20150414 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_2019_20200227

ID#* 20150414 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/27/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/27/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream Pr Wetlands r- Buffer r` Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Harry Tsomides
Project Information
...................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20150414
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Sandy Bridge Farm
County: Rutherford
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Sandy Bridge_96920_MY03_2019.pdf 10.89MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Harry Tsomides
Signature:*
���•t t% r.'srrr���l

Monitoring Report MY03

Sandy Bridge Restoration Site
DMS Contract 6400
DMS Project Number 96920

DWR #: 15-0414
USACE Action ID: 201500827
Rutherford County, North Carolina

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

Monitoring Data Collected: 2019
Date Submitted: December 2019
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 2019-MY03

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]

December 2019

E NGINEERS • S CIENTISTS • S URVEYORS • C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGERS
4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
February 6, 2020

Mr. Harry Tsomides
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr. #102
Asheville, NC 28801

Re: Response to Sandy Bridge Farm MY03 Report Comments

Dear Mr. Tsomides,

KCI has reviewed the comments prepared by the DMS for the Sandy Bridge Farm MY03 Report
and has prepared the following responses:

1. The addition of gauges (3) and vegetation plots (2) in 2018 are noted; please clarify in the
report why these features were added to the project during MY2.
KCI Response: These additional monitoring components were installed in response to a
request from the IRT made after a site visit on December 6, 2017. A note stating this has
been added to the report.

2. Cross section 4 shows repeated values on the vertical scale. Please correct.
KCI Response: This issue has been corrected.

3. Please indicate whether KCI (during downstream repairs) removed the multiple loose
tubular steel gates around the relict beaver dam near the upstream end of the project (see
MY02 report comment).
KCI Response: These were removed during the repair of the non-project stream in
November 2019.

4. Wetland Reestablishment feature shape does not match the creditable acreage reported in
the asset table. Please provide DMS with a feature for the Wetland Reestablishment that
accurately characterizes the creditable assets, or provide further clarification.
KCI Response: It appears that the shape provided did not exclude the open water area of
the BMP. An updated shapefile that accurately characterizes the assets on site has been
provided.

5. The digital data provided does not include a CVS tool submission.
KCI Response: Because neither the RFP or the Mitigation Plan stipulate the use of CVS
protocol for vegetation data collection, KCI does not use it for this project. All vegetation
data collected is included in the Excel sheet named “Sandy Bridge Vegetation MY-03”
that is included with the digital deliverables.

6. Visual data folder did not include excel sheets for visual assessment tables.
KCI Response: These have been added to the digital deliverable.

Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these
responses.

Sincerely,
Adam Spiller
Project Manager
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 2019-MY03
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1
MONITORING RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 2
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................. 5
Figure 2. Site Asset Map ............................................................................................................................... 6

Appendix A – Background Tables
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 8
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History .......................................................................................... 9
Table 3. Project Contacts ............................................................................................................................ 10
Table 4. Project Information ....................................................................................................................... 11

Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data
CCPV .......................................................................................................................................................... 14
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment ........................................................................ 15
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment ................................................................................................ 16
Photo Reference Points ............................................................................................................................... 17
Vegetation Plot Photos ................................................................................................................................ 19
Repair Area Photos ..................................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix C – Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species ...................................................................... 25

Appendix D – Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary ................................................................................................... 28
Table 9. Cross-section Morphology Data Table ......................................................................................... 29
Cross-section Plots ...................................................................................................................................... 30
Pebble Counts ............................................................................................................................................. 34

Appendix E – Hydrologic Data
30-70 Percentile Graph ............................................................................................................................... 37
Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events .................................................................................................. 38
Precipitation and Water Level Plots ............................................................................................................ 40
Table 11. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment ..................................................................................... 53

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 1 2019-MY03

PROJECT SUMMARY
The Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site (SBFRS) was completed in March 2017 and restored a
total of 6.85 acres of riparian wetland (1.29 acres of wetland rehabilitation and 5.56 acres of
wetland reestablishment) and 1,626 linear feet of stream. The SBFRS is a riparian system located
in the Broad River Basin (03050105 8-digit cataloging unit) in Rutherford County, North
Carolina that had been substantially modified to maximize the use of the area for grazing. The
completed project will restore impacted agricultural lands to a functioning stream and wetland
ecosystem with enhanced water quality, restored hydrology, and improved fish and wildlife
habitat.

The SBFRS is protected by a 9.5 acre permanent conservation easement, held by the State of
North Carolina. The site is located off of Rock Road, approximately 3 miles north of
Rutherfordton, North Carolina. The project site is bounded by interspersed pastureland and
forested land to the east, agricultural land and Rock Road to the north-northwest, and Catheys
Creek to the southwest.

The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program’s (NCEEP) publication in 2009 identified
HUC 03050105070020 (Catheys Creek) as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW). The goals and
priorities for SBRFS are based on the information presented in the Broad River Basin Restoration
Priorities: to restore wetland and stream functions, to maintain and enhance water quality, to
restore hydrology, and to improve fish and wildlife habitat (NCEEP 2009). The project goals,
which reflect those from the approved Mitigation Plan, are in line with the following basin
priorities:
- Reduce sources of sediment and nutrients by restoring riparian buffer vegetation,
excluding livestock, and restoring natural geomorphology.
- Prioritize project implementation in the Catheys Creek local watershed planning area.

The goals for the project are to:
- Restore a channelized stream to a meandering C-type channel with a floodplain.
- Buffer and reduce sediment impacts to the project stream.
- Restore a Piedmont Alluvial Forest Community.
- Restore a wetland hydroperiod to drained and livestock-impacted land.

The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives:
- Relocate a channelized stream to its historic landscape position.
- Install an appropriately-sized channel cross-section.
- Install bedform diversity with pools, riffles, and habitat structures.
- Demarcate the project easement boundaries and fence out livestock.
- Plant the site with native trees and shrubs and an herbaceous seed mix that supports the
development of a Piedmont Alluvial Forest.
- Fill field ditches and redevelop wetland microtopography to slow the flow of surface and
subsurface drainage.

To restore the site, select ditches across the site were modified or filled and incoming surface
inputs and seeps were integrated to create a stream/wetland complex. Additionally, Tributary 1 to
Catheys Creek was improved with Priority 1 stream restoration to re-meander the stream and
elevate the groundwater table. The entire site was planted as a Piedmont Alluvial Forest
community (Schafale 2012). The site was constructed as designed with no modification from the
design plan.

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 2 2019-MY03

The majority of monitoring components were installed in March 2017. Nine groundwater
monitoring wells were installed to evaluate the attainment of jurisdictional wetland hydrology. A
stream gauge was installed on Tributary 1 to Catheys Creek to record the occurrence of bankfull
events. To determine the success of the planted mitigation areas, eight 10 m x 10 m permanent
vegetation monitoring plots were established. The location of the planted stems relative to the
origin within these plots, as well as the species, was recorded and planted stems were grouped
into size categories (0-10 cm, 10-50 cm, 50-100 cm, >137 cm). Any volunteers found within the
plots were also grouped into size categories by species, but separate from the planted stems. Six
permanent photo reference points were established and will be taken annually. Four permanent
cross-sections (two sets of coupled riffles and pools) were also established and a detailed
longitudinal profile of the stream was taken. Wolman pebble counts were performed at both 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 by the end of each monitoring year. During a site
visit with the IRT on December 6, 2017, it was requested that KCI install three additional
groundwater monitoring wells and two additional vegetation plots. On March 30, 2018 the three
additional groundwater monitoring wells were installed along the area of the filled, pre-
construction stream channel. On September 10, 2018, the two additional vegetation plots were
installed near the southern end of the site.

Vegetative success criteria for the site is 320 woody stems/acre after three years, 260 woody
stems/acre after five years, and 210 woody stems/acre after seven years. The baseline monitoring
counted an average of 647 woody stems/acre. To meet the hydrologic success criteria, the upper
12 inches of the soil profile must have continuously saturated or inundated conditions for at least
10% of the growing season during normal weather conditions. The soil survey for Rutherford
County estimates the growing season begins April 4 and ends November 6 (217 days), meaning
the water table must be within 12 inches of the surface for at least 22 consecutive days during the
growing season. A minimum of two bankfull events must also be recorded during the monitoring
period. Bank height ratios should not exceed 1.2 and the entrenchment ratios should be 2.2 or
greater. Visual assessments will also be used to identify problem areas.

MONITORING RESULTS
The site was planted in March 2017 with tree tube protection installed around many of the planted
stems. The third-year monitoring was conducted July 11, 2019. The site averaged 526 planted
stems/acre across all 10 plots. Six of the 10 plots had greater than 320 planted stems/acre, with
Plots 1, 6, 7, and 8 not achieving the success criteria. Including volunteers, the site averaged 703
total stems/acre. The vegetation on the site was significantly impacted by beavers during the
second monitoring year. Although there is still a good quantity of woody stems, many of the
previously large and healthy stems have been chewed down to a smaller size or killed by beaver
activity. Even with the beaver impacts, in general, the site is well vegetated, with widespread
herbaceous coverage and many healthy planted stems. KCI is planning a supplemental planting
before the beginning of the next growing season in areas where the herbaceous vegetation is
outcompeting the planted woody stems and where beaver damage is most severe.

Daily rainfall data were obtained from the NC State Climate Office for a local weather station in
Rutherfordton, NC. In 2019 the months of February, April, June, July, September, and October
experienced above average rainfall, while January, May, and August experienced average
rainfall. The months of March and November experienced below average rainfall for the site.
Overall, the area experienced above average rainfall during the 2019 growing season. During the
site’s third growing season, all 12 of the groundwater monitoring wells had continuous saturation
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 3 2019-MY03
within 12 inches of the ground surface for 10% (22 days) or more of the 217 day growing season
(April 4 to November 6).
The stream gauge has recorded multiple bankfull events in each year since construction, including
10 bankfull events in 2019. This large number of bankfull events is the desired outcome for this
project. A component of the stream design was to provide regular recharging of the riparian
wetlands from overbank stream flows. In June 2018, several large beaver dams were discovered
towards the lower half of the stream. These dams were removed in early August 2018. KCI has
been continuously monitoring for further signs of beaver activity, trapping beavers on-site and
removing dams when they are found. Additional dams were removed in November 2018, June
2019, August 2019, and October 2019. See Appendix B and Appendix E for more information.
The third-year cross-section survey showed aggradation in the pool cross-sections (XS2 and 4) as
well as aggradation on the banks of Cross-section 1. The cross-section survey took place only a
few days after several large beaver dams had been removed. The backwater from these dams had
deposited sediment throughout the project, especially in the pools. At the time the cross-sections
were surveyed, this sediment had not had a chance to wash through the system. A visual
inspection of the site in November 2019 revealed that almost all of this sediment had washed
through and it is anticipated that next year’s cross-section survey will show the cross-sections
closer to their baseline conditions. A mid-channel bar reported in Cross-section 2 last year is no
longer present. This bar had formed as a result of backwater from beaver activity and it was
anticipated that once the dams were removed, it would wash out, which is what happened.
The monitored cross-section data have been calculated by adjusting the bankfull elevation to
maintain the baseline bankfull area for each cross-section. A total cross-sectional metric has been
added to the cross-section data to indicate the cross-sectional area below the baseline bankfull
elevation. In instances where there has been some lateral aggradation and narrowing (XS1) the
data show the cross-section having a significantly higher bankfull width and higher width/depth
ratio as compared to previous years. The comparison of cross-section plots between monitoring
events illustrates that this change does not indicate a problematic change in cross-section
condition. Future monitoring will show how the channel has adjusted to the varying backwater
conditions and how the stream has processed the sediment from these events.
The right bank of the stream that flows along the easement’s southern boundary has been
experiencing significant erosion due to several areas of obstruction in the center of this channel
that are diverting water into the banks. Although this stream is not part of the project, and is
located outside of the easement bounds, the erosion on the right bank has encroached into the
easement. In November 2019, KCI repaired and stabilize this area. This work involved removing
the mid-channel obstructions and sloping back the eroding bank. This area will receive live-stake
planting in early 2020. During this work, several farm gates that had become buried in the stream
bank were removed and a small swale was dug to direct water into the site that had been ponding
in fields adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. This swale was designed to drain inundated
areas that had formed off site and dissipate the water throughout the wetlands on-site. See
Appendix B for more information.
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 4 2019-MY03

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=18
877169&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=18
877169&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. 

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 5 2019-MY03

BMP
Tributary 2CatheysCree
k
Source: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2015.
SITE ASSET MAPSANDY B RIDG E FA RM RESTORATIO N SITERUTHERFORD CO UNTY, NC ±0 200100Feet
Conservation Easement
Wetland Re-establishment (5.56 ac / 5.56 credits)
Wetland Rehabilitation-filled ditches (0.70 ac / 0.70 credits)
Wetland Rehabilitation (0.59 ac / 0.39 credits)
T1 - Priority 1 Restoration (1626 lf / 1,626 credits)
Other Streams
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 7 2019-MY03

APPENDIX A

Background Tables

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 8 2019-MY03

R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
*=wetland rehabilitation associated with filled ditches

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920
Mitigation Credits
Stream Riparian
Wetland
Non-riparian
Wetland Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE
Credits 1,626 6.65
Project Components
Project
Component
-or-
Reach ID
Stationing/
Location
Existing
Footage/
Acreage
Approach
(PI, PII
etc.)
Restoration -or-
Restoration
Equivalent
Restoration
Footage/
Acreage
Mitigation
Ratio Credits
Tributary 1 10+00 to
26+26 1,470 lf PI Restoration 1,626 lf 1:1 1,626
Wetland
Reestablishment Restoration 5.56 ac 1:1 5.56
Wetland
Rehabilitation* 0.79 ac Restoration 0.70 ac 1:1 0.70
Wetland
Rehabilitation 0.59 ac Restoration 0.59 ac 1.5:1 0.39
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream
(linear
feet)
Riparian Wetlands
(Acres)
Non-Riparian
Wetlands (Acres)
Buffer
(square feet) Upland (Acres)
Riverine Non-
Riverine
Restoration 1,626 lf
Reestablishment 5.56 ac
Rehabilitation 1.29 ac
Enhancement
Creation
Preservation
High Quality
Preservation
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 9 2019-MY03

Activity or Report Data Collection Complete
Actual Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan June 2016
Final Design - Construction Plans June 2016
Construction Grading Completed Aug 29, 2016
Planting Completed March 11, 2017
Baseline Monitoring/Report March 2017 April 2017
Vegetation Monitoring March 21, 2017
Stream Survey March 20, 2017
Year 1 Monitoring November 2017 December 2017
Vegetation Monitoring October 26, 2017
Stream Survey November 6, 2017
Additional Groundwater Gauges Installed March 30, 2018
Beaver Dam Removal August 20, 2018
Additional Vegetation Plots Installed September 10, 2018
Beaver Dam Removal November 6, 2018
Year 2 Monitoring November 2018 December 2018
Vegetation Monitoring September 10, 2018
Stream Survey XS1 and 2: June 28, 2018
XS3 and 4: September 11, 2018
Beaver Dam Removal June 14, 2019
Beaver Dam Removal August 8, 2019
Beaver Dam Removal October 17, 2019
Non-project Reach Repair November 21, 2019
Year 3 Monitoring November 2019 December 2019
Vegetation Monitoring July 11, 2019
Stream Survey June 19, 2019
Table 2. Project Activity & Reporting History
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Sites, DMS Project #96920

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 10 2019-MY03

Table 3. Project Contacts
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Sites, DMS Project #96920
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 KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction
4505 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Planting Contractor Conservation Services Inc.
1620 N. Delphine Ave.
Waynesboro, VA 22980
Contact: Mr. David Coleman
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]

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 11 2019-MY03

Table 4. Project Information
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920
Project Name Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
County Rutherford County
Project Area (acres) 9.45 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.) 35.407997° N, -81.937000° W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
River Basin Broad
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03050105 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03050105070020
DWQ Sub-basin 9-41-13-(0.5)
Project Drainage Area (acres) 837 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage
of Impervious Area 8%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Mixed Hardwoods/Conifers 42% (350.0 ac), Managed Herbaceous Cover 39%
(329.3 ac), Mountain Conifers 12% (99.5 ac), Mixed Shrubland 5% (43.5 ac), Low
Intensity Developed 1% (11.0 ac)
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters T1
Length of reach (linear feet) 1,470 lf
Valley classification Valley Type VIII
Drainage area (acres) 837 acres
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification WS-V (Water Supply – upstream)
Morphological Description (stream type) Ditched channel
Evolutionary trend Channelized
Mapped Soil Series Wehadkee-Chewacla Association
Drainage class Poorly drained; Somewhat poorly drained
Soil Hydric status Drained hydric
Slope 0-1%
FEMA classification Zone AE
Existing vegetation community N/A (Pasture)
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation 5%
Existing Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.59 acres (Wetland Rehabilitation Area)
Wetland Type Headwater Seep
Mapped Soil Series Wehadkee-Chewacla Association
Drainage class Poorly drained; Somewhat poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status Drained Hydric
Source of Hydrology Seepage/ Precipitation
Hydrologic Impairment Ditching and Grazing
Existing vegetation community Emergent Wetland
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation 5%

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 12 2019-MY03

Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States – Section
404 Yes DWR# 15-0414
USACE Action ID# 201500827
Jurisdictional
Determination
Waters of the United States – Section
401 Yes DWR# 15-0414
USACE Action ID# 201500827
Jurisdictional
Determination
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 N/A N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 13 2019-MY03

APPENDIX B

Visual Assessment Data

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 15 2019-MY03  Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability AssessmentSandy Bridge Farm Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project#96920Reach IDReach 1Assessed Length 16261. Bed 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units)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 Condition1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 20 20 100%3. Meander Pool Condition1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 20 20 100%2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)20 20 100%4.Thalweg Position1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 20 20 100%2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 20 20 100%2. Bank 1. Scoured/ErodingBank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion0 0 100%2. UndercutBanks 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 WastingBank slumping, calving, or collapse0 0 100%0 0 100%3. Engineered Structures1. Overall IntegrityStructures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 8 8 100%2. Grade ControlGrade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100%2a. PipingStructures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 5 5 100%3. Bank ProtectionBank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 6 6 100%4. HabitatPool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.5 5 100%TotalsAmount of Unstable Footage% Stable, Performing as IntendedMajor Channel CategoryChannel Sub-Category MetricNumber Stable, Performing as IntendedTotal Number in As-builtNumber of Unstable Segments
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 16 2019-MY03   Table 6 Vegetation Condition AssessmentSandy Bridge Farm Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project# 96920Planted Acreage 9.5Vegetation Category DefinitionsMapping Threshold CCPV DepictionNumber of PolygonsCombined Acreage% of Planted Acreage1. Bare AreasVery limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.1 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%2. Low Stem Density AreasWoody 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%00.000.0%3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or VigorAreas 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%00.000.0%Easement Acreage 9.5Vegetation Category DefinitionsMapping Threshold CCPV DepictionNumber of PolygonsCombined Acreage% of Easement Acreage4. Invasive Areas of ConcernAreas 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 AreasAreas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).none Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0%TotalCumulative Total
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 17 2019-MY03

Photo Reference Photos

PP1 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP1 – MY-03 – 11/16/19

PP2 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP2 – MY-03 – 11/16/19

PP3 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP3 – MY-03 – 11/16/19
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 18 2019-MY03

PP4 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP4 – MY-03 – 11/16/19

PP5– MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP5– MY-03 – 11/16/19

PP6– MY-00 – 3/21/17 PP6– MY-03 – 11/16/19

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 19 2019-MY03

Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos

Vegetation Plot 1 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 1 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 2 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 2 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 3 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 3 – MY-03 – 7/11/19
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 20 2019-MY03

Vegetation Plot 4 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 4 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 5 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 5 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 6 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 6 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 21 2019-MY03

Vegetation Plot 7 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 7 – MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 8 – MY-00 – 3/21/17 Vegetation Plot 8 - MY-03 – 7/11/19

Vegetation Plot 9– MY-02 – 9/10/18 Vegetation Plot 9 - MY-03 – 7/11/19

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 22 2019-MY03

Vegetation Plot 10– MY-02 – 9/10/18 Vegetation Plot 10 - MY-03 – 7/11/19

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 23 2019-MY03

Repair Area Photos

Photo 1. Eroding stream bank that was encroaching into easement before repair, 8/29/2018

Photo 2. Stream bank after repair, 11/21/2019 

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 24 2019-MY03

APPENDIX C

Vegetation Plot Data
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 25 2019-MY03 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted TotalAmerican Elm (Ulmus americana)22 1 22Black Walnut (Juglans nigra)Black Willow (Salix nigra)2Box Elder (Acer negundo)Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) 3 3 1 146Eastern Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) 22 23 11 11 11Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)22Oak (Quercus sp.)Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) 1 1Pin Oak (Quercus palustris)Red Chokeberry (Aronia arbutifolia)Red Maple (Acer rubrum) 1 1 4 4 1 1River Birch (Betula nigra) 11 25 44 33 11Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum) 2 2 7 7 5 7 1 1Smooth Sumac (Rhus glabra)Sugarberry (Celtis laevigata)11 22Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii) 1 1Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 1 2 1 1Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) 2 2 1 1 2 2Witch Hazel (Hamamelis virginiana)Unknown6 6 13 19 8 8 10 10 9 13 7 7 6 8 6 63367334445553344243 243 526 769 324 324 405 405 364 526 283 283 243 324 243 243Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920Table 7. Stem Count by Plot and SpeciesCurrent Plot Data (MY03 2018)11size (ACRES)0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.02511size (ares)Species countStems per ACRE1Stem count111SpeciesPlot 06 Plot 07 Plot 08Plot 01 Plot 02 Plot 03 Plot 04 Plot 05
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 26 2019-MY03 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted TotalAmerican Elm (Ulmus americana) 22676677Black Walnut (Juglans nigra)11Black Willow (Salix nigra)21Box Elder (Acer negundo) 10 5 15 8 1Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) 8 10 8 8 9 9Eastern Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) 7 8 9 9 16 16Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)11 11 1 1 14 14 13 13Oak (Quercus sp.)44Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)1111Pin Oak (Quercus palustris)2222Red Chokeberry (Aronia arbutifolia) 6 6 6 6 6 6 2 2Red Maple (Acer rubrum) 2 6 8 6 6 9 9River Birch (Betula nigra)11 14 11 12 11 11Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum) 4 6 1 1 20 24 21 22 13 13Smooth Sumac (Rhus glabra)12Sugarberry (Celtis laevigata)333444Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii) 3 3 6 6 10 10 10 10 3 3Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 152251051235Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)1111116611Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) 1 1 6 6 7 7 6 6Witch Hazel (Hamamelis virginiana)11Unknown3 3 139 13926 44 13 18 104 139 109 128 97 101 144 144880.20 0.197684686700 15171718331052 1781 526 728 526 703 551 647 491 511 728 728Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920Table 7. Stem Count by Plot and Species0.025 0.0250.20MY00 (2016)0.208MY01 (2017)Current Plot Data (MY03 2019)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACRE118Annual MeansStem countsize (ares)SpeciesPlot 09 Plot 10 MY03 (2019) MY02 (2018)
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 27 2019-MY03 

APPENDIX D

Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data

Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 28 2019-MY03 Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary Sandy Bridge Farm Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Med Max n Min Mean Med Max n Proposed Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 31.5 32.9 330 34.0 4 14.8 16.7 18.6 2 15.0 15.4 17.2 18.9 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 60.9 72.9 69.3 92.0 4 >40 >47 >55 2 >38 >60 >68 >70 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.5 4 1.3 1.5 1.7 2 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.9 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.7 4 1.9 2.2 2.4 2 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 66.6 73.2 71.2 84.0 4 25.0 25.1 25.1 2 12.7 13.2 13.5 13.8 2 Width/Depth Ratio 13.5 14.8 14.9 16.0 4 8.8 11.3 13.8 2 17.7 17.3 22.1 27.0 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.7 4 >2.5 >2.5 >2.5 2 >2.5 3.8 4.0 4.1 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.7 4 1.2 1.4 1.5 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 60 1 35-60 35 60 2 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 16 87 1 30-50 30 50 2 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 0.9 5.9 1 2.0-3.3 2.0 3.3 2 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 66 191 1 134-160 134 160 2 Meander Width Ratio * 4.1 1 8.9-10.7 8.9 10.7 2 Riffle Length (ft) 23 40 56 20 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.000 0.010 2 0.013 0.035 2 0.002-0.008 0.000 0.006 0.014 20 Pool Length (ft) * 14 33 2 17-55 11 22 39 20 Pool Spacing (ft) * 50 105 2 55-90 25.9 78.3 102.2 19 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be% 18%/39%/43%/1%/0%/0% 66%/2%/22%/10%/1%/0% d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.076/1.2/3.3/5.2/9.4/18 0.062/0.5/17.5/25.5/40/90 Channel length (ft) 1,470 1,626 1,626 Drainage Area (SM) 1.31 1.49 1.31 1.31 Rosgen Classification E4-G4 C4 C4 C4 Sinuosity 1.0 1.3 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0043 0.0050 0.0038 0.0027 *No data shown due to channelization/lack of bed diversity
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project # 96920 29 2019-MY03 Dimension and SubstrateBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Elevation 866.7 866.9867.3 867.4 866.7 866.7 867.5 867.7Bankfull Width (ft) 15.4 15.7 18.1 13.8 18.8 19.6 18.6 21.0Floodprone Width (ft) >80 >80 >80 >80 - - - -Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.1 2.7 2.7 2.2 2.7Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2)13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.8Total Cross-Sectional Area (ft2)13.8 10.9 7.2 7.1 26.8 26.2 12.9 10.9Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 17.3 17.9 23.6 13.4 - - - -Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.1 5.1 4.4 5.9 - - - -Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 - - - -d50 (mm) 35 26 0.7 0.6 - - - -Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Elevation 865.3 865.3865.2 865.2 865.3 865.16 865.1 865.4Bankfull Width (ft) 15.7 17.3 15.4 16.7 18.7 18.1 17.1 20.4Floodprone Width (ft) >70 >70 >70 >70 - - - -Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.4Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 1.9Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2)13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 28.8 28.8 28.8 28.8Total Cross-Sectional Area (ft2)13.1 12.4 15.1 15.1 28.8 30.7 32.1 20.7Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 18.8 22.8 18.0 19.7 - - - -Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.6 4.2 4.7 4.5 - - - -Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 - - - -d50 (mm) 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062 - - - -Cross-Section 4 (Pool) Station 105+67Sandy Bridge Farm Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920Table 9. Cross-Section Morphology Data TablesCross-Section 2 (Pool) Station 16+40Cross-Section 1 (Riffle) Station 14+75Cross-Section 3 (Riffle) Station 101+73 Calculations are based on a fixed bankfull area established during the baseline survey, and the resulting bankfull elevation. Total Cross-Sectional Area represents the cross-sectional area measured from the baseline bankfull elevation.
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 868.58 867.42
0.1 868.27 13.8
6.0 868.31 7.1
14.0 868.41 13.6
19.9 868.36 869.5
23.9 867.62 80.4
26.6 867.42 2.1
29.5 867.32 1.0
31.7 867.33 13.4
34.2 867.37 5.9
35.6 867.38 0.8
36.9 867.28
37.8 867.09
38.5 866.45
39.2 865.74
40.4 865.30
41.4 865.33
42.6 865.37
43.6 865.50
44.3 866.23
46.0 867.04
47.7 867.12
49.2 867.39
53.8 867.47
60.6 867.63
67.8 867.71
73.4 867.73
76.4 867.81
80.4 867.83
River Basin:Broad
Site:Sandy Bridge
XS ID XS1
Drainage Area:837 acres
Date:6/19/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
W / D Ratio:
SUMMARY DATA
Current Bankfull Elevation:
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:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Sandy Bridge, XS1, Riffle
Bankfull Flood Prone Area Baseline MY-01 MY-02 MY-03
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 868.50 867.65
0.1 868.07 26.8
5.0 868.21 10.9
10.1 868.01 21.0
19.7 867.76 ---
22.8 867.12 ---
25.0 866.96 2.7
26.0 867.41 1.3
27.8 867.39 ---
31.0 867.50 ---
33.4 867.42 ---
34.5 867.24
35.6 866.67
36.2 865.60
36.9 865.45
38.5 865.48
40.1 865.58
41.3 865.56
42.6 865.30
43.2 864.91
43.5 865.08
44.2 865.97
45.8 866.34
46.3 866.62
47.9 866.72
49.0 867.13
51.5 867.32
54.4 867.46
59.4 867.21
64.5 867.56
69.1 867.58
75.4 867.45
83.6 867.66
83.7 867.87
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
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Date:6/19/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
Drainage Area:837 acres
River Basin:Broad
Site:Sandy Bridge
XS ID XS2
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Sandy Bridge, XS2, Pool
Bankfull Flood Prone Area Baseline MY-01 MY-02 MY-03
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 866.29 865.18
0.1 865.86 13.1
2.6 865.53 15.1
7.8 865.44 16.1
14.8 865.26 866.9
22.9 865.17 72.3
30.9 865.16 1.7
32.9 865.03 0.8
34.3 864.58 19.7
35.7 864.34 4.5
36.2 864.01 0.9
37.3 863.57
38.6 863.49
40.2 863.56
41.6 863.86
41.9 864.36
43.0 864.38
43.7 864.69
44.7 864.69
46.5 865.15
48.4 865.26
50.4 865.29
54.9 865.26
61.3 865.41
67.7 865.21
72.3 865.18
72.3 865.50
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
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Date:6/19/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
Drainage Area:837 acres
River Basin:Broad
Site:Sandy Bridge
XS ID XS3
863
864
865
866
867
868
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Sandy Bridge, XS3, Riffle
Bankfull Flood Prone Area Baseline MY-01 MY-02 MY-03
Cross-Section Plots
Station Elevation
0.0 865.75 865.66
0.1 865.36 28.8
4.7 865.56 20.7
12.3 865.43 20.4
19.9 865.24 ---
27.3 865.22 ---
32.1 865.22 1.9
34.0 864.83 1.4
35.7 864.56 ---
36.3 864.33 ---
37.4 863.79 ---
38.8 863.93
40.7 863.98
42.9 863.81
45.1 863.73
47.0 863.76
48.4 863.87
49.1 864.38
50.2 864.88
51.6 865.17
52.5 865.40
54.7 865.25
59.8 865.11
64.2 865.05
70.8 865.09
75.8 865.80
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
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
Date:6/19/2019
Field Crew:T. Seelinger, A. Gutierrez
Drainage Area:837 acres
River Basin:Broad
Site:Sandy Bridge
XS ID XS4
862
863
864
865
866
867
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Sandy Bridge, XS4, Pool
Bankfull Flood Prone Area Baseline MY-01 MY-02 MY-03
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A 10
Medium .25 - .50 N 37
Coarse .50 - 1 D 15
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 15
Very Fine 2 - 4 12
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 2
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 2
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 2
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 3
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 1
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O 1
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.28 mean 0.9 silt/clay 0%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.4 dispersion 3.6 sand 77%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.57 skewness 0.20 gravel 22%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 1.1 cobble 1%
Total 100 D84 3 boulder 0%
D95 11 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Size Distribution
Cross-Section 1 Riffle - MY-03
Size (mm) 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
Sandy Bridge
XS 1 Riffle
MY-00
MY-01
MY-02
MY-03
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 75
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 3
Fine .125 - .25 A 5
Medium .25 - .50 N 5
Coarse .50 - 1 D 10
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 2
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
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.1 silt/clay 75%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.062 dispersion 2.8 sand 25%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.062 skewness 0.41 gravel 0%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 0.062 cobble 0%
Total 100 D84 0.29 boulder 0%
D95 0.81 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Cross-Section 3 Riffle - MY-03
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
Sandy Bridge
XS 3 Riffle
MY-00
MY-01
MY-02
MY-03
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 36 2019-MY03 

APPENDIX E

Hydrologic Data

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
Nov-18Dec-18Jan-19Feb-19Mar-19Apr-19May-19Jun-19Jul-19Aug-19Sep-19Oct-19Nov-19Rainfall (in)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
30-70 Percentile Graph
WETS Station Name: Lake Lure 2, NC
2018 Rainfall 2019 Rainfall 30% Less Than 30% Greater Than
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 38 2019-MY03 
Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920
Date of Occurrence Method Photo
Number
April 6, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
April 24, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
May 29, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
August 3, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
August 14, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
August 15, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
September 5, 2017 Onsite stream gauge
October 23, 2017 Onsite stream gauge, photos taken on site 1
February 7, 2018 Onsite stream gauge, photos taken on site 2
February 11, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
April 15, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
April 24, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
May 19, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
May 30, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
September 16, 2018 Onsite stream gauge
October 11, 2018 Onsite stream gauge 3
January 4, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
January 20, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
January 24, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
February 18, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
February 21, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
February 22, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
April 8, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
May 11, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
June 18, 2019 Onsite stream gauge
October 31, 2019 Onsite stream gauge

Photo 1. Sediment on plants and wrack lines above bankfull, 10/26/2017

Wrack lines 
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 39 2019-MY03 
Photo 2. Bankfull event on site, 2/7/2018

Photo 3. Wrack lines above bankfull, 11/7/2018

Wrack lines 
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
863
864
865
866
867
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Stream Stage Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Stream Gauge
Rainfall Sensor Elevation Surface Water Stream Bed Elevation Bankful Elevation
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19RainfallRelative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 1
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
46 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 2
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
Gauge malfunction
32 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 3
Rainfall Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4 End Growing Season
November 6
162 Days 30 Days
Gauge reinstalled
March 5, 2019
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 4
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4 End Growing Season
November 6
156 Days 25 Days
Gauge reinstalled
March 5, 2019
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 5
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
34 Days43 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 6
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
49 Days
Gauge
malfunction
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 7
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4 End Growing Season
November 6
162 Days 55 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 8
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
39 Days
Gauge
malfunction
39 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 9
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4 End Growing Season
November 6
Gauge
malfunction
36 Days 40 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 10
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4 End Growing Season
November 6
22 Days
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 11
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
25 Days
Gauge reinstalled
April 1, 2019
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
1-Jan-1910-Jan-1919-Jan-1928-Jan-196-Feb-1915-Feb-1924-Feb-195-Mar-1914-Mar-1923-Mar-191-Apr-1910-Apr-1919-Apr-1928-Apr-197-May-1916-May-1925-May-193-Jun-1912-Jun-1921-Jun-1930-Jun-199-Jul-1918-Jul-1927-Jul-195-Aug-1914-Aug-1923-Aug-191-Sep-1910-Sep-1919-Sep-1928-Sep-197-Oct-1916-Oct-1925-Oct-193-Nov-1912-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)Date
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 12
Rainfall Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface
Begin Growing Season
April 4
End Growing Season
November 6
24 Days
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA
DMS Project # 96920 53 2019-MY03 
Table 11. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site, DMS Project #96920
Greater than 10% Continuous Saturation/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season
(Percentage)
Gauge # MY-01
2017
MY-02
2018
MY-03
2019
MY-04
2020
MY-05
2021
MY-06
2022
MY-07
2023
Gauge 1 Yes/30
(13.8%)
Yes/40
(18.4%)
Yes/46
(21.2%)
Gauge 2 No/11
(5.1%)
Yes/35
(16.1%)
Yes/32
(14.7%)
Gauge 3 Yes/110
(50.7%)
Yes/78
(35.9%)
Yes/162
(74.7%)
Gauge 4 Yes/47
(21.7%)
Yes/105
(48.4%)
Yes/156
(71.9%)
Gauge 5 No/11
(5.1%)
No**/6
(2.8%)
Yes/44
(20.3%)
Gauge 6 Yes/30
(13.8%)
Yes/63
(29.0%)
Yes/49
(22.6%)
Gauge 7 Yes/22
(10.1%)
Yes/105
(48.4%)
Yes/162
(74.7%)
Gauge 8 Yes/29
(13.4%)
Yes/43
(19.8%)
Yes/39
(18.0%)
Gauge 9 No/15
(6.9%)
Yes/87
(40.1%)
Yes/40
(18.4%)
Gauge 10* No/8
(3.7%)
Yes/22
(10.1%)
Gauge 11* No/8
(3.7%)
Yes/25
(11.5%)
Gauge 12* Yes/38
(17.5%)
Yes/24
(11.1%)
*=Gauge installed March 30, 2018 **=Gauge malfunction, only recorded for first 35 days of growing season