-Oct-1917-Oct-1926-Oct-194-Nov-1913-Nov-1922-Nov-191-Dec-1910-Dec-1919-Dec-1928-Dec-19RainfallStream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Stony Fork Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T3 Stream Flow Gauge
Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Bankfull Elevation Sensor Depth Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera)
55 Days30 Days
Camera malfunction