20050408 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20130212

t. .
UT to Sandy Creek
Randolph County, North Carolina
2012 Year 5 Monitoring Report
EEP Project Number: 403
USGS HUC 03030003020010
EcoEngineering Project Number: EEP -08030
Prepared for:
NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
2728 Capital Blvd., Suite 1 H 103
Raleigh, NC 27604
3
�J
EcoEngineering
A division of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
P. 0. Box 14005 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
919- 287 -4262 FAX 919 - 361 -2269
www.ecoengr.com
. r
A
f�
� u
t
3
�J
EcoEngineering
A division of The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
P. 0. Box 14005 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
919- 287 -4262 FAX 919 - 361 -2269
www.ecoengr.com
. r
A
f�

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
Table of Contents
1.0 Executive Summary /Project Abstract . . .......... 1
1 1 Project Goals and Objectives... .. ........... .... ....... ...1
1.2 Vegetation Condition and Comparison 1
1.3 Stream Stability /Condition and Comparison . ........ 2
1.4 Wetland Conditions and Performance ..... ....... 2
1.5 Monitoring Plan View. . ... ...... .. 2
2 0 Methodology... . .. .. ..... .2
3 0 References.. .... ..... 4
Project Conditions and Monitoring Data Appendices
Appendix A — General Figures and Plan Views
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Consolidated Current Condition Plan View
Appendix B — General Project Tables
Table 1 Project Restoration Components
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Attribute Table
Appendix C — Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 5 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Table 6 Vegetation Metadata Table
Table 6A Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 7 Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
— Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos (see Appendix F — Project Photo Stations)
— Vegetation Problem Area Photos (submitted electronically)
— Vegetation Problem Area Inventory Table (submitted electronically)
Appendix D — Stream Assessment Data
Table 8 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
Table 9 Verification of Bankf ill Events
— Stream Station Photos (see Appendix F — Project Photo Stations)
— Cross Sections with Annual Overlays
— Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
— Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
— BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates Table (omitted, not applicable)
— Baseline Stream Data Summary Table [Exhibit Table VIII] (submitted electronically)
— Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary [Exhibit Table IX] (Cross Section and Reach
Parameters submitted electronically)
— Stream Problem Area Photos (submitted electronically)
— Stream Problem Area Inventory Table (submitted electronically)
i FEJ]EcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Com{wny, Inc

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
Appendix E — Wetland Assessment
Table 10 Wetland Criteria Attainment (omitted, not applicable)
— Precipitation and Water Level Plots (omitted, not applicable)
Appendix F — Project Photo Stations
RCl®
I EC 7 1 2012
NC ENHAPJCEMENT P PROGRAM
ii aEcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
1.0 Executive Summarv/Proiect Abstract
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
The goal of the restoration project is to improve the water quality and biological habitat of
the site's streams, wetlands, and riparian buffers through the following
- Restoration (pattern, dimension, and profile) of unstable streams using natural channel
design techniques
-Re- establishment of riparian buffers (Kimley -Horn, 2008)
- Enhancement of aquatic and terrestrial habitats
- Reduction in nutrient and sediment loading into stream
1.2 Vegetation Condition and Comparison
Vegetation Plots 1, 2, and 3 are located in a planned low- height planting zone. Vegetation
Plots 1, 2, and 3 were abandoned Three new Vegetation Plots (7, 8, and 9) were added to
the project outside of the planned low- height planting zone The location of Vegetation Plots
7, 8, and 9 are depicted on the Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View Appendix A.
The 2012 Monitoring Year 5 data was summarized by Carolina Vegetation Survey and was
not manipulated for presentation within Table 7 - Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot
Species Appendix C
Current stem counts were calculated using vegetation plot monitoring data Final stem count
criteria are 320 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring for Randleman
Buffers and 260 trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring for stream mitigation
units. As for Monitoring Year 5, UT to Sandy Creek had 6 vegetation plots encompassing
0 15 acres, containing a total of 83 planted stems excluding live stakes. When examining
total stems (to include planted stems and volunteer stems) within all 6 vegetation plots, there
were a total of 140 stems. In total, the 6 vegetation plots yielded a density of 560 planted
trees per acre excluding live stakes. When examining the density total of all trees within all 6
vegetation plots, there was a density of 945 planted trees including volunteer trees These
density totals exceed the requirements by 10% for both planted trees per acre excluding live
stakes and planted trees including volunteer trees With regard to each individual vegetation
plot, vegetation plots 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 exceeded the requirements by 10% when examining
planted stems excluding live stakes and when examining planted stems including volunteer
stems. Vegetation plot 5 failed to meet the stem count requirement criteria for Randleman
Buffers and stream mitigation units.
Exotic /invasive species were observed at the site. The following invasive species were
observed at the site- Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and cattail (Typha latifolia) There
are nineteen (19) areas in which exotic /invasive species were observed totaling
approximately 0.47 acres in size and are approximately 4.63% of the easement acreage. The
extent of exotic /invasive species is depicted in the Consolidated Current Condition Plan
View Appendix A
1 FEl]EcoEngineering
A division of The John R. MLAdams Company, Inc

UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
During the previous monitoring period there were six (6) areas, totaling approximately 1 19
acres in size, which were determined to be low stem density areas EEP prescribed
supplemental plantings for these six (6) low stem density areas and conducted planting
operations on March 8, 2012 The areas which received supplemental plantings are depicted
in the Consolidated Current Condition Plan View Appendix A. There were a total of 200
containerized stems planted and consisted of the following species cherrybark oak (Quercus
pagoda, 25 stems), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica, 50 stems), red maple (Acer rubrum,
50 stems), shumard oak (Quercus shumardn, 25 stems), and sycamore (Platanus
occidentahs, 50 stems).
1.3 Stream Stability /Condition and Comparison
Overall, the stream system appears stable and is not migrating toward lateral or vertical
instability Based on the prior year comparison using longitudinal profile data, it appears that
minor systemic aggradation has occurred throughout the reach, although this condition does
not appear to pose an imminent threat to the overall stability of the system.
The primary concern at UT to Sandy Creek is the sporadic flow conditions observed in the
channel in past monitoring years although flow was observed during the 2012 Monitoring
Year 5 field investigation The stream was dry during previous site visits during the month of
August Flowing water in the stream channel has been observed approximately half of the
time the site has been monitored. To document bankf ill events a crest gage is located
approximately 50 feet upstream of cross - section 4 and is depicted in the Consolidated
Current Condition Plan View Appendix A Evidence of a bankf ill event was observed this
monitoring year on September 20, 2012. There have been a total of 3 cumulative bankfull
events recorded for this project during the five (5) year monitoring period
1.4 Wetland Conditions and Performance
No wetlands are being monitored for mitigation credits at this project site
1.5 Monitoring Plan View
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment
and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found
in the tables and figures in the report appendices Narrative background and supporting
information formerly found in these reports can be found in the mitigation and restoration
plan documents available on the EEP website All raw data supporting the tables and figures
in the appendices is available from EEP upon request
2.0 Methodology
All monitoring methodologies follow the most current templates and guidelines provided by
EEP (EEP, 2006, EEP, 2009) Photographs were taken at high resolution using an Olympus
FE -115 5.0 megapixel digital camera. GPS location information was collected using a
Trimble Geo XT handheld mapping grade GPS unit Stream and vegetation problem areas
were noted in the field on As -Built Plan Sheets
2 [JEcoEngineering
A ch�sion of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
The methods used to generate the data in this report are standard fluvial geomorphology
techniques as described in Applied River Morphology (Rosgen, 1996) and related
publications from US Forest Service and the interagency Stream Mitigation Guidelines
(USACE, 2003)
Vegetation monitoring methods followed the 2008, Version 4 2 CVS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation (Lee et al , 2008) Vegetation plot photographs were collected for
each vegetation plot. Vegetation monitoring plots were re- marked in the field by replacing all
old flagging with new orange flagging Monitoring taxonomy follows Flora of the Carolinas,
Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas (Weakley, 2007) Stem height was measured with
a folding one -meter rule Diameter at breast height and decimeter height were measured with
calipers.
3 AEcoEngineering
A dmsion of The John R McAdams Company, Inc

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • December, 2012
3.0 References
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), 2006. Monitoring Report Guidelines, November
16, 2006
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), 2009 Monitoring Report Guidelines, June 1, 2009
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc, 2008 UT to Sandy Creek Stream Mitigation Report
Submitted to NCDENR -EEP, March 2008.
Lee, Michael T, R K Peet, S. D Roberts, and T R Wentworth 2008 CVS -EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation, Version 4 2 (http•//cvs bio.unc edu/methods htm)
Rosgen, D L. 1996 Applied Morphology Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003 April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2005. Information Regarding Stream Restoration In
The Outer Coastal Plain of North Carolina US Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District, Regulatory Division and North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, December 1, 2005.
Weakley, A S , 2008 Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Florida, and
surrounding areas University of North Carolina Herbarium (NCU), North Carolina
Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, working Draft as of
April 7, 2008.
4 Fal]EcoEngineering
A division of The John R McAdams Company Inc

APPENDIX A
General Figures and Plan View

1 , r
p Out
7 UM 681
ff
• , 1 i A VI
� v
• Jh� - 64
ID
USGS, 7.5 MINUTE, TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE;
GRAYS CHAPEL, N.C.; 1974; LAT: 35.8380510' N
LON: 79.6601200' W
PROWr no. v
EEP -08030 AEcoEngineedng' EEP -08030 UT TO SANDY CRE EK Aa•Wm•QfTbeJch
9 ' D1Ca�3 •P1J1•gWRi1pR8•IIftmIQW�lIL
y SCAM 1� s 1,000 tell] Yilill \111 lrl�u I�IIC7TIYUCIiIIU`•�NOrR
DAB: 10-18-12 ! 11J1 C'1?l ±'l 1 LPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA o..�

UT TO SANDY CREEK
CONSOLIDATED CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW —YEAR FIVE MONITORING
�<IX.IrIM..
VICINITY MAP
NTS
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EEP PROJECT NUMBER: 403
DATE: OCTOBER 18, 2012
NORTH CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
NC -EEP CONTACT: MELONIE ALLEN (919) 368 -9352
SHEET INDEX
101`4 CONSOIIDATEO PI.AN VIEW (STA. 100+OD TO 105 +00)
2of4 CONSOLIDATED PLAN VIEW(STA. 105+00'1`0111+00)
3.1`4 CONSOLIDATED PLAN VIEW (STA. 111 +00 TO I I")
4 of4 (.'ONSOLIDATEDPLAN VIIiW (STA. 11E+00'TO 123 +55)
LAT'. 35.8360510' N
LON: 76.6601200' W
MWE SUMy"rM30I11WWSG A.`tD IOr,YJ1V.X
r` PlEcoEngineenng
A dviom oIT4¢ Io1� R NkAd�ea Oorpgy, Iac.
1'�CU�ystem , �g. p1, ANf1665 -SIJRVSYORS•2iNVIR)NY&)1'�L

LEGEND
ROCK OR STONE
EASEMENT MARKER FOUND
IRON MARKER FOUND
ROOT WAD
OVERHEAD WARE
011 ROCK VANE
EXISTING FENCE LINE
—X —X— CONSERVATION EASEMENT CE
THALWEG OF CREEK
SO FOOT BUFFER — —
INTERMEDIATE CONTOUR
INDEX CONTOUR
----- - - - - -- VEG.
_ _ __ INVASIVE/EXOTIC VEGETATION PLOT I
TOB OF BANK -- -TB - -- PHOTO POINT 1 y�
BOTTOM OF BANK ---- BB - ---
CREST GAGE d
LOG VANE I`pAt14lA0AI1pA1NNFpJ• �7 �+ 1
2012 SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING STREAM PROBLEM AREA a+°- - E
AREA5/LOW STEM DENSITY
AREAS"
CROSS SECTION 2
NOT[i: Sl1RVL :YI)A'I'USO1 +'I'IIALWI'GAND
'1'OP•OF -BANK - U9t 1,lI d t'U U9v71V1 x.
LIGUSTRUM SINENSE F.NCROACHMEC
50 FOOT BUFFE� -�% /
J
Il VEG.
PLOT /2•
et
# 4
l
� J
-
� 111 _
PLOT /1•
a
I W
7�
1
1 \1
L° \�
1
t \
� ®9920 \ +\
�" / % � _ � -%" � mow♦ 8 0� /
L -=
T. - -�- -- 7 T
6f 5
PLOT #3•\
' 4 03 FOOT BUFFER
LIGUSTRUM SINENSE ENCROACHMENT t
GROSS SECTION 1 IJ
5002 f�
•NOTES-
VEGETATION PLOTS 1, 2, AND 3 ARE LOCATED IN A PLANNED LOW - HEIGHT
PLANTING ZONE. VEGETATION PLOTS 1, 2, AND 3 WERE NOT SAMPLED DURING
MY -05. VEGETATION PLOTS 7, 8, AND 9 WERE ESTABLISHED BY EEP AND SAMPLED
BY EEP DURING MY -04. ECOENGINEERING SURVEY LOCATED VEGETATION PLOTS 7, 8,
AND 9 DURING MY -04 AND SAMPLED DURING MY -05.
•• ON MARCH B. 2012, EEP PRESCRIBED SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITHIN AREAS
DEEMED TO BE OF LOW STEM DENSITIES DURING PREVIOUS MONITORING YEAR.
0
GRAPHIC SCALE
40 0 20 40 BD
I inch = 40 ft
SHEET 1 OF 4
f
w
V
Vl
O
.i x
IL 1 a

LIGUSTRUM SINENSE
50 FOOT BUFFER n
.s V_ r 803
M1" - - -w - -, VEG.
e' ;'"�.d -' -w^ ♦ LOT ih� \
1 �+.�' ,� ♦--'-- n--- --w_'_ .w -- � _ — — � N- 1.1USiRUM SINENSE
STREAM CROSSING LIGUSTRUM SINENSI
_ -- - — — �tLGf
��y1lAr., Sri's 50 FOOT BUFFER
� f
Al I
i
i t
I
9 s s
X9920 \
LIGUSTRUM SINENSE
Ci !-
F__
10
GRAPHIC SCALP:
50 0 25 50 goo
1 inch = 50 tL.
SHEET 2 OF 4
W
u <
r' �qHL
� � S
W

GRAPHIC SCALP
50 0 as 50
1 inch 50 ri
SHEET 3 OF 4
W
O
v
W
w�<
U ,
OU
d
N

��:
�' °_-
�w�<
�
U �
��
.3 z
y
Q
��u
c�
O �
aQi
oX
v
� I�

APPENDIX B
General Project Tables

Exhibit Table 1. Project Restoration Components
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Project
Segment
c
e
c.
'X
or
C,
.•
Reach ID
w w
''
Q
cz 4
Stationing
Comment
Mitigation Units exclude 2
ford structures which total 50
Reach 1
1,000
R
P1
1,400
1
1,350
100+00- 114 +00
feet
Reach II
870
R
P1
900
1
900
114+00 - 123 +00
Reach III
2
P 1
384
1
384
200+00 - 203 +84
Pond Tributary
Mitigation Unit Summations
Riparian
Nonnpartan
Stream
Wetland
Wetland
Total Wetland
Buffer
Comment
2,634
0
0
0
179,903
R= Restoration Ell= Enhancement II P t= Priority I P3= Priority III
El= Enhancement S= Stabilization P2= Priority II SS--Stream Bank Stabilization

Exhibit Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EE P Project Number: 403
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
Winter 04
Jan -05
Final Design — 90%
Summer 06
Winter 06
Construction
Summer 07
Fall 07
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area
Summer 07
Fall 07
Permanent seed mix apphed to reacb/se ments 1 & 2
Fall 07
Fall 07
Containerized and B &B plantings for reach/segments 1 & 2
Fall 07
Winter 07
Mitigation Plan / As -built Year 0 Monitorin — baseline
Winter 07
Mar -08
Year 1 Monitoring
Oct -08
Nov -08
Year 2 Monitoring
Sep-09
Nov -09
Year 3 Monitoring
Jun -10
Oct -10
Year 4 Monitoring
Apr- I I
Jun -11
Year 5 Monitoring
Sep-12
Nov -12
Note Tiineframe estimated from information provided by EEP

Exhibit Table 3. Project Contacts Table
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Designer
Kmiley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
P O Box 33068, Raleigh, North Carolina 27636
Primary project design POC
POC name and phone [phone]
Construction Contractor
Shamrock Environmental
PO Box 14987
Construction contractor POC
Greensboro, NC 27415
Planting Contractor
Contact Appalachian Environmental Services
PO Box 52, Webster, NC 28788
Planting contractor POC
phone. [phone]
Seeding Contractor
Contact Appalachian Environmental Services
PO Box 52, Webster, NC 28788
Planting contractor POC
phone [phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Contact Appalachian Environmental Services
phone- 828 -586 -1973
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Contact- Appalachian Environmental Services
phone. [phone]
Monitoring Performers
EcoEngineenng - A Division of The John R McAdams Co
2905 Meridian Parkway, Durham, NC 27713
Stream Monitoring POC George Buchholz
919-287-0890
Vegetation Monitoring POC George Buchholz
919 -287 -0890
Wetland Monitoring POC NA
INA
Note Information obtained trom ELY documents and Did taouiauvn WbUltb VAG N10I1MVIS Ll l Vli AVl auw
information or to verify data

Exhibit Table 4. Project Background Table
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Pro ect/EEP Project Number: 403
Project County
Randolph County
Drainage Area
4.2 square miles
Drainage impervious cover estimate ( %) For example
Estimated at I%
Stream Order
1 st for UT to Sandy Creek
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
Ecoregion
Carolina Slate Belt
Rosgen Classification of As -built
C
Cowardin Classification
R3UBH
Dominant soil types
Chewacla loam, Vance
Reference site ID
Reference Reach Tributary to Sandy Creek
USGS HUC for Project and Reference
3030003020010
NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project and Reference
03 -06-09
NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference
WSHI
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed?
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d
listed segment?
No
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor INA
% of project easement fenced
100%

APPENDIX C
Vegetation Assessment Data

Table S. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
lt'T to Ctanrly rrppk Rpstnratinn Prniect /FRP Prniect ID: 403
Ve etation
Plot Sum ary Information
Volunteers''
Plot #
Riparian Buffer
Stems'
Stream/ Wetland
Stems
Live Stakes
Invasives
Volunteers'
Total,
Unknown
Growth Form
VP4
8
18
0
0
0
18
0
VP5
6
6
0
0
0
6
0
VP6
5
9
0
0
0
9
0
VP7
14
14
0
0
0
is
1
VP8
18
19
0
0
0
19
0
VP9
14
14
0
0
0
16
1
Wetland /Stream Vegetation Totals
Plot #
Stream / Wetland
Stem%2
Volunteers''
Tota14
Success
Critcria Net?
VP4
728
0
728
Yes
VP5
243
0
243
No
VP6
364
0
364
Yes.
VP7
567
0
607
Yes
NIPS
769
0
1 769
Yes
VP9
567
0
647
Yes
Project AvIt
540
0
560
Yes
Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Plot #
Riparian Buffer
Stemsl
Success
I Criteria Met?
VP6
202
No
VP7
567
Yes
VP8
728
Yes
VP9
1 567
1 Yes
Notes:
Stem Class characteristics
'Buffer Stems Native planted hardwood trees. Does NOT inchide shrubs. No pines. No vines.
2Strcaml
Welland Stems Native planted woody stems. Includes shrubs. does NOT include live stakes. No vines
3Volunteers Native woody stems. Not planted. No vines.
'Total Planted + volunteer native woody stems. Includes live stakes. Excl. exotics. Excl. vines.
Color for Density
by 10%
rails to meet requirements, by less than IO'y
Fails to meet requirements by more than I M,e

Table 6. Vegetation Metadata
UT to Sand Creek Restoration Project /EEP Project ID: 403
Report Prepared By
George Buchholz
Date Prepared
11/14/2012 11.14
database name
cvs -cep-ent tool- v2.3.1 Rocky and Sand .mdb
database location
X-\Projects\EEP\EEP -08030 (UT to Sandy Creek) \Storm \CVS Vegetation Data\2012
Ve etation Data \Ve etation CVS Data
computer name
BUCHHOLZ 13
file size
27 92
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN
THIS DOCUMENT------- -----
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and
project data.
Pro', planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year This excludes
live stakes
Pro' total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year This includes live
stakes all planted stems, and all natural /volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing,
etc.
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total
stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by e for each plot
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot, dead
and missing stems are excluded
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural
ivolunteers combined ) for each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT
Project Code
403
project Name
UT to Sandy Creek Williams Tract
Description
UT to Sandy Creek Restoration Project
River Basin
Cape Fear
length(ft)
2,680
stream-to-edge width ft
25
areas m
0 02 sq miles 10 2
Plots calculated
6
.Required
Sam led Plots
6

Table 6A. Vegetation Condition Assessment
UT to Sandy Creek Restoration Project /EEP Project ID; 403
Planted Acreaae 7.11
Easement
Acreaae 10.18
Vegetation
Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
of
Vegetation
Areas or points (if too
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Planted
Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas
Very limited cover of
red
of Concern
both woody and
0.1 acres
- - --
0
0
0.0%
I. Bare Areas
herbaceous material.
5. Easement
Woody stem densities
Encroachment
clearly below target
none
- - --
0
0
0.0%
Areas
levels based on MY3,
0.1 acres
- - --
0
0
0.0%
2. Low Stem
4, or 5 stem count
Density Areas
criteria.
Areas with woody
stems of a size class
3. Areas of Poor
that are obviously
0.25 acres
- - --
0
0
0.0%
Growth Rates or
small given the
Vi or
monitoring ear.
Cum itive Totali
t
i o
Easement
Acreaae 10.18
Vegetation
Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
%
Easement
Acreage
Areas or points (if too
small to render as
1000 SF
diagonal,
19
0.47
4,63%
4. Invasive Areas
polygons at map
red
of Concern
scale).
real or poin s (if too
5. Easement
small to render as
Encroachment
polygons at map
none
- - --
0
0
0.0%
Areas
scale).

Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
UT to Sandy Creek Restoration Project/EEP Project ID: 403
Page 1
Notes:
a) Data presented in table was provided to EcoEngineenng from the Carolina Vegetation Survey. Data was not manipulated by EcoEnginewing. Formatting of table was performed by EcoEngineenng.
b) Vegetation Plots 1, 2, and 3 are located in a planned low- height planting zone. Vegetation Plots I, 2, and 3 were abandoned. Three new Vegetation Plots (7, 8, and 9) were added to the project for sampling outside of the planned low- height planting zone. The location
of Vegetation Plots 7, 8, and 9 are depicted on the Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View.
c) An Acer rubrum was surveyed during 2008 monitoring season even though it is not a species listed as being planted. Although acer rubrum is a volunteer stem, it was determined that this specific stem would continued to be monitored in the proceeding monitoring
years.
d) PnoLS = Planted Excluding Live Stakes; P -all = All Planted Stems; T = Total Planted and Volunteer Stems
e) Ce% highliahled in VIOLET indieale the presitrce of volunteers.
Color for Dens't
Current Plot Data (MY5 2012
Scientific Name
Common Name
S ecies T
E403- 01 -VP4
E403- 01 -VP5
E403- 01 -VP6
E403- allen -VP7
E403- allen -VP8
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T JPnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
2
1
1
3
Aroma arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
1
1
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern bacchans
Shrub
Betula nuara,
river birch
Tree
4
4
6
11
11
11
4
4
4
Carpinus caroliniana
American hombeam
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Carya
hickory
Tree
Ca rya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
Celtis laevi ata
sugarberry
Tree
omus
dogwood
Shrub or Tree
Comus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
10
10
14
Comus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
1
1
1
Comus sencea ss . sericea
redosier doRwood
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
geen ash
Tree
4
4
8
5
5
5
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
4
4
4
1
1
1
4
4
1
u tans igra
black walnut
Tree
1
1
1
Juni etas
humper
Lindera benzoin
northern s icebush
Shrub
Li uidambar
sweet rum
Tree
Li uidambar st raciflua
sweet gum
Tree
6
3
Mimosa
sensitive plant
Exotic
N ssa s Ivatica
black um
Tree
1
1
1
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
2
Prunus serotina
black Cherry
Tree
1
1
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
uercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
uercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
uercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
uercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
Rhus co allimrm
flameleaf sumac
shrub
2
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Viburnum dentatrnn
southern arrowwood
I Shrub
41
41
4
Stem count
size (arcs)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACREE§M
18
18
30
6
6
12
91
91
19
15
15
22
191
191
31
1
I 1
I
1
I
0.02
0.02
0.02
1 0.02
0.02
61 61
71
31
31
51
31 31
51
5 5
7
91 91
11
72843
1214.1
242.81
485.62
-_ 364.22
768.9
607.03
890.31
768.9
1254.5
Notes:
a) Data presented in table was provided to EcoEngineenng from the Carolina Vegetation Survey. Data was not manipulated by EcoEnginewing. Formatting of table was performed by EcoEngineenng.
b) Vegetation Plots 1, 2, and 3 are located in a planned low- height planting zone. Vegetation Plots I, 2, and 3 were abandoned. Three new Vegetation Plots (7, 8, and 9) were added to the project for sampling outside of the planned low- height planting zone. The location
of Vegetation Plots 7, 8, and 9 are depicted on the Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View.
c) An Acer rubrum was surveyed during 2008 monitoring season even though it is not a species listed as being planted. Although acer rubrum is a volunteer stem, it was determined that this specific stem would continued to be monitored in the proceeding monitoring
years.
d) PnoLS = Planted Excluding Live Stakes; P -all = All Planted Stems; T = Total Planted and Volunteer Stems
e) Ce% highliahled in VIOLET indieale the presitrce of volunteers.
Color for Dens't

Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
UT to Sandy Creek Restoration Project/EEP Project ID: 403
Page 2
a) Data presented in table was provided to EcoEngineenng from the Carolina Vegetation Survey. Data was not manipulated by EcoEngmeenng. Formatting of table was performed by EccEngmeering.
b) Vegetation Plots I. 2, and 3 are located in a planned low- height planting zone. Vegetation Plots I, 2, and 3 were abandoned. Three new Vegetation Plots (7, 8, and 9) were added to the project for sampling outside of the planned low- height planting zone. The location of Vegetation Plots 7, 8, and 9 are
depicted on the Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View.
c) An Acer rubrum was surveyed during 200% monitoring season even though it is not a species listed as being planted. Although acer rubrum is a volunteer stem. it was determined that this specific stem would continued to be monitored in the proceeding monitoring years.
d) PnoLS = Planted Excluding Live Stakes, P -all = All Planted Stems, T = Total Planted and Volunteer Stems
e) Calls higlJigWed in VIOLFF indicme the presence of volunteers.
Color for Denatty
A 101i
Current Plot Data
MY5 2012
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
E403- allen -VP9
MYS (2012)
MY4 (2011)
MY3 (2010)
MY2 (2009)
MY1 (2008)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
JPnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
IT
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
6
1
1
11
I
I
3
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
I
Aroma arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
19
19
21
19
19
20
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
Ca inns caroliniana
American hombeam
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
31
1
Ca rya
hickory
Tree
12
121
12
12
12
12
13
13
14
Carya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
1
1
2
21
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Celtis laevi Bata
sligarberry
Tree
I
1
I
Comas
do nvood
Shrub or Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
10
12
18
18
24
19
19
25
14
14
1
Comus amomwn
silkv do mood
Shrub
10
10
14
1
1
1
Corpus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
1
1
1
1
I
1
Comus sericea ss . sericea
redosier dogwood
1
1
1
11
Ili
14
17
17
25
11
11
11
14
14
I
Fraxinus permsylvanica
green ash
Tree
9
9
15
10
101
15
7
7
7
7
7
7
3
3
3
Hamamelis vir iniana
American witchhazel
Tree
9
9
17
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
Ju lans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Juni ems
Fumper
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Lindera benzoin
northern s icebush
Shrub
1
Li uidambar
sweetgiml
Tree
35
Li uidambar st raciflua
sweet Mint
Tree
2
13
I
I
1
1
1
I
Mimosa
sensitive plant
Exotic
1
ssa s Ivatica
blackgurn
Tree
1
1
1
5
5
6
1
1
1
I
I
I
Pinus taeda
loblollV pine
Tree
1
2
1
1
1
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
10
2
2
2
uercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
uercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
uercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
uercus cobra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
Rhus co allinum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
2
4
2
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
l
Viburnum dentatum I
southern arrowwood
Shrub
41
4
4
5
5
5
10
10
10
9
9
9
7
7
7
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
16
16
26
83
83
140
88
88
106
65
65
83
�59
59
104
48
48
4
1
6
6
6
6
6
0.02
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
51
51
80
201
241
181
181
21
ill
ill
121
Ill
Ill
14
1 1 1 1
1 1
'_W_$J
64T51
10522
-_$$_OA 559.821
944.27
- 50:5l
593.541
714,94
1438At
438.411
97.94
701.46
323.75
323.75
a) Data presented in table was provided to EcoEngineenng from the Carolina Vegetation Survey. Data was not manipulated by EcoEngmeenng. Formatting of table was performed by EccEngmeering.
b) Vegetation Plots I. 2, and 3 are located in a planned low- height planting zone. Vegetation Plots I, 2, and 3 were abandoned. Three new Vegetation Plots (7, 8, and 9) were added to the project for sampling outside of the planned low- height planting zone. The location of Vegetation Plots 7, 8, and 9 are
depicted on the Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View.
c) An Acer rubrum was surveyed during 200% monitoring season even though it is not a species listed as being planted. Although acer rubrum is a volunteer stem. it was determined that this specific stem would continued to be monitored in the proceeding monitoring years.
d) PnoLS = Planted Excluding Live Stakes, P -all = All Planted Stems, T = Total Planted and Volunteer Stems
e) Calls higlJigWed in VIOLFF indicme the presence of volunteers.
Color for Denatty
A 101i

APPENDIX D
Stream Assessment Data

Table Sa. Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Reach 1: 1,410 Linear Feet
Feature Category
Metric (per As -built and reference baselines)
(# Stable) Number
Performing as Intended
Total number per
As -built
Total Number feet to
unstable state
% Perform in Stable
Condition
Feature Perform,
Mean or Total
A Riffles
1. Present
12
12
NA
100
2 Armor stable (e # n o dis lacement)9
12
12
NA
100
3 Facet grade appears stables sto <_ design range)
1
12
NA 1
12
4 Minimal evidence of embeddm firrrn 9
12
12
NA
100
5 Length appropriatO
NA
NA
NA
NA
78
x, •�..-.� naxu+c °ma+aavnazar>Krm
�rasaaJaxuxm_ uuz _r>ux +. +„� �wu,..�u?,n
vii ,-°� »�rma. ¢,i � a -r,. i
wa, °e *,ave.. c.,n +,,,w ,,.v°
ce;, n z m.r_'s w. ^ :e i w
^�,.vz wieesaasc..�.eena a
am'^�na.;�carw
B Pools
I Present) (c g not subject to seven; aggrad or mrgmt ))
is
is
NA
100
2 Sufficiently deep (Max Pool D Mean Bktyl 69)
Max Pool / 1 2 > 1 6,
12 of 15
Design = 3 511 2 =
29 15
NA
77
3 Length appropriate" ( s
NA
NA
NA
NA
89
C Thalweg
1. Upstream of meander bend (nrtt/mflecuon) centenng`'
10
10
NA
100
2 Downstream of meander (glide/inflection) centenng9
9
10
NA
too
100
I Outer bend to state of limited/controlled erosron9
10
10
NA
D Meander
100
2 Of those eroding, # w /concomitant point bar formation
10
10
NA
100
3 Apparent Re within s ec9
8
10
NA
85
4 Sufficient flood lam access and rehef9
10
10
NA
100
95
E Bed General
1 General channel bed allmdation areas (bar formation)
NA
NA
5125
99
2 Channel bed degradation — areas of increasing down-
cutting or head cuttin ?
NA
NA
NA
100
100
fygry•a.ea. --. wa.ar
���.� •.. -.,. . sin l: z
1�.dp.GItl�6N ti�: tsti
PNL'M..ICILt•lW. iXk- .QII.TYIM
W' �fdcES6
F Bank
1 Actively eroding, wasting, or slumpq# bank
NA
NA
99
99
®5O1
Y}RBippgl0
iq�y)e�»- '1JLSV•RPi
MONg1613iS "
>�9NS
G Vanes
1 Free of bank or arm scour)
10
10
NA
100
2. Height appmpnate9
10
10
NA
100
3 Angle and &eometry a a ro nate9
10
10
NA
100
4 Free of piping or other structural farlures9
10
10
NA
100
100
H Wads/ Boulders
1 Free ofscour9
NA
NA
NA
100
2 Footing stable9
NA
NA
NA
100
100
+.rcerxu�- .•� zn•rn.,.rs . �_.�.��
trarsr�rsn�.•cws.¢ =.r
ssr:�_c „uwra� ou.- ae+�!sasx
ser,� • icr �zra•m`

Table 8b. Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Reach II: 886 Linear Feet
Feature Category
Metric (pLi As-built and reference baselincs)
(#I Stable) Number
Performing as Intended
Total number per
As -built
Total Number! feet in
unstable state
% Perform in Stable
Condition
Feature Perform.
Mean or Total
A. Riffics
1. Present ?
13
13
NA
1tHl
2. Armor stable (e.. n o displacement)?
13
13
NA
100
3. Facet grade appears stable? (slope < design range)
2
13
NA
12
4.Minimal evidence ofembeddin embedding/fining'?
13
13
NA
100
5. Length appropriate?
NA
NA
NA
NA
78
B. Pools
I. Present? (e.g. not subject to severe aggrad. or migrat• ?)
16
16
NA
100
2. Sufficiently deep (Max Pool D:Mean Bkt'>l.6 ?)
Max Pool / 1.2 > 1.6,
12 of 16
Design = 3.511.2 =
2,9 16
NA
77
3, length appropriate? (p -p spacing)
NA
NA
NA
NA
89
C. Thalweg
1. Upstream of meander bend (run /inflec(ion) centering'?
10
10
NA
100
2. Downstream of meander (glide/inflection) centering?
10
10
NA
100
100
D. Meander
I. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled crosion?
10
10
NA
100
2. Of those eroding, $ w/concomitant point bar formation
10
10
NA
100
3. Apparent Re within spec?
9
10
NA
85
4. Sufficient Flood lain access and relief?
10
10
NA
100
95
E. Bed General
1. General channel bed aegradation areas (bar formation)
NA
NA
5/25
99
2. Channel bed degradation — areas of increasing down-
cutting or head cutting?
NA
NA
NA
100
100
F. Bank
1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank
NA
1 /18
NA
99
99
G. Vanes
1. Free of bank or arm scour?
I 1
1 I
NA
100
2. Height a ro iatc?
11
11
NA
100
3. Angle and gLorrictry appear appropriate?
I l
1 1
NA
100
4. Free of piping or other structural failures?
8
11
NA
73
93
H. Wads' Boulders
1. Free of scour?
NA
NA
NA
100
2. Footing stable?
NA
NA
NA
100
100

Table 8c. Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Reach III: 384 Linear Feet
Feature Category
Metric (per As-built and reference baselines)
(# Stable) Number
Performing as Intended
Total number per
.As -built
Total Number feet in
unstable state
% Perform in Stable
Condition
Feature Perform.
Mean or Total
A. Riffles
i. Pm,ent?
7
7
NA
100
2, Armor stable (e.. n o displacement)?
7
7
NA
t00
3. Facet grade appears stable? (sloe < design range)
5
7
NA
71
4. Minimal evidence of embeddin finin `.'
7
7
NA
100
5. Length appropriate?
NA
NA
NA
NA
93
B. Pools
1. Present? (e.g. not subject to severe aggmd, or migrat. ?)
5
5
NA
100
2. Sufficiently deep (Max Pool D:Mean Bkf> 1.6 ?)
Max Pool % 0.5 > 1.6, 4
01`5
Design = 1.910.5 =
3.8 5
NA
80
3. hc:n th appropriate? (- spacing)
NA
NA
NA
NA
90
C. Thalwe
1. Upstream of meander bend (runim fleet ion) centering?
7
8
NA
100
C. Thalweg
2. Downstream of meander (glideinflection) centering'?
8
8
NA
100
too
D. Meander
I. Outer bend in state of limitedicontrolled erosion?
8
8
NA
100
2. Of those eroding, ii w!concomitant point bar formation
8
8
NA
100
3. Apparent Fie within s ?
8
8
NA
100
4. Sufficient floodplain access and relief?
8
8
NA
100
100
E. Bed General
1. General channel bed aggradation areas (bar formation)
NA
NA
11200
48
2. Channel bed degradation — areas of increasing down -
cutting or head cutting?
NA
NA
NA
100
74
F. Bank
1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank
NA
NA
NA
100
100
G. Vanes
I . Free of bank or arm scour?
5
5
NA
100
2. Height o ro riate?
5
5
NA
100
3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate?
5
5
NA
100
14. Free ol"piping or other structural failures?
5
5
NA
100
100
H. Wadsf Boulders
1. Free of scour?
NA
NA
NA
100
2. Footing stable?
NA
NA
NA
100
too

Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Project/EEP Project Number: 403
Method
Date of Data Collection
Date of Occurrence
Photo # if available
On -Site Crest Gage located at
Between 09/09/09 and
Station 115 +32. Observed
Not Available
06/29/10
06/29110
elevation on gage at elevation
56663
On -Site Crest Gage located at
Between 06/29110 and
Station 115+32 Observed
Not Available
04/21/11
04/21/11
elevation on gage at elevation
56751
On -Site Crest Gage located at
Between 04/21/11 and
Station 115 +32 Observed
Not Available
09/20/12
09/20/12
elevation on gage at elevation
567.43
Note A crest gage was installed during the 2009 Monitoring Year L rieia invesugauons so mac oaunttu, vvcnw ­-
documented during subsequent monitoring years Monitoring Year 3 is the first monitoring year in which bankfuli events
were documented The crest gage is located at Station 115 + 32 and is depicted in the Consolidated Current Condition Plan
View located in Appendix A

UT to Sandy Creek - EF.P Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County, North Carolina - November, 2012
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT k 403
CROSS - SECTION:
1
Year -0
Year -1
Year -2
Ycar -3
Year4
Year -5
Year-6
Station f
Elev. ft
Station Ift)
Hev. ft
Sta ion ft
Elev. ft
Station ft
Elev. ti
Station t2
Elev. fl
Station (ft)
Elev. ft
Station fi El . ift)
0.00
582.65
0.00
582.68
0.21
582.67
0.08
582.63
0.09
582.67
0.09
582.67
0.14
582.65
13.00
581.05
7.00
581.64
14.44
580.77
15.44
5W67
15.44
580 -67
10.49
581.20
32.00
58035
20.26
580.75
34.37
580.21
33.8
580.31
33.8
580.31
17.42
580.72
43.00
580.10
29.73
580.39
44.19
57990
42.52
580.1
4252
580.1
43.54
579.95
46.20
579.65
38.96
580.19
49.63
579.47
43,33
580.07
43.33
580.07
48.60
578.96
49.00
579.27
43.59
580.05
50.82
578.80
44.54
579.83
44.54
579.83
50,60
57811
50,00
578.91
47.81
579.48
54.04
578.70
45.88
579.73
45.88
579.73
53.53
578.63
51.10
578.69
51.08
578.96
57.34
578.79
47.15
579.63
47.15
579.63
55.21
.578.71
52.00
578.80
52.25
578.82
60.02
579.19
48.57
579.3
48.57
579.3
57.30
578.81
52.70
578.69
53.64
578.78
68.01
580.45
49.24
579.41
49.24
579.41
58.88
579.22
53.10
578.56
54.89
578.71
93.49
580.39
49.59
579.43
49.59
579.43
60.87
579.14
53.60
578.67
55.99
578.67
117.82
581.37
50.03
579.23
50.03
579.23
64.91
579.93
54.00
578.57
5768
578.76
50.35
579.12
50.35
579.12
66.93
580.20
54.50
578.52
60.81
579.07
50.54
578.9
50.54
578.9
69.69
580.36
54.90
578.56
64.69
579.89
50.57
578.84
50.57
578.84
104.36
580.42
55.20
578.67
68.08
580.30
51.16
578.73
51.16
578.73
1l&02
581.43
55.80
578.75
73.26
580.43
51.67
578.85
51.67
578.85
118.10
581.43
56.60
578.80
83.64
580.45
52.33
578.85
52.33
578.85
57.00
579.01
99.12
580.40
53.03
578.81
59.80
579,19
118.73
581.37
53.6
578.71
62.60
579,52
54.51
578.66
67,50
580.35
55.39
578.7
69.20
580.49
56.08
578.78
87.00
580.39
56.74
578.82
104.20
580.47
57.18
578.93
118.00
581,40
57.24
578.88
5751
579.02
59.93
579.23
64.1
579.93
77.5
580.45
101
580.37
117.89
581.38
[ri--
'�:cr��teltt ,
®EcoEngineehng
A am.�, of M- Jh PL WAdaea. t'avupanX• la.

583
582
� 581
8
•4i 580
u 579
578
577
UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • November, 2012
UT to Sandy Creek Cross Section 1 - Riffle
--------- ���------------------- - - - - -1
— Bankfull i
—+r—
Year-0, 8122107
Year -1, 9/16/08
-- * Year -2. 9111/09
— * Year -3, 6130110
—CIE -- Year -4, 04/21/11
—f— Year -5, 9120/12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
Width front River Left to Right (It)
YEAR-5,2012 SURVEY DATA
PROJECT SANDY CREEK
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE: 09/17/2012 to 0912012012
CREW BUCIIHO12/PARRISH
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
Bankfull X -sec area
Bankfull Width
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth
Width /Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
Classification
Bankfull Elevation:
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
CROSS- SECTION: 1
FEATURE: Riffle
16.01 sq. ft.
23.88 ft.
0,67 tt.
1.32 ft.
35.63
4,19
C
580.08 ft.
CROSS SECTION PHOTO - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
r=�
[11 ©EcoEngineedng
A diviu orT7x )OAn k VcAdn l'Omman 1r

UT to Surly Creek - EEP Project Nmnber: 403 • USCS HUC 0303000 4020 0 10
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - RmxkAph County, North C"ma - November, 2012
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT M 403
CROSS - SECTION:
2
Year-0
Year -1
Year -2
Year -3
Year4
Year -5
N car-6
Station (ft)
FILY, (ft)
Station
i
Elcv. (ft
Stetson (ft)
Qcv, (ft l
Station (ft
IE ev. (ft)
Station (ft
Elev. (ft)
Station(
Elev, (ft l
Station i ft F. •%
0,00
582.59
0.00
582.55
0,36
582.58
0.17
582.56
0.15
582.59
0.15
582.59
0,09
582.59
8.00
581.44
5.18
582.05
10.14
58121
8.64
581.44
8.64
581.44
3.22
582.21
16.30
580.54
10.34
581.13
21.00
579.74
12.99
58091
12.99
580.91
11,17
581.00
19,60
580.36
16.37
580.57
24.01
576.25
17.09
580.48
17.09
580.48
19,11
580.47
21.10
579.95
19.88
580.32
24,39
575.17
19.03
580.47
19.03
580.47
23.93
578,89
21.70
579.70
22.34
579.57
26.62
575.22
20.01
580.12
20,01
580.12
24.00
578.71
22.50
579.40
23.74
577.17
29,11
576.15
20.69
580.00
20.69
580,00
26.75
577.62
23.20
578.01
24.07
577.05
30.42
577.25
21.16
579.69
21.16
579.69
28.41
576,54
2310
576,90
24.73
576.90
30,77
577.78
21.55
579.48
21.55
579.48
29.38
576.37
2410
576.82
25.37
577.15
37.03
579.17
21.86
578.30
21.86
578.30
30.39
576,40
25.80
575.04
26.60
577.48
46.30
579.06
21.98
577.03
21.98
577.03
32.48
576,65
26.80
575.02
27.69
577.36
69.44
579.32
22.49
576.19
22.49
576.19
34.08
577,32
27,40
575.06
29,11
577.33
8411
57915
23.05
575.81
23.05
575.81
3539
577.60
28.50
$75.11
30.15
577,37
23.47
575.57
23.47
575.57
38,60
577.99
29,60
575.20
31.58
577.55
24.21
575.43
24.21
575.43
42.65
578.71
30,80
575.43
32.96
577.64
25.11
57510
25.11
575.20
62.56
379.23
32.30
575.85
33.99
577.75
25.40
575.09
25,40
575.09
80.54
579.51
33.60
577.00
34.58
578.39
26.90
575.22
26.90
575.22
84.82
579.31
33.70
577.56
37,02
578.27
28.18
575.64
28.18
575.64
84.91
579,31
34.90
577,74
41.11
578.54
29.27
576.02
29.27
576.02
36.60
577.84
43.99
578.82
30.12
576.75
30.12
576.75
38.40
577.94
58.87
579.26
31.22
57719
31.22
577.29
40.80
57838
69.36
579.33
31.74
57748
43,20
578.74
86.12
579.38
32.40
577.83
45.60
578.90
32.89
577.85
48,30
579.07
32.91
578.30
61.30
579.18
33.10
378.36
67.60
579.23
33.99
578.31
8530
579.22
34.48
578.73
36.05
57818
38.33
579,20
40.92
578.81
43,66
579.13
53.65
579.18
65.14
579.45
84.72
579.25
r=�
®EcoEngineedng
Aeivi.io.orra�Jaiwac<.wr•iec

584
583
582
—681
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number. 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randotph County, North Carolim - November, 2012
UT to Sandy Creek Cross Section 2 - Pool
------- - - - - -- - --- --
Banktull
--�— Year -O 8122107
- -+— Year -1, 9116M
—M— Year -2, 9111/09
9 Year -3, 6130110
—41-- Year -4, 04/21111
�— Year -5, 9/20/12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 '5 so 8
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
YEAR - 5.2611 SURVEY DATA CROSS-SECTION:
PROJECT SANDY CREEK FEATURE: Pool
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20!2012
CREW BUCHHOLZMARRISH
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
Bankfull X -sec area 31.42 sq. ft.
Bankf ill Width 30.47 ft.
Bankfull Mean Depth 1.03 ft.
Bankfuil Max Depth 3.62 ft.
Width/Depth Ratio 29.55
Entrenchment Ratio 0.00
Classification n/a
Bankfull Elevation: 579.19 ft.
CROSS SECTION PHOTO - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
ry
®EooEngineering

UT to Sandy Cmk - ETP Project Number: 403 - USGS NUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County. North Carolina - November. 20]2
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT b 403
CROSS - SECTION:
3
Year -0
Year -1
Year -2
Year -3
Yea r-4
Year -5
Year -6
Station ft
Elev, ft
Station ft
Elm A
Station (ft) Elm
01
Station (fl)
Elm
Sta i n ft
Elev. ft
Station ft
Elev. ft
Station Fl Elev. ft
0.00
568.02
0.00
568.03
-0.62
568.02
0.37
568.11
0.01
568.13
0.01
568,13
0.09
568.02
17.00
567.86
10.62
568.12
17,28
567.99
5.09
568.22
5.09
568.22
9.21
568.14
22.50
567.60
18.89
567.71
24.28
56738
12.2
568,1
12.2
568.1
23,76
567.49
25.00
567,04
23.48
567.43
26.91
56664
16.87
567.9?,
16.87
567.92
25,00
566.95
28.00
565.96
25,40
566.76
28.95
566.13
19.15
567.76
19.15
567.76
29.60
565.22
28.70
565.55
26.42
566.41
29,31
565.12
20.91
567.79
20.91
567.79
31.28
564.86
29.00
565.15
28.69
$65.81
29.73
564.94
22.66
567,67
2266
567.67
32.56
564.86
29.50
564.95
29,16
565.08
29.82
564.80
23,63
567.47
23.63
567.47
35,05
564. R5
30.40
564.70
29.81
56412
31.04
564.63
25.08
567.14
25.08
567.14
35.31
565.18
31.30
564.61
30.68
564.58
31.97
564.58
27.06
566.49
27.06
566.49
39.92
566.95
32.40
564.54
31.84
564,51
32.45
564,58
28.47
566.35
28.47
566.35
43.70
567.12
3110
564.65
32.82
564.57
33.32
56434
29.13
566.02
29.13
566.02
52.54
566.95
34.00
564.65
33,59
564.58
34.18
564.62
29.52
565
29.52
565
61,36
566.85
34.70
564,74
34.21
564.64
34.99
564,71
29.53
565.07
29.53
365.07
61.50
566.85
35.20
565.27
34.76
564.68
35.44
565.14
29.75
564.88
29.75
WAS
36.40
565.83
35.46
565.55
35.92
565.81
30.21
564.72
30.21
564.72
40,00
56682
37.39
566.14
39.81
566.94
30.93
564.57
30.93
564.57
41.00
566.93
30.15
566.86
49.89
567.09
31.75
564.49
31.75
564.49
48.00
566.93
48,11
56690
61.37
566.93
32.45
564.45
61.50
566.86
61.47
566.88
33.1
564.44
33.75
564.51
34.5
564.55
34.98
564.62
35.32
564.99
35.56
565.52
36.31
565.88
37.43
566.18
38.57
566.55
39.88
566.94
41.94
56709
45.43
567.08
52.62
56703
61.33
566.87
r�
©EcoEngineering

UT to Sandy Creek • L•EP Project Number: 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County. North Carolina • November, 2012
U•f to Sandy Creek Cross Section 3 - Riffle
589
568
E 567
c----------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- ---------------------
0
586
— Bankfull
LQ 565 --*— Year -0, 8122/07
-- • — Year -1, 9/16108
Year-2, E) 9/11109
564 —E) Year -3, 6/30110
*—Year 4, 04121/11
563 --f— Year -5, 9/20112
-2 3 8 13 18 23 28 33 38 43 48 53 58 63
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
YEAR-5,2012 SURVEY DATA
PROJECT SANDY CREEK
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE 0911712012 to 09/20/2012
CREW BUCHI-IOLZIPARRISH
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
Bankfull X -sec area
Bankfull Width
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
Classification
Bankfull Elevation:
r-�
L� - awsteln
C n l.tt t•n li °n
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
CROSS- SF.CTI ON: 3
FEATURE: Riffle
15.81 sq. ft.
12.66 fl.
1.25 It
2.28 ft.
10.13
7.90
C
566.62 ft.
CROSS SECTION PHOTO - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
®EcoEngineering

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County, North Carolina- November, 2012
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT
# 403
CROSS - SECTION:
4
Year -0
Year -1
Year -2
Year -3
Year -4
Year -5
Year -6
Station (ft)
Glen. (R)
Station ft
Elev.
Station tftl
Elev. ft
Station ft
Elm
Station ft
Elev. ft
Station tt
Elev. (ft)
Station ft Elev. ft
0.00
567.19
0.00
567.20
003
567.23
0.00
567.30
0.16
567.17
0.16
567.17
0.07
567,19
12.00
567.31
8.62
567.22
17.27
567.51
8.2
567.21
8.2
567.21
17.84
567.46
2000 .
56731
17.85
567.48
24.76
566.99
16.15
567.51
16.15
567.51
24.27
567.17
22.60
567.24
23.91
567.20
29.31
566.19
20.07
567.38
20.07
567.38
27.39
566.55
22.90
567.22
24,58
567.12
31.10
565.54
24.3
56724
24.3
56724
28.73
566.10
25.00
566,91
29.38
566.26
32.37
56453
26.83
566.63
26.83
566.63
29.60
565.97
29.70
565.87
31.79
565.27
3140
563.89
28.45
566.45
28.45
566.45
32.11
564.78
31.80
564.94
32.50
564.59
32.51
564.14
30.05
566.15
30.05
566.15
34.04
56141
32.30
564.61
33.79
563.92
33.93
562.86
309
565.82
30.9
565.82
34.88
563.22
33.20
564.19
34.15
563.41
35.92
562.92
31.35
565.58
31.35
565.58
36.03
563.17
34.00
563.29
34.24
563.23
36.79
563.14
31.81
565.15
31.81
565.15
39.56
564.32
35.00
563.10
35.00
562.96
37.79
563.54
32.12
564.59
32.12
564.59
42,14
564.77
35.70
563.33
35.73
562.95
38.49
564.38
32.23
564 34
32.23
564.34
45.37
565.44
36.90
563.50
36.43
56197
38.75
564.01
32.52
563.98
32.52
563.98
47.50
565.97
37.90
563.80
37.00
563.19
40.05
565.41
33.07
563.65
33.07
563.65
47.74
566.10
39.00
564.30
37.93
563.33
43.69
565.49
33.86
563.18
33.86
563.18
53.16
567.13
39.50
564.63
38.59
563.60
53.25
567.36
34.55
562.98
3455
562.98
66.62
567.03
41.60
56498
39.29
563.93
61.84
567.03
35.31
562.94
35.31
562.94
85.71
567.08
47.40
566.05
39.78
564.27
85.78
567.27
36.39
563.05
36.39
563.05
86.21
567.18
53.70
567.12
40.61
564.91
37.36
563.39
37.36
563.39
$6.29
567.18
66.00
567.09
45.05
565.5'_
38.67
564.04
38.67
564.04
86.30
56725
51.46
566.48
38.95
564.57
38.95
56457
63.23
566.92
39.27
564.35
39.27
564.35
87.29
56732
39.48
565.13
40.58
565.55
43.6
565.4
50.38
566.45
56.17
567.28
86.11
567.28
1 l'�C•cn��tcnl
®EcoEngineedng
A a.w.,e W M- Kd la.

569
568
567
S
g566
�5
9-
563
562
UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County, North Carolina - November, 2012
UT to Sandy Creek Cross Section 4 - Pool
------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- ---------------------------
- — — Bankfull
—tr— Year -0, 8/22/07 I
Year -1, 9/16108
—Year -2, 9111/09
Year -3, 6/30110
- -0 -- Year -4, 04/21/11
--41F— Year -5, 9120/12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Bankfull Width 16.12 11.
Bankfull Mean Depth 1.41 11. n'
Bankfull Max Depth 3.12 ft.
WidthfDcpth Ratio 11.44 R.
Entrenchment Ratio 0.00 R.
Classification n/a
Bankfull Elevation: 566.11 R.
r
©EcoEngineering
A if-1—V The AM. R. VcA.Mres CMnyany. Iqc
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
YEAR-5,2012 SURVEY DATA C
CROSS - SECTION: 4
PROJECT SANDY CREEK F
FEATURE: P
Pool
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20. +'2012
CREW BUCFIHOL7./PARRISH
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
'
Bankfull X -sec area 2
22.72 s
sq. 11.
r
©EcoEngineering
A if-1—V The AM. R. VcA.Mres CMnyany. Iqc

UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number: 403 • USGS NUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • November, 2012
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT # 403
CROSS - SECTION:
5
Year-0
Year -1
Year -2
Year
-3
Year4
Year -5
Year -6
Station Elev.
(ft)
Station
ft
Hey,
Station ft
Elev.
Station 01
Elev. ft
Station ft
Elev. ft
Station (R)
Hey. 01 )
Station Elev, Ift)
0.00
568.53
0.00
568.57
.1.49
568.61
0.20
568.64
0.22
568.58
0,22
568.58
0.09
568,53
15.00
568.53
13.72
568.67
17.05
568.40
826
568.52
8.26
56852
13.42
568.56
25.00
568.17
18.08
56844
26.23
568.14
16.73
568.46
16.73
568.46
28.15
567.90
25.80
568.14
21.40
568.50
29.84
567.40
23.46
568.29
2146
568.29
29,56
567.39
28.30
567.81
26.64
568.07
30.89
567.26
24.28
568.19
24.28
568.19
31,60
567,39
29.50
567.41
29.10
567.68
32.76
567.57
25.74
568.2
25.74
568.2
32.47
367.20
30.40
567.23
29.70
56751
34.34
567.78
27.28
568.04
27.28
568.04
33.55
567.42
30,70
567.22
30.75
567.35
37.47
568.41
28.39
567.95
28.39
567.95
35,00
567.90
31.10
567.27
31.43
567.45
48,74
569.39
28.9
567.81
28.9
567.81
36.06
568.37
32.50
567.25
32.17
567.40
54.10
56950
29.4
56771
29.4
56271
45.50
569.05
33,80
567.41
32.75
567.44
29.88
56764
?9.88
56764
53.56
569.52
34.30
567.70
33,44
567.51
30.22
56747
30.22
567.47
53.69
569.52
36.60
568.37
34.12
567.74
30.32
567.59
30.32
567.59
38.00
568A0
35.07
567.99
30.73
5625
30.73
567.5
4600
569.08
35.86
568.27
31.1
567.44
31.1
567.44
53.90
5%51
36.94
568.42
31.4
567.27
31A
567.27
40.46
568.72
31.81
567.34
31.81
367.34
43.26
568.97
32.16
567.43
32.16
567.433
49.66
569.42
32.58
567.45
32.58
567.45
53.98
569.58
33
567,47
33
567.47
33.02
567.59
33.02
567.59
33.3
567,62
33.3
567.62
33.81
567.6
34.42
567.88
35.99
568.37
43
568.99
53.73
569.54
c�
I�;�Y),y�rcnl
©EcoEngineedng

570
569
568
c
L 567
588
565
UT to Sandy Creek Cross Section 5 - Riffle
— — —
Bankfull
--�— Year -0, 8122107
— Year -1, 9116108
—>~- Year -2, 9111109
—9 Year -3, 6/30/10
—lIE -- Year -4, 04/21/11
---0— Year -5, 9/20/12
UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
FifthYear Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • November, 2012
-- - - - - ` --------- ------ - - - --t
1 4 9 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
YEAR -5, 2012 SURVEY DATA CROSS-SECTION-
PROJECT SANDY CREEK FEATURE: Riffle
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20/2012
CREW BUCHHOLZJPARRISHIPICKENS
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
Bankfull X -sec area
4.18
sq. ft.
Bankfull Width
9.46
ft.
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.44
ft.
Bankfull Max Depth
0.81
ft.
Width/Depth Ratio
21.40
ft.
Entrenchment Ratio
10.57
ft.
Classification
C
Bankfull Elevation: 568.13 ti.
r�
I� owstem
u �,lt ��111t�f1
®EmEngineering
A dhi"m of TW §&a R McA,4w, Co�p+x 4C

UT to Sandy Creek - EEP Project Number: 403 - USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fiflh Year Monitoring Report - Randolph County, North Carolina - November, 2012
UT to SANDY CREEK
EEP PROJECT H 403
CROSS - SECTION:
6
Year-0
year-1
Year -2
Year -3
Year -4
Year -5
Year-6
Station (It)
Flev. (11)
Station
(ft
Flev. (ft)
Station (ft) Elev.
(ft)
S5s414R (ft
F1s.Sv. ($)
Station (ft)
Elev. (ft)
tion tl .IF ev. (ft)
St i o" (ft) F %. 11A
0.50
568.58
0.00
568.57
-0.37
368.62
0,08
568.64
0.21
56836
0.68
568,58
17.00
568.35
10.17
568.63
13.95
568.53
9.36
568.54
12.89
568.59
31.20
568.16
17.91
368.36
33,81
567.84
18.09
568.44
28.12
568,41
34.10
567.65
25.12
$68.46
35.85
567.29
25.18
568.35
31.34
568,24
35.70
567.24
19.87
$68.33
37.13
566.63
2847
568.39
36.54
567.12
36.40
56744
32.73
567.90
38.34
566.39
31.46
568.18
37.49
566.46
37.70
566.39
3148
567.84
40.59
566.46
33.34
567.85
38.98
566.10
38.90
566.19
34.07
567.68
42.27
567.50
34.33
56731
39.82
566.29
40.10
56633
34,77
367.54
43,07
567.86
35.16
56759
41.29
567.15
41,00
566,80
35.55
567.34
49.14
568.57
35.5
567.49
43.08
567.92
41.70
567.21
36.26
.567,06
57.65
569.62
33.72
567.32
43.76
568.13
42,70
567.60
36.73
566.81
35.83
56745
44.00
568.24
45.60
568.39
37.18
566.56
36.11
$67.12
44.80
568,50
50,00
568.59
37.97
$66.54
36.55
566.97
31.46
568.90
57.90
369.57
38.61
566,45
36.97
566.8
58.25
$69,65
39,50
566.48
37.$
566.59
58.30
569.65
40.41
566.52
38.17
566.49
40.79
566.91
39.04
566.19
41.52
567.38
39.86
566.32
3129
567,68
40.45
566.39
43.52
568.15
40.99
566.7
45.41
$68.54
41.4
567.39
51.85
568.86
42.23
567.42
57.89
569.65
43.37
568.07
57.79
569.61
rJ
Ecosystem
�' ll 1,11 t'lllt'll
®EcoEngineering
A dk� 41>k,ob. IL NegOrr Coaos� AsG

571
570
569
C
� 568
ro
v 567
566
565
564
UT to Sandy Creek • EEP Project Number: 403 • USGS HUC 03030003020010
Fifth Year Monitoring Report • Randolph County, North Carolina • November. 2012
UT to Sandy Creek Cross Section 6 - Pool
— — — — — — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ y
— — — Bankfull
—+— Year -0, 8/22/07
—�— Year -1, 9/16/08
- -0-- Year -2, 9/11/09
6 Year -3, 6130/10
* Year -4, 04/21/11
—f— Year -5, 9/20112
-1 4 9 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
YEAR-5,20112 SURVEY DATA
PROJECT SANDY CREEK
TASK CROSS SECTION
REACH SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20/2012
CREW BUCHHOLZIPARRISH
Summary Data
All dimensions in feet.
Bankfull X -sec area
Bankfull Width
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
Classification
Bankfull Elevation:
r�
F�CC>s��teln
k li 1.11 t•1il( 11
CROSS SECTION PLOT - LOOKING DOWNSTREAM
CROSS - SECTION: 6
FEATURE: Pool
8.34 sq. ft.
10.00 ft.
0.83 ft.
1.65 ft.
12.00
0.00
n/a
567.83 ft.
®EcoEngineering
A &,V a af7M lain R. 7JCA�m Cn,prY. hc.

UT to Sandy Creek
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reaches I & II
580
579
578 / - -� 1 1 r— - - - - -1
577 A -
�
576 -- --
> 575 ` \V
w �
-� Reach 1 --0
w 574
— — — YR -0 TW Profile 2/29/08
573 YR -1 TW 10/1/08
O YR -1 Structures
YR -2 TW 9/9/09
A YR -2 Structures
572 YR -3 TW 6/30/10
O YR -3 Structures
YR -4 TW 4/21/11
571 %K YR -4 Structures
YR -5 TW 9/20/12
YR -5 Structures
—YR -5 WS
570 -
10000 10100 10200 STATION (feet) 10300 10400 10500
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally. Elevation data was not changed. Year -5 water surface was sporadic due to low / absent flow;
therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
EcoEngineering
\Ai�n�w W'lAr.�du R M�.MJmf`wP Wc.

577
576
575
574
1-1
J 573
Z
O
E�
572
W 571
570
569
568
567
UT to Sandy Creek
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reaches I & II
10500 10600 10700 STATION (feet) 10800 10900 11000
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally. Elevation data was not changed. Year-5 water surface was sporadic due to low / absent flow;
therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
EcoEngineedng
. \M�tsww d'lA>. ,4du R IQaMWs. f wtpy\i W-

572
571
570
Ifs:
568
O
C567
W
W 566
565
564
563
562
dV 11�
A1-/-j
,
— — — YR -0 TW Profile 2/29/08
YR -1 TW 10/1/08
O
YR -1 Structures
YR -2 TW 9/9/09
A
YR -2 Structures
YR -3 TW 6/30/10
O
YR -3 Structures
YR -4 TW 4/21/11
)IC
YR -4 Structures
YR -5 TW 9/20/12
YR -5 Structures
AYR -5 WS
UT to Sandy Creek
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reaches I & II
N
�1
r-
l1/�
11000 11100 11200 STATION (feet) 11300 11400 11500
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally. Elevation data was not changed. Year -5 water surface was sporadic due to low / absent flow;
therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
®EcoEngineedng
AAl—WT TM.dgwR WAJ1— tww7:rw M•.

567
565
= 563
O
H
! 561
W
W
559
557
555
UT to Sandy Creek
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reaches I & II
r
1�
1 --
1 N, I 1
IN
r— --
1
1� I
- - --
YR -0 TW Profile 2/29/08
YR -1 TW 10/1/08
O YR -1 Structures
YR -2 TW 9/9/09
A YR -2 Structures
YR -3 TW 6/30/10
O YR -3 Structures
YR -4 TW 4/21/11
X YR -4 Structures
YR -5 TW 9/20/12
YR -5 Structures
AYR -5 WS
11500 11600 11700 STATION (feet) 11800 11900 12000
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally. Elevation data was not changed. Year-5 water surface was sporadic due to low/ absent flow;
therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
EcoEngineedng
.�diww W'iR: .MMR AkA4m.Fwrpwu h.

563
562
561
w 560
Z
0
559
W
.a
w
558
557
556
555
r�
X 9
,1 I
1 I
I 1
— — — YR -0 TW Profile 2/29/08
YR -1 TW 10/1/08
O YR -1 Structures
YR -2 TW 9/9/09
A YR -2 Structures
YR -3 TW 6/30/10
O YR -3 Structures
YR -4 TW 4/21/11
�C YR -4 Structures
YR -5 TW 9/20/12
YR -5 Structures
AYR -5 WS
UT to Sandy Creek
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reaches I & II
LN ; - -- -�
-� �1
1 �
11
J
I
I,f
14
I
I i
I J
i
f---- Reach II
12000 12100 12200 STATION (feet) 12300 12400 12500
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally. Elevation data was not changed. Structures were used as a guide. Year -5 water surface was
sporadic due to low / absent flow; therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
[E-3]EcoEngineedng
i.l T�.� L•:4i R 11.�1.lr�nl.uulve�, lo:

578
576
Reach III -�
574
572
v.
Z
O
570
a
W 568
566
564
UT to Sandy Creek - Tributary
Longitudinal Profile
2012 (Year -5) Monitoring
Reach III
I
— — — YR -0 TW
YR -I TW 10/1/08
O
YR -1 Structures
YR -2 TW 9/9/09
A
YR -2 Structures
YR -3 TW 6/30/10
O
YR -3 Structures
YR -4 TW 4/21/11
SIC
YR-4 Structures
YR -5 TW 9/20/12
YR -5 Structures
—YR -5 WS
I
f Reach I I I
562 4-
20000 20050 20100 20150 20200 20250 20300 20350 20400
STATION (feet)
Note: Due to slight differences in thalweg length, longitudinal profile was adjusted horizontally on average 10 feet. Structures were used as a guide. Year -5 water surface was sporadic due to
low / absent flow; therefore, when connecting water surface data points the dashed line is plotted below ground surface in some locations.
®EcoEngineedng
,Klo nr1 *� R POrAJYmt'wNrq. M:_

S -YEAR, 2012 SURVEY DATA PROJECT NAME UT TO SANDY CREEK
TASK LONGITUDINAL PROFILE
FEATUIWFACET SLOPE REACHES UT to Sandy Creek and Minor Tributary
LENGTH, AND SPACING AND DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20/2012
LONGITUDINAL PROFILE DATA CREW BUCHHOLZIPARRISH
to Sandy Creek Reach I
water surface
ESIGN AVG.
Riffle 0.4%
WS sta start=
WS sta end=
10020 57 ft
11422 50 ft
MEDIAN
Run
p -p spacing
Riffle slopes measured = 3
- --
62
ELEV. Start =
579.21 ft msl
Run slopes measured = 4
177%
588%
894% 2222%
ELEV End =
566.01 ft msl
54
60 122
MIN =
0 21 %
RIFFLE
343
Results
303%
MEDIAN=
158%
RIFFLE
n=
MIN
MEDIAN
AVG
MAX
slopes measured =
11
0 21 %
158%
237%
466%
_Rtflle
Run slopes measured =
6
174%
6.94%
953%
2632%
Pools measured =
20
12
72
68
146
UT to Sandy
Creek Reach II
Overall water surface slope =
1 %
DESIGN
Riffle
AVG.
0.4%
W S sta. start =
W S sta. end =
11427 87 ft
12349 06 ft
MEDIAN
Run
p -p spacing
Riffle slopes measured = 3
- --
62
ELEV Start =
566 01 ft msl
Run slopes measured = 4
177%
588%
894% 2222%
ELEV End=
560 59 ft msl
54
60 122
MIN =
0 21 %
RIFFLE
343
Results
303%
MEDIAN=
158%
RIFFLE
n=
MIN
MEDIAN
AVG
MAX
Riffle slopes measured =
9
000%
088%
166%
595%
Run slopes measured =
4
089%
237%
3 21 %
720%
Pools measured =
14
19
58
71
135
UT to Sandy Creek Reach III
Overall water surface slope = 2% DESIGN AVG.
Riffle 17%
WS sta start= 20008 47 R Run --
WS sta. end = 20390 92 ft p -p spacing 46
-ELEV Start= 573 98 ft msl
ELEV. End = 565 40 ft msl Results
n =
MIN
MEDIAN
AVG MAX
Riffle slopes measured = 3
206%
864%
703% 1039%
Run slopes measured = 4
177%
588%
894% 2222%
Pools measured = 6
30
54
60 122
All data reported in units of feet unless otherwise specified.
Feature
Station
Length
UT to Sandy
Slope
Creek I
_
RIFFLE
133
24
143%
n =
11
RIFFLE
265
42
0 21 %
MIN =
0 21 %
RIFFLE
343
16
303%
MEDIAN=
158%
RIFFLE
403
7
077%
AVG _
237%
RIFFLE
458
15
4.66%
MAX =
466%
RIFFLE
571
7
413%
RIFFLE 908 18 1.58°x'0
RIFFLE 1006 25 432%
Sandy Creek, 5 -Year Momtonng Data Sheet 1 of 3

RIFFLE
RIFFLE
RIFFLE
Feature
1158
1272
1399
Station
44
29
24
Length
UT to Sandy
158%
2.76%
1.57%
Slope
Creek H
RIFFLE
1640
24
1.17%
n =
9
RIFFLE
1760
20
2.17%
MIN =
0.00%
RIFFLE
1797
5
5.95%
MEDIAN =
088%
RIFFLE
1928
26
0.27%
AVG. =
166%
RIFFLE
2028
42
088%
MAX =
595%
RIFFLE
RIFFLE
RIFFLE
2099
2168
2233
31
17
7
023%
063%
362%
RIFFLE
2269
62
0.00%
Feature
Station
Length
UT to Sandy
Slope
Creek III
RIFFLE
20114
8
206%
n =
3
RIFFLE
20234
9
1039%
MIN =
206%
RIFFLE
20325
2
864%
MEDIAN =
864%
AVG. =
MAX =
703%
10.39%
Feature
Station
Length Slope
UT to Sandy Creek I
RUN
307
3
266%
n =
6
RUN
359
13
1123%
MIN =
174%
RUN
579
15
174%
MEDIAN =
694%
RUN
926
11
200%
AVG =
953%
RUN
1031
8
1325%
MAX =
2632%
RUN
1301
12
26.32%
_ Feature
Station
Length
UT to Sandy
Slope
Creek II
RUN
2070
12
168%
n =
4
RUN
2130
15
306%
MIN =
089%
RUN
2185
19
720%
MEDIAN =
237%
RUN
2331
25
089%.
AVG =
3.21%
MAX =
7.20%
Sandy Creek, 5 -Year Monitoring Data Sheet 2 of 3

Feature Station Length Slope
UT to Sandv Creek III
RUN 20001 61 294% n= 4
RUN 20122 1 177% MIN = 1.77%
RUN 20243 4 22 22% MEDIAN = 588%
RUN 20327 8 8 82% AVG. = 894%
POOL
41
19
87
n=
20
POOL
107
27
66
MIN =
12 (p-p spacing)
POOL
190
40
83
MEDIAN =
72
POOL
233
36
43
AVG =
68
POOL
324
24
91
MAX =
146
POOL 372 37 48
POOL 440 41 69
POOL 522 32 82
POOL 613 36 91
POOL
700
11
87
POOL
718
23
17
POOL
792
33
74
POOL
850
51
59
POOL
937
18
87
POOL
955
9
18
POOL
966
25
12
POOL
1039
28
72
POOL
1074
45
35
POOL
1221
44
146
POOL
1330
30
109
Feature
Station
Length p -p
spacing
59 MAX =
122
UT to Sandy
Creek 11
POOL
1431
7
n = 14
POOL
1449
14
19 MIN = 19 (p -p spacing)
POOL
1577
48
128 MEDIAN = 58
POOL 1629 19 52 AVG. = 71
POOL 1675 10 46 MAX = 135
POOL 1699 41 24
POOL 1834 27 135
POOL
1918
16
84
POOL
1965
18
47
POOL
2082
19
116
POOL
2145
26
64
POOL
2204
33
58
POOL
2253
20
49
POOL
2355
57
103
Feature
Station
Length p -p
spacing
UT to Sandy
Creek III
POOL
20071
12
n =
6
POOL
20126
7
54 MIN =
30 (p-p spacing)
POOL
20247
8
122 MEDIAN =
54
POOL
20277
25
30 AVG =
60
POOL
20336
24
59 MAX =
122
POOL 20372 7 36
Sandy Creek, 5 -Year Monitoring Data Sheet 3 of 3

Histogram
30 --- - - - - -- - - - - -- -- — -- - - - - - -- -- -- - - ----
■Year 1
25 ■Year2 P
d
E3 Year 3
20 - - -- ■Year 4
15 _ _ ■ Year 5
c
10 -- -- -
5_ -
0
oo��y ooh ►. a (b Nfo �ti �� NV It,), �oa�
Particle Size (mm)
EEP PROJECT ID: 403
CROSS - SECTION: I FEATURE: RIFFLE
r�
�C,' systel)ll
PROJECT UT to SANDY CREEK
TASK PEBBLE COUNT
REACH UT to SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20/2012
CREW BUCHHOLZ /PARRISH
Material
Size Ran a mm Count
0 0.062
0.062 0.13
0.13 0.25
UT Sand
Note:
silt/clay
very fine sand
frie sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.25 0.5
0.5 1
1 2
2 4
Riffle Pebble Count, UT Sandy
1M% - - - - - • ' •; • ` • `
90%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
4 6
6 6
8 11
11 16
16 22
22 32
I
80%
t 70%
~ gOgr,
" 50%
Hill
4 f:tY
very coarse gravel
32 45
40%
very coarse aravel
small cobble
medium cobble
45 64
64 90
90 128
a 30%
20%
large cobble
very large cobble
128 180
190 256
10% ;
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) Cumulative Percent ♦ Percent Item
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
256 362
362 512
512 1024
large boulder
ve la a boulder
bedrock
1024 2048
2048 4096
Size percent less than mm Percent b substrate t e
D16
D35
D50
D84
D95 sift/clay
sand ravel
cobble
boulder
R
Total Particle Count: 100
0.207
0.61
13.5
30
48 0%
45% 55%
0%
0%

30 -
m 25
c 20
15
10
5
O
� sod
O
Histogram
■Year 1
_ -_- - -- -- - - -� ■Year2
OYear 3
`— — ■Year
■Year 5 5
Ooh ^rV �y�`O 4,►' T oP
Particle Size (mm)
EEP PROJECT ID: 403
CROSS - SECTION: 3 FEATURE: RIFFLE
r�
1',c'onYsten l
f
PROJECT UT to SANDY CREEK
TASK PEBBLE COUNT
REACH UT to SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/17/2012 to 09/20/2012
CREW BUCHFIOLZ/PARRISH
Material
Size Range
0
0.062
mm Count
0.062
0.13
UT Sand
silt/clay
very fine sand
fine sand
0,13
0.25
Note
medium sand
0.25
0.5
coarse sand
0.5
1
Riffle Pebble Count, UT Sandy
very coarse sand
1
2
100%
-
very fine gravel
2
4
gory,
fine gravel
4
6
fine gravel
6
8
80%
medium gravel
8
11
c1OC
70%
medium gravel
11
16
6095
coarse gravel
16
22
c
coarse
gravel
22
32
U-
50%
very coarse gravel
32
45
0
40%
;i
very coarse ravel
45
64
ti
30%
small cobble
64
90
medium cobble
90
128
20%
large cobble
128
180
10%
very lar s cobble
180
256
small boulder
256
362
1
0%
small boulder
362
512
0.01 0.1
1 10
100 1000 10000
medium boulder
512
1024
Particle Size (mm)
Cumulative Percent
♦ Percent Item
large boulder
1024
2048
Size percent less than mm
Percent b L substrate t1le
very large boulder
2048 40%
bedrock
D16
D35
D50
DB4
D95
silUcla
sand ravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
Total Particle Count: 100
0.134
0.37
0.6
6
80
0%
64% 29%
7%
0%
096

Histogram
50 -. —_ -- -------- .._..__ ■Year 1
■Year 2
40 __ ......— E3 Year 3
CD ■Year 4
30 — ■Year 5
= 20
0 � � -� -'fir' � �� TT. •TTT -�
oti ti� ox �o �ti �o°` ,��� rho �►,ti off'
o0 0• ti
Particle Size (mm)
EEP PROJECT ID: 403
CROSS - SECTION: 5 FEATURE: RIFFLE
r I--
-1-9;j
L CX15 te111 ,
PROJECT UT to SANDY CREEK
TASK PEBBLE COUNT
REACH UT to SANDY CREEK
DATE 09/1T2012 to 09/2012012
CREW BUCHHOLZMARRISH
Material
Size Range
0
0.062
mm Count
0.062
0.13
UT Sand
---
sift/clay
very fine sand
fine sand
0.13
0 -25
Not
medium sand
0.25
0,5
coarse sand
0.5
1
Riffle Pebble Count,
UT Sandy
very coarse sand
1
2
100%
very fine gravel
2
4
90%
fine gravel
4
6
80%
�; T
fine gravel
6
8
medium gravel
8
11
r
70%
medium gravel
11
16
~
60%
coarse gravel
16
Z2
coarse gravel
22
32
LL.
50%
very coarse gravel
32
45
40%
very coarse gravel
45
64
a
30%
small cobble
64
90
♦ ; ♦;
medium cobble
90
126
20%
large cobble
128
180
,
10%
♦
'�
very large cobble
180
256
0°l0
.
small boulder
256
362
0.01 0
1 10 100 1000 10000
small boulder
362
512
-1
medium boulder
512
1024
Particle Size (mm)
Cumulative Percent
♦ Percent Item
large boulder
1024
2048
Size percent less than mm
Percent by substrate type
very lar a boulder
2048
4096
D16 I
D35
I 050
I D84
I D95
siltfcla
sand I gravel
I cobble
I boulder
bedrock
bedrock
Total Particle Couni: 100
0.094
0.16
0.2
35
68
0%
80% 14%
6%
0%
D %

BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates
UT to Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Pro ect/EEP Project Number: 403
Linear
°'
w
a
9 r
Segment/
Footage or
�+
c
3
Time Point
Reach
Acreage
w
j
ft
%
ft
%
ft
%
ft
%
it
%
ft
%
Tun/
Note BEHI and NBS assessments were not conducted for the entire project pre - construction as part of the
existing conditions survey. Therefore, BEHI and NBS assessments are not applicable during Monitoring Year

APPENDIX E
Wetland Assessment
(Omitted, Not Applicable)

APPENDIX F
Project Photo Stations

PHOT06RAPH I: RIP -RAP. HEAD OF UT -I.
PHOT06RAPH 2: GROSS VANE. STA: 100 +12.
No' EEP -08030
ri
to SANDY CREEK
�D�►PnON
®EcoEngineering
nm.wo.dre�R.WAdo Comm", Inc.
0;1-PRae`T
`�"EA1a:EEP08030X.DWG
sc�: NITS
1����
MO, MORING PHO`rOGRAPHS
CZIP
DATE.: 10 -30 -12
1 , �'��L ��
RANDiNM C ILIP17 Y. NC
P14000 1.7709-4008
(919) 361 -5oon

loy
Apr
All
ON
. ti �' i • r; {!„tom'" � �1 '�- � '• � �1s! ..
i�.�'•,T.i � ,�y �' f �':: ~s��� ray' -;;,F

-c � : ma�yy., � �• i � I � �t' ::. ; � � ., r + � . ``j
•� ,�� \� .}� �_ �' "yam �
� tll•' ff�•�ir 1 :.'
• l
1. • . GRO55 VANE. STA: 101+40.
it
efKk
Y Y
r•4 � mss+ \ tL � �(.�

Sri � -. � .. � _ •• Afi
� � • � � .�` .+ .
Owl..
�1
rk
rk
9

jcXWnVATIK: EEP -08030
EEP08030X.DWG
N TS
10 -30 -12

- -'r t� ; • , ,, `fit, - • f, , •.�jC� •%�7+
V
IF NOW
r ` ,` rte. ��" `� - '••�.� �
yf "! t`.' ' ✓. n:: , �j �:�:
Ij
Ao
jr
- �.•�" �''� •.7> �f • „ /�y�.- ��q�•• � r� 'ter -��•` t'.'; `� -S -
• ' 1�� ;�
''rte o!,`.*#`�.��.._� ► �� ''
k.
Z ll*dr\ �'' w. ;� • ,1� L1 f -- �1 _ �• r 'fir ,; , •!r i
- - - AX
is 4� � � i� •v :4
- ��� . � � 'y` •'4' y. V f -, •� ICS
PRO16c' "D- EEP -08030
om mm Arcs: EEP08030X.DWG
tV SCAM NTS
oc
En DATE' 10 -30 -12

,'Z �.� � irk f 1� 43 • ••��i t : t � - Y. � _ 1
a -_ }�, +a ;�. �. •t : , -fit,,, .:� � .!
!af "ice , .',�� �' ,.1 � ��. �•
ye
Al
t V
op
PROJEa no. EEP -08030
Ic "'er"""g EEP08030X.DWG
0
P.
tV
a
SCAM N TS
v
in DATE; 10 -30 -12

PHOT064RAPH 15: RIP -RAP.
PHOTOGRAPH lb: GR055 VANE. 5TA: 107 +4q.
�•.
UT to SOMY CREEK
[-,-:ljEcoEngineering
X. DWG
�� e�o�
R
A dividm of Tbc )obo R McA&m Caogny, Inc.
(ffm8030
sv teln
,
MONnORING PHOTOGRAPHS
BOXH
12
i
.11 �3ll(;tIItIl
RANWIpH r,OU11ny� NC
P.O. l4005 21iPp�sani005
(919) 901 -0000

1[Y,�?�
�•rl��•�'' Tom+ Y �.
• _ /
all •, %� r '.t. 1
• - '�.'" .di ice/• IJ,fi'� — •�q�_/
Is
Wk
iii•\ �: ,'i. � ,�• �, �. +,
• r - y, r •.ri ^';�:., �. ��'_;�'�T$ir Sk it M ;.' '• v�j{�:
1 � - A?' /''`� _ -' ~� •, ��:�,. ./ � , _•ice i - � ` 1.
ilk 1
A
a
,+yy
1t1 .. s:�7?•
�k A:
-ir,

-- EEP -08030
n
EEP08030X.DWG
a
NTS
DATE: 10 -30 -12

�� i .. s / i •
fox A `
ze
Ke
i
4
r
• • R•
1414
� ;a
s F f f yips
`,�v
x
d
a
S

4-1
App
4"A
1 , , A"
%0

ol
7v
Th-
41,
A
lo
l
it
t ,
r %
EEP-08030
0 K Fax": EEP08030X.DWG
tv SCAU:
NTS
DATE: 10-30-12
7
4

145
I I,v
Ji
ti
y
.,mob.
4
Ar
EEP-08030
EEP08030X.DWG
SCAU;
NTS
En DAM 10-rO-12
#I

rrtvmu - EEP -08030
V"E" ""g' EEP08030X.DWG
SCALE: NTS
DATE: 10 -30 -12

PHOTOGRAPH 31: "A" VANE. STA: 118 +46.
PHOTOORAPH 32: GRO55 VANE, 5TA: IIq +O?.

4 -;C_.. � 3 •. �+,, § � t� � ELI
�+,�� ,•,X it , r��} � ).`. _ . L
� Sv
-'r � • �'�' 'r., taw `�.,
�JJyy
,7
w 1hSS
W-W
T� _ • K • ,, y� , t'f ' � � � r w � � �i�r'f
' • + . *
A - �'a� .ti,' �'! �• e x"71
�c
w

PHOTOGRAPH 35: RIP —RAP. WELTAND DRAINAGE.
PHOTOGRAPH 36: GR055 VANE, 5TA: 122 +00.
PRONAM "' 08030030 UT to SANDY CREEK [JEcoEngineering
F11E ^A11Ei EEP08030X.DWG i]�jC�� /��O*T
yO j1►1C%►J 1 <JI\L"1 lr A divuian otibe )dm R McA� Campy, fnc.
q scA1E: NTS �
� Stelll MONrMRING PHOTOGRAPHS RESEARCH MINGLE PARK. NC
BATE: P.O. BOX 14005 ZIP 27709 -4005
10 -30 -12 1'�llli't':i RArIDOLtcoUN Y, NC (919) 951 -5000

' -. r
Vt -7 k-
Sal -
.•'�
• • OF
Al
Ok
'.. '.... . �tir� �.�•i. 1 r �. -/. tl.�: i� �i � - Vii, -`�
. . '` .e °_ - - I► �tr� • fib: �'. •.7_.,. '7L ''s , +. '�,, !�.T
PROJECT nu. EEP -08030
EEP08030X,DWG
v
b
!SCALE: N TS
v
OAT), 10- -30 -12

n
d
a

ior
tk IA
lo
/ 1-4 1 ,
ljo
�
tok
10 4jr;
l l
—y., •..— — H 41- CRO55 VANE.
y� • J
�'. .: :1. [ - .+'�: / • .'/;j' r /Air,
46 400
r" j" j " EEP -08030
'"A" EEP0803OKM
scAle: NTS
�' DA's 10 -30 -12

O.V •, F 'r � , Fes' f ,.
V.
s,.. yam: � : ' `,% , � ' . , /, � �; N }� � Y• , ;-
vIl Ir
lk
• ; IF `I '
Of
1�
rttv:ec, nu. EEP -08030
FILINAM": EEP08030X.DWG
tW scAIE: N TS
In DATE: 10 -30 -12

L
IN
V.q
w
4A
1 47
I Pt
T
ip
-A
Y,
PRomcT N"- EEP-08030
M's: EEP08030X.DWG
tV ISCAU:
NTS
Lo DATE: 10-30-12

I VI-I
Taft
' �. � .* r � „ y� � IBC ♦ T �\> r � • � a _ •t � ���'1 AOF
r t
a
a

'! ;ti?' �, -� K' • . iris' r
.� rr / t .
jj-
40 •
(per r ca ac y 4 F
• ( 1
i R
y ��. .;, _� _ _' ,• :. � �_
Ic
40 dr.
Af
� tom;. ^ • ji * ,�`
s
+III "�fJ•! - T a
d
Y

r� y. •'�J r ! i I l , 1 i,. ., . � t t2 I ��'�`;{, .. 3. , ,; :>M` d --- � I t,
I At
- • •!!�� �.� ,N ,t !, ?� �
•�fY�;
PHOTOORAPH 51. GR055 5ECTION 2 LOOKINO BANK.
�� n � 1. �/ -*` 'CTS ��� � ��� •�'_ y
r ♦� i A�
d
,LJ

r• )t'e a�,,'I -VT \
IV
Lr
arlr L t,'. }1 4 •aY•�i. .iaV e.., 4 ii` qtr i„F l - � .
1ori
COD
Ai:
jr-
�• ~
w ,- t ' � =. � �. ` 1 � �_ _!� �- ate• C:� - `�
n
v
0
y

`• �l _ 1,
• T��k »'r- �:'•.',t�9'R'q .• � i � 4�'�' ` rat .Y�'�I
1 if i� °jam a
s 1 1 '`�('\ - � gyp.. t••'. _ - \ y ;�..
ML zil�
�� � tl�l � •� i � 'q • si`� Y � -
� '� � - {, � '��� �. A tea► �4 ' �'r �•` - '�
i, �: i 1 �� � "r. _� • jam. -
,
ems• r r 4dl& f 0
�Z^Otgq 'If#
Ago
" 't T t,. +►mot
Axl
1 • ,may V � ; T, T ` * T J•
1 li iR,• V�t l r . _ _ .i 1
OVII
a �y
d
in

•�� 11 `1 J � , r. �� *. ..L � _.. �. r,
oe
1'
N" 0020014morzam-AMA
W ,.
AP
lop
OV
I
w
• �� . 4krte -
4r
•
rmom" EEP -08030
FILEIIAME: EEP08030X.DWG
v
v
SCALE! N TS
Y
y
v, DATE: 10 -30 -12

•�'����- _ 'li` -.a . ��+��' a,�[''�'e \� � � .iii , :;�;�`� a,,•i -
`� a, • • •1 + �.:. �' -�,.. , , "'"� � \ � �, �� is - s . �, -�
4.
DO
1L
y- _'� Y . �: ,,[� .: �•. ter,: PVI
' 1 1F
- -/r� � a ', �ik•+ . M�' ! j. rr, � ,/� '�'aILFF stir. i
0
L✓
dry

- Y
f i f
.1i
Y a .
n

i
it
wL
� .: tom',,`, '\ i• k��',, , �•� _ _ t .r �►T ,. i
• 1
,
n
C
y

s-=
JOT
A.
x•7.4 -, •+ ' w ( x !Ja ^l .� J
i 5; CRO55SECTION 5 LOOKINO BAW.
.iV4,
En

w
• yr»i .
IL
Ar �
N

..`,� • Y �� � ` � ���. t r'�j0 , 7t -{qty ��'4 � •,�• *• yam/
+' � -� � ' � Y�`t► ", �.``� � rr�:. � ',a� In
•:L f�1. �•�lE� .►�i •'� by �•. �- � /'- �.
'i - ,, • +,. - +'' ' t. 'tom � ,� ; � k��
L 1, t.i "'.'k h`

r 7'
�' r°'5��� • � .� . �t.1 �� �5, ^ + �` '�s`' if �(. �r; � i,
� 1 L• i �i % `,,
IN I
• • �• •
v •I •fig pI
AL
i � �� jyw: �rM - _ c � �_ • t
C1 '
d

n
ail
Inn

. wt
.
� t � '•A y' � �r 7R
. r.",,'i- 3
Jr
Pl

n
a
d
a
S
CA

FUZNAT lo' EEP -08030
r-i UT to SANDY CREEK NlEcoEngineering
'°E"""�` EEP08030X. D WG ���E� �`riy'���j•(Oj�j A dlrlolm ofTUe
1'_�invtitelll MONMRING PHOTOGRAPHS y NTS ssssulca mu+acs rexc, xc
10-30-12 liN'; i►�'II RANDOI�'HCOUNiY, NC (eos)eaei�500
ZIP zrr°o - +aoa
{j� DATE: