20120773 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_2018_20190201

MNga ion Project Name Jadobs Landing
DMS SO SM24
River Basin Yadkin
coed ging Unit 03040105
Count, Rowan USAGE Action ID 2012-01006
Data Project insulated 61=011 NCDWR Permit No 2012-073
Data Propound 512Y2018
Lratllt Ralmse Mllmrone
Pdantlalmode MIDaton Plan
Scbetlulnd
Rd..
(Stream)
Wym COOT
u,seas a
Loltl AntlGlwced
Relmoo Year
(ad...,
Attual 5<M1eCul<E
Reluma Dde, Releases
(6baaml (Fomstnd)
WONaM Lretllb
Rlerine Non Asvan
erine Non-nprlan smart lnd
Rolemos
(Cound)
Cms. Adidieatatl Adual
Relevse Year Release Dale
(Watland) (WMIMd)
Potential Closed pa-Bullt Served
4,484.000
A551.W0
A Gula.... milegati.n aurin$)
A-000
1 Site EsmWl.mant
WA
WA
WA
NIA
NIA
WA
WA
5 ffear 01A Sullt
3DY.
1.36&260
2014
inB2Dl4
30A
WA
WA
SYmr i Manitnln
1WA
4528M
M15
erD2015
W%
WA
WA
4 (war 2 Will
10%
452.760
2D16
4bND2016
19%
NCOOT TIP U3aaO, NC 3
20IMS05 M12M49 WtlmIng.. CabarrvB Ceury
WA
WA
5 (Year V.dtmm
10%
452.760
2017
4/1209
ZMA
WA
WA
6 Year A Manitorin
10%
4E276D
2010
4252018
IMA
MWA
WA
NIA
] ant S MWbrin
15%
2019
1B%
WA
WA
Smord BBnkfull 6teadmtl
15%
6)9.140
2017
1$201]
WA
Tcbl Credits Resulted as Dere
amass
DEBI S(reused madlb only)
Rates 1 1.5 25 5 1 3 2 5 1 3 2 5 1 3 2 5
1- For DMS, no credits are released during NMrst milestone
2. For DMS projects, the second credit release milestone occurs automatically when the as -built report (baseline monitoring report) has been made available to the NCIRT by posting it to the NCEEP portal, provided the following criteria have
been met:
1) Approval of the final Mbipatlon Plan
2) Recordation ofthe pres rvagcn mechanism, as well as a @le opinion acbsptable to the USAGE covering the property
3) Completion of all physical and biological improvements to the midga5on site pursuant to the mklgagon plan
4) Reciept of necessary DA pork aatho112aticn or written DA approval for porjects where DA pemlit Issuance Is not required
3-A 150b reserve of credits is to be held back unit the mm full event performance standard has been met
A Bunt A.m.(reet and aeras,
4,484.000
109.000
A Gula.... milegati.n aurin$)
A-000
43.Wo
Rosemead Raid.
BPA
85%
admBM standee Mantl ewes
1811.40
MGM
losevM amounts(medb)
3.811.400
31P80
NCDWR Pdme USACE Myon 10 P109 Ia
NCOOT TIP U3aaO, NC 3
20IMS05 M12M49 WtlmIng.. CabarrvB Ceury
8W.150
NCOOT M P 1.10 W - Division
test 012a9
716000
NCDOTTIP45606-
M1141460 OIvit e's
568.000
2017-125D 2D1S0o248 NCDOT TI P PS]O4
sippad
NCOOTTIPR-2123CE-
W11-0431 20110.123] cartnic Ouvs Lada
1.411.25D
92650
Remalning Amount$lreetl azres)
D.00d
Gard
RemBlning Amdun!(<rctllb)
0.000
o.WO
1- For DMS, no credits are released during NMrst milestone
2. For DMS projects, the second credit release milestone occurs automatically when the as -built report (baseline monitoring report) has been made available to the NCIRT by posting it to the NCEEP portal, provided the following criteria have
been met:
1) Approval of the final Mbipatlon Plan
2) Recordation ofthe pres rvagcn mechanism, as well as a @le opinion acbsptable to the USAGE covering the property
3) Completion of all physical and biological improvements to the midga5on site pursuant to the mklgagon plan
4) Reciept of necessary DA pork aatho112aticn or written DA approval for porjects where DA pemlit Issuance Is not required
3-A 150b reserve of credits is to be held back unit the mm full event performance standard has been met

Design and Monitoring Firm
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF NC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Email: [e-mail]
Project No: 20110675
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 2018— MY05

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
MEMORANDUM
4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Date: February 1, 2019
To: Matthew Reid, DMS Project Manager
From: Adam Spiller, Project Manager
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Subject: Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site
MY -05 Monitoring Report Comments
Yadkin River Basin CU 03040105
Rowan County, North Carolina
NCDMS Project # 95024
Contract # 003984
Please find below our responses in italics to the MY -05 Monitoring Report comments from NCDMS
received on January 22, 2019, for the Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site.
• Report discusses supplemental plantings that occurred in 2015 and 2018. CCPV shows
supplemental plantings dated 2016 and 2018. Please revise and/or update report discussion to
include all supplemental plantings. A short discussion regarding size, quantity and species
would be helpful. Did the planting that occurred in 2018 affect the outcome of the vegetation
plot totals? Is the 2016 planting referring to the 2015 effort, or was this a separate
supplemental planting?
➢ The reference to a 2015 planting was a typo. The only supplemental plantings that occurred
on site were in 2016 and 2018. This error has been corrected and a brief description of the
extent of each planting has been added to the report. No new stems were reported in any of
the veg plots in 2018.
• Is the "Total Cross-section Area" measurement the previous method used to determine area?
The report indicates that this is a new metric. A short explanation in the report about this
metric would help clear up any confusion. Please list the fixed elevation used for the
measurement on the graph and/or table for each cross-section.
➢ Total Cross-section Area represents the previous method used to determine area (i.e. area
under the baseline bankfull elevation). A short explanation of this has been added to the
report and Table 11 has been updated with the baseline bankfull elevation for each cross-
section.
• Update Table 2 to include all supplemental plantings..
➢ Table 2 has been updated.
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A.
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

• DMS met with KCI on December 4, 2018 to view the Jacob Landing site. Dense privet was
observed on Reach T2A. Please show this area on the CCPV and include the treatment date
if it has occurred on Table 2.
➢ This area of privet was treated on December 13, 2018. This date has been added to Table 2
and the area has been added to the CCPV.
• A large tree fell and damaged portion of the fence on T2. Has this tree been removed and the
fence repaired?
➢ The area around the tree is currently too wet to access and so the tree has not been removed.
Once the area dries out, KCl will remove the tree and repair the fence. The landowner does
not have his cows in this area of his pasture and has said he will keep the cows away from
this area until the fence is repaired.
• Table 11 c (T2) is missing the Total Cross Section Area line as shown on Table 11 b (T1).
Please update.
➢ This table has been updated.
Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these responses.
Sincerely,
Adam Spiller
Project Manager
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A.
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/PROJECT ABSTRACT................................................1
2.0 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................2
3.0 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................2
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Figure1. Vicinity Map...................................................................................................................4
Figure2. Site Asset Map................................................................................................................5
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits...................................................................6
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History ..........................................................................7
Table 3. Project Contacts Table....................................................................................................8
Table 4. Project Attribute Table................................................................................................... 9
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Current Condition Plan View....................................................................................................................1 l
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment..........................................................13
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment..................................................................................15
StreamStation Photos...............................................................................................................................16
VegetationMonitoring Plot Photos...........................................................................................................24
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment...............................................................................28
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata.......................................................................................19
Table 9. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species...............................................30
Appendix D — Stream Survey Data
Cross -Section Plots................................................................................................................................... 34
LongitudinalProfile Plots.........................................................................................................................45
PebbleCount Plots....................................................................................................................................47
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary Table...........................................................................58
Table 11 a. Cross -Section Morphology Data Table..........................................................................62
Table l lb. Stream Reach Morphology Data Table...........................................................................63
Appendix E — Hydrologic Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events......................................................................................66
StreamHydrographs.................................................................................................................................67
Appendix F — Additional Information
Request for Mitigation Plan Amendment, letter dated 5/22/2014............................................................70
Reply to Request for Mitigation Plan Amendment, letter dated 9/2/2014 ................................................73
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 i 2018— MY05

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT
The Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site is a full -delivery project that was developed for the North Carolina
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). Construction was completed in November 2013. The site includes the
restoration of 4,484 linear feet of restoration and 109 linear feet of enhancement on four tributaries to Irish Buffalo
Creek in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. The project is located west of China Grove and north of Kannapolis off
of Saw Road in Rowan County (Figure 1, Appendix A). This project will expand aquatic and terrestrial habitat in
the Rocky River Watershed (03040105). The project is within the 03040105020040 Irish Buffalo Creek Local
Watershed Unit (14 -digit HUC) (NCDENR, EEP 2009). In DMS' most recent publication of excluded and Targeted
Local Watersheds/Hydrologic Units, the 03040105020040 14 -digit HUC has been identified as a Targeted Local
Watershed. The project is located in the Piedmont Physiographic Province and the project streams initiate as
headwater systems out of moderately -sloped, forested hills before reaching the floodplain of Irish Buffalo Creek.
The site's 0.72 -square mile watershed is mostly pasture and mixed hardwoods with small pockets of rural residential
development. Prior to construction the site was actively used for timber and cattle production for over five
generations.
The project goals and objectives are listed below.
Project Goals
• Restore a diverse riparian corridor that connects forested stream systems upstream and downstream of the
project.
• Reduce the sediment supply entering Irish Buffalo Creek.
Project Objectives
• Restore stable channel planforms to streams that have been straightened and modified.
• Reshape and stabilize eroding stream banks.
• Plant the site with native trees to help reestablish a diverse riparian corridor.
• Install exclusion fencing and alternative watering options to keep livestock out of the project streams.
During the Proposal Stage of the project, Reach T2 -A was identified as Enhancement Level 1 at a 1.5:1 credit ratio.
During the assessment and design stage for this reach, a more aggressive restoration approach was determined to
be need, and the because of this the decision was made to completely change the stream type from a G -type channel
to a C/B type channel. This required a restoration level approach during construction and because of this KCI
requested a reallocation of credit type from the IRT from 1.5:1 to 1:1. After several meetings and discussions with
the IRT, this reallocation of credit type was agreed to and resulted in an increase of 155 credits from the credits
listed in the mitigation plan. See Appendix F for more information on this change.
Vegetation success is based on the criteria established in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003). This
document states that vegetation monitoring results should have the following planted stem density minimums in the
corresponding monitoring years: 320 stems/acre through Year Three, 288 stems/acre in Year Four, and 260
stems/acre in Year Five. The fifth -year vegetation monitoring was based on the Level 2 CVS-EEP vegetation
monitoring protocol. The site's average density for this monitoring period is 392 planted stems/acre, with none of
the plots having live stakes planted in them. Ten of the thirteen plots had greater than 260 planted stems/acre. There
are three monitoring plots that have calculated planted stem densities less than 260 stems/acre; (Plots 3, 4, and 6).
To ensure continued vegetative success, some parts of the site received supplemental planting in early 2016. This
consisted of 80 one gallon size trees and approximately 1,400 bare root trees spread across the lower third of both
tributaries. An additional supplemental planting occurred in early 2018, consisting of approximately 320 one gallon
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 1 2018— MY05

size trees spread primarily along the left bank of Tributary 2. See the Current Condition Planview in Appendix B
for the locations of these plantings. Including volunteers, the monitoring plots averaged 1,055 total stems/acre.
Fifth -year monitoring found the Jacob's Landing Site to be stable, with only minor changes from the as -built
conditions. Two small areas of bank erosion that were reported on T 1 during MY02 were repaired with soil lifts in
the beginning of 2016 and these have shown no signs of instability since. The monitoring components were installed
in February/March 2014. Two automatic recording gauges have been installed along T1 and T2. Both stream gauges
recorded several bankfull events during 2018. The monitoring plan for each tributary is as follows: T1 has a 1,500
foot longitudinal profile, 3 riffle cross-sections, and 1 pool cross-section; T2 has a 1,500 foot longitudinal profile,
5 riffle cross-sections and 2 pool cross-sections; T1A and T2A are being monitored visually since they are short
reaches and small channels. Pebble counts were conducted at all eleven cross-sections. Ten permanent photo
reference points have been established with a total of twenty-two photos to be taken annually. The fifth year of
monitoring found the site to be functioning and T2 shows little change from the baseline conditions. While T 1 has
several areas of stream bed aggradation, this is not seen as problematic, but rather the natural transfer of sediment
through the system. Across the five years of monitoring, a clear pattern of sediment aggradation and transport
through the system has been seen and this latest evidence of aggradation is believed to be a natural part of that cycle.
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
Baseline Monitoring Report and in the Mitigation Plan documents available on the DMS' website. All raw data
supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are available from DMS upon request.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The survey data were collected using a real-time kinematic GPS instrument between December 17 and 19, 2018.
Based on feedback from the IRT and DMS, the cross-section measurements have been reviewed and have been
updated. These measurements are now calculated by adjusting the bankfull elevation so that the cross-sectional area
remains the same throughout the monitoring period. A metric called total cross-sectional area has been added that
shows the cross-sectional area based off of the baseline bankfull elevation.
The CVS-EEP protocol, Level 2 (http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm) was used to collect vegetation data from the
site. The vegetation monitoring was completed on July 27, 2018.
3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, M.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.httn)
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin
Priorities 2009. Raleigh, NC.
http://www.nceep.net/services/restplans/Yadkin Pee_Dee _RBRP_2009_Final.pdf
USAGE. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 2 2018— MY05

Appendix A
Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 3 2018— MY05

--
0 - =�r
q
ilk a J I m
a
a Veyies
i
Cr
152
I a
0
7
a
J -
HINA G
o
tp -
"153
� <
C r
To reach the site from Raleigh: proceed west on 1-40
"
for approximately 62 miles. Then travel on 1-85 south
1 ; NDIS
toward High Point/Charlotte for approximately 50
9 PP Y
1
miles. Take Exit 68 toward China Grove on US -29
m
south. Turn right on NC -152 on East Church Street for
approximately 5 miles and then turn left onto Saw
Road. The site will be approximately 0.5 -mile ahead
_+
on the right.
— I
The ro subject project site Is an environmental restoration
1 P 1
- -
-� -
site of the NCDENR Division of Mitgation Services
�
(DMS)andisencompassedbyarecordedconservation
easement, but is bordered by land under private
ownership. Accessing the site may require
i L.',
traversing areas near or along the easement boundary
d
and therefore access by the general public is not
_
permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state
and federal agencies or their designees/contractors
_ - -
involved in the development, oversight and
f
stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within
the terms and timeframes of their defined roles. Any
r h
intended site visitation or activity by any person
outside of these previously sanctioned roles and
activities requires prior coordination with DMS.
DAVIE
KANNAPOLIS
IREDELL DAVIDSON
-- - -- -
29
136
ROWAN
Division
of
Mitigation
CABARRUS STANm
LY m \ Services
- -
x _
FIGURE 1. PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP N
0 0.75 +.5 JACOB'S LANDING STREAM RESTORATION SITE
N11 -
DMS PROJECT # 95024, ROWAN COUNTY, NC
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 4 2018— MY05

r
s �
x ; d
t
Stream Restoration 4,484 If 14,484 SMUs Division
Stream Enhancement 11 109 If/44 SMUs of
Other Streams t Mitigation
Conservation Easement IL Services
FIGURE 2. SITE ASSET MAP
0 175 350 JACOB'S LANDING STREAM RESTORATION SITE Source: NC 2010
Feet DMS PROJECT # 95024, ROWAN COUNTY, NC Statewide Orthaimagery.
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 5 2018— MY05

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Miti
ation Credits
Riparian
Non-
Nitrogen
Stream
wetland
riparian
Buffer
Nutrient
Wetland
Offset
Type
R
EII
Length
4,484
109
Credits
4,484
44
TOTAL
CREDITS
4,528
Project
Component
Project
Design
Existing
Restoration -or-
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
Footage
Approach
Restoration
Footage
Mitigation
-or-
Location
(PI, PII etc.)
Equivalent
Ratio
Reach ID
T1
10+00 — 13+03
326
P2
Restoration
303
1:1
T1
13+52 —14+61
158
-
Enhancement II
109*
1:2.5
T1
14+61 —23+54
846
P2
Restoration
893
1:1
T1A
40+00 —41+78
294
P2
Restoration
178
1:1
T2
50+00 —77+45
2,935
P2
Restoration
2,645*
1:1
T2A
100+00 —104+65
465
P2
Restoration
465
1:1
Component Summation
Restoration
Stream
Mitigation Units (SMU)
Level
(linear feet)
Total Restoration
4,484
4,484
Total
Enhancement Ii
109
44
TOTAL SMU
4,528
*Mitigation units have been calculated to exclude the easement exceptions and water utility easements.
Though not formal BMPs, several small water quality detention structures were installed throughout the project to improve
water quality from the surrounding drainage area.
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 6 2018— MY05

ITable 2. Project Activity & Reporting History
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Data Collection I Actual Completion
Activity or Report Complete or Delivery
Mitigation Plan Sept 12
Final Design - Construction Plans Dec 12
Construction Nov 13
Planting Jan 14
Baseline Monitoring/Report March 14 April 14
Vegetation Monitoring
Feb. 20, 2014
Nov 14
Photo Points
March 11, 2014
Stream Survey
Feb. 25, 2014
Year 1 Monitoring
Oct 14
Nov 14
Vegetation Monitoring
Oct. 1, 2014
Photo Points
Oct. 29, 2014
Stream Survey
Oct. 29, 2014
Year 2 Monitoring
August 15
Dec 15
Vegetation Monitoring
July 28, 2015
Photo Points
Dec. 17, 2015
Stream Survey
Aug. 11, 2015
Bank erosion repair
Jan 16
Supplemental Planting
April 16
Year 3 Monitoring
Dec 16
Dec 16
Vegetation Monitoring
Aug. 31, 2016
Photo Points
Nov. 15, 2016
Stream Survey
June 10, 2016 (T1),
Dec. 8, 2016 (T2)
Year 4 Monitoring
Dec 17
Dec 17
Vegetation Monitoring
Aug. 14, 2017
Photo Points
Nov. 17, 2017
Stream Survey
June 2, 2017 (Tl),
Dec. 112017 T2
Supplemental Planting
April 18
Year 5 Monitoring
Dec 18
Jan 19
Vegetation Monitoring
July 27, 2018
Photo Points
Dec. 19, 2018
Stream Survey
Dec. 19, 2018
Invasive Treatment
Dec 18
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 7 2018— MY05

Table 3. Project Contacts
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Design Firm
KCI Associates of North Carolina
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Construction Contractor
Wright Contracting, LLC
160 Walker Road
Lawndale, NC 28090
Contact: Mr. Stephen James
Phone: [phone]
Planting Contractor
Forestree Management Co.
1280 Maudis Road
Bailey, NC 27807
Contact: Mr. Tony Cortez
Phone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers
KCI Associates of North Carolina
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 8 2018— MY05

Table 4. Project Information
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Project Name
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site
County
Rowan County
Project Area (acres)
13.9 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.)
35.552956 N, 80.653116 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit 03040105020040
DWQ Sub -basin
13-17-09
Project Drainage Area
459 acres/0.72 square miles
Project Drainage Area Percentage
2.3% / 6 acres
of Impervious Area
CGIA Land Use Classification
4.8% Cultivated, 60.1% Managed Herbaceous Cover, and 35.1 % Mixed Upland Hardwoods.
Reach Summary Information (Post -Restoration)
Parameters
TI
T1A
T2
T2A
Length of reach (linear feet)
1,305
178
2,645
465
Valley classification
VIII
VIII
VIII
VIII
Drainage area (acres)
258.6 acres
136.9 acres
200.6 acres
35.7 acres
NCDWQ Water Quality
Class C, WSIII
Class C, WSIII
Class C, WSIII
Class C, WSIII
Classification
Morphological Description (stream
C4
B4c/C4
C4
B4c/C4
type)
Evolutionary trend
Stage II
Stage II
Stage II
Stage II
Constructed
Constructed
Constructed
Constructed
Mapped Soil Series
Chewacla loam
Chewacla loam
Pacolet sandy loam
Pacolet sandy loam
and Chewacla loam
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Well drained
Poor to Well drained
Well drained
Soil Hydric status
Non hydric
Non hydric
Non hydric
Non hydric
Sloe
0-2%
0-2%
0-2%
0-2%
FEMA classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Piedmont Alluvial
Piedmont Alluvial
Piedmont Alluvial
Mesic Mixed
Native vegetation community
Forest
Forest
Forest
Hardwood Forest
Percent composition of exotic
0%
0%
0%
0%
invasive vegetation
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section
Yes
Yes, received 404 permit.
N/A
404
Waters of the United States — Section
Yes
Yes, received 401 permit.
N/A
401
Endangered Species Act
No
N/A
N/A
Historic Preservation Act
No
N/A
N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act*
N/A
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management
No
N/A
Act (CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Floodplain development permit obtained
N/A
through Rowan County
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 9 2018— MY05

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 10 2018— MY05

t
CONSERVATION EASEMENT r I P10 0° SUPPLEMEPLANTING NT L J
* 50 FEET
STREAM • AGGRADATION+ \x EASEMENT
x� EXCEPTION
CROSS-SECTION (XSna Vp7\ x
r ..� XS11VEG PLOT ACHIEVING DENSITY CRITERION
t (GAUGE 2) +
VEG PLOT BELOW DENSITY CRITERION Z
UPPLE }
N0 PHOTO POINT (PP)
\x }
A X X 4
END ( 6 9 �0o
• '••
PROFILE T2
/ uvr t
16 REPAIRS
i.
SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING
VP8AGE SOURCE: NC 2014 STATEWIDE ORTHOIMAGERY
+ %
s77+00
Y SUPPLEMENTAL
NC GRIP
PLANTING - 2018
(ONLY ALONG FENCE) +
MAD 133
WATER QUALITY VP12
STRUCTURE f'
'
EASEMENT \ \% —x�X o x�x VP13 SUPPLEMENTAL •.y'}x";"
-80' -40' 0' 80' 1y0EXCEPTION PLANTING (2016)
o XS3 0 \x\ r 4
j.
GRAPHIC SCALE XS2 00 \
PP2 y o s y r
0 0 o P x I N tis:lr
X/V P 10 0 / 0 x 0�
00
XS1 PP4 M�
� � VP11
r 4 ry )
1
00 $ (GAUGE 1) x }
o e _ - . x—� ,X y
0+11 END
-C VP9 + PROFILE T1
BEGIN PP1l,�
REACH TI BEGIN
N.- PROFILE T1
BEGIN
REACH T1
-—.7—l__. _
• it -
•k :, z� - �,ya �-. ��� �^may �, •'
Vis; • _ y �9p'�yt
F
Ov
_ t• .x4r'
.. � - .� � +,''fa
i �.. ,�`-. .• a •:• _sn:. :�: •!�� i. _ -
.m
_ - - - A - ��M „�--v^�r:-. •tfE•, �`-•,ice '�=�
- _ _ _ moi,{ �.dY � - _ .•+' ��. r

0
GG.gS ]L-
1 i•
f
-80' -40' 0' 80' 160'
_ r °
WATER QUALITY
STRUCTURE
BEGIN
PROFILE T2
VP1 PP5 VP2 XS6 h yekoo
1
*99
00 oo51+00 0+
BEGIN 00 r ° +
REACH T2 XS5 6akoo 01 y�x
PID6
XS7
SUP LEMENTAL
WATER QUALITY G (2018)
STRUCTURE
, 50 FEET
EASEMENT
EXCEPTION
L� - ':•may}.
SUPPLEMENTAL
PLANTING (2018)
0
* VP4
(o
0
00 ..
PP7
- BEGIN
REACH T2A
100+00
INVASIVES
TREATMENT #y.
(2018)
�NpO
Pc. o VP5 ,
XS8 -
_ SUPPLEMENTAL —Z'
PP8 jf�it
6 r
AR50 FEET
103+00 #' `.P: EASEMENT
EXCEPTION
SUPPLEMENTAL
o� PLANTING - 2018
(ONLY ALONG FENCE)
XS9 VP6
.. 00�x�
+ o oo
.®
SUPPLEMENTAL
PLANTING (2016)
n
o �
_^O
P.
PP9 0 �s or oo �? � o
A
1
VP7 PP10 END
�C, XS11 PROFILE T2
n� (GAUGE 2) SUPPLEMENTAL
PLANTING (2016)
PROFILFs
" SUPPLWEN-TAC o
PLANTING - 2018 N
(ONLY ALON,FENCE
) I I
• - ~.w•}s-� y'i '.)!'1 --_-'--""I ----- _ � � _ _ _ - - �I - - I OHO �� •M �'�
XS4
VP12 (GAUGE 1
PP3 1
SUPPLEMENTA'
XS3 PLANTING (2016
"-_- - - XS2 $ 00.
_-
m
WATER QUALITY
STRUCTURE
VP11
00+0J40
? PP2

Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Assessed Len th 2,389 Reach - Tl
Number
Major
Stable,
TotalNumber
of
Amount of
%Stable,
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Category
Sub -Category
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to
1. Vertical Stability
1. Bed
(Riffle and Run units)
significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
2
900
62%
point bars)
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate -Riffle maintains coarser
12
21
57%
substrate
3. Meander Pool
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean
3
1 6
19%
Condition
Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance
between tail of upstream riffle and head of
3
16
19%
downstrem riffle)
I, Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend
4.Thalweg Position
11
I 1
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander
(Glide)
10
10
100%
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
poor growth and/or scour and erosion
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass
wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts
2. Undercut
that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
0
10 0
providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures physically intact with no dislodged
6
6
100%
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
boulders or logs.
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
6
6
o
100%
grade across the sill.
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath
6
6
N/A
2a. Piping
sills or arms.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of
3. Bank Protection
influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for
6
6
100%
this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool
4. Habitat
Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6
0
0
N/A
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 13 2018 — MY05

Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Assessed Len th 2,084 Reach -T2
Number
Major
Stable,
TotalNumber
of
Amount of
%Stable,
Channel
Channel
Performing as
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Category
Sub -Category
Metric
Intended
As -built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to
1. Vertical Stability
1. Bed
(Riffle and Run units)
significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
0
0
100%
point bars)
2. DeEadation -Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser
2. Riffle Condition
substrate
23
23
100%
3. Meander Pool
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean
26
26
100%
Condition
Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance
between tail of upstream riffle and head of
26
26
100%
downstrem riffle)
4.Thalweg Position'
(.Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend
N/A
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander
N/A
(Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
2. Bank
1. Scoured/I}oding
poor growth and/or scour and erosion
0
�>
100 u
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass
wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts
2. Undercut
that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
t>
100 u
providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
1 Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
Totals
0
o
100%
3. Engineered
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged
15
15
100%
Structures
boulders or logs.
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
15
15
100
grade across the sill.
Structures lacking any substantial flowunderneath
2a. Piping
sills or arms.
1
1
100
Bank erosion within the structures extent of
3. Bank Protection
influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for
6
6
100%
this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
Pool forming structures maintaining-- Max Pool
4. Habitat
Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6
0
0
:N:/AJ
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
'Due to this reach's small size and the scale of the pattern, the exact position of the thalweg in relation
to the meanders and morphological features is inconsistent and not practical to evaluate
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 14 2018 — MY05

Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Planted Acreage 12.83 Easement Acreage 13.9
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
% of Planted Acreage
Very limited cover of both woody and
Pattern and
1. Bare Areas
0.1 acre
0
0.00
o
0.0/�
herbaceous material.
Color
Woody stem densities clearly below
2. Low Stem Density
Pattern and
target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5
0.1 acre
0
0.00
0.0%
Areas
Color
stem count criteria.
Total
0
0.00
0.0%
3. Areas of Poor Growth
Areas with woody stems of a size class
Pattern and
that are obviously small given the
0.25 acre
0
0.00
0.0%
Rates or Vigor
Color
monitoring year.
Cumulative Total
0
0.00
0.0%
4. Invasive Areas of
Areas or points (if too small to render
Pattern and
1,000 SF
l *
0.48
3.5%
Concern
as polygons at ma scale).
Color
5. Easement
reas or points (if too small to render
Pattern and
Encroachment Areas
Fas,polygons at map scale).
none
I
I Color
0
0.00
0.0%
*This area was treated on December 13, 2018
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 15 2018 — MY05

Stream Station Photos
Photo Point In: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point In: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point Id: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 1d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 1 Tributary: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 1 Tributary: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 16 2018— MY05

Photo Point 2u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 2u: MY -05 —12/19/18
Photo Point 2d: MY -00 3/11/14
Photo Point 2d: MY -05 12/19/18
Photo Point 3u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 3u: MY -05 —12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 17 2018— MY05

Photo Point 3d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 3d: MY -05 —12/19/18
Photo Point 4u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 4u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 4d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 4d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 18 2018— MY05

Photo Point 5u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 5u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 5d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 5d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 6u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 6u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 19 2018— MY05

Photo Point 6d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 6d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 7u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 7u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 7d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 7d: MY -05 —12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 20 2018— MY05

Photo Point 8u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 8u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 8d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 8d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 9u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 9u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 21 2018— MY05

Photo Point 9d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 9d: MY -05 —12/19/18
Photo Point 9 Tributary: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 9 Tributary: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Photo Point 10u: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 10u: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 22 2018— MY05

Photo Point 10d: MY -00 — 3/11/14
Photo Point 10d: MY -05 — 12/19/18
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 23 2018— MY05

Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Plot 1 Photo: 7/27/18 W05
Plot 3 Photo: 7/27/18 — W05
Plot 5 Photo: 7/27/18 — MY05
Plot 2 Photo: 7/27/18 — MY05
Plot 4 Photo: 7/27/18 — MY05
Plot 6 Photo: 7/27/18 — MY05
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 24 2018— MY05

. _�'�A ��e: ® lac •` '✓�'". �,��
y eS�. Sjq� A
F
"lot 9 Photo: 1 1
K �a
' r � At,
4 '
ar
. _�'�A ��e: ® lac •` '✓�'". �,��
k9 R
yF! �
1
y eS�. Sjq� A
F
"lot 9 Photo: 1 1
' r � At,
4 '
k9 R
yF! �
1

Plot 13 Photo: 7/27/18 — MY05
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 26 2018— MY05

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 27 2018— MY05

Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Vegetation Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold Met?
Monitoring Year 05
Planted Stem Density
(stems/acre)
Monitoring Year 05
Total Stem Density
(stems/acre)
1
Yes
283
931
2
Yes
405
607
3
No
243
283
4
No
243
1,214
5
Yes
364
526
6
No
202
607
7
Yes
607
2,388
8
Yes
405
1,255
9
Yes
445
1,093
10
Yes
445
647
11
Yes
526
1,740
12
Yes
405
769
13
Yes
526
1,659
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 28 2018— MY05

Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Report Prepared B
Drew Rosso _
8/2/2018 7:08 _
KCI-2016-Lnidb
M:\2011\20110675-Jacobs Landing\Monitoring\Vegetaton CVS Database
12-39GM5H2
63410176
Date Prepared
database name
database location
computer name
file size
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEET'S
IN THIS DOCUMENT — — ----
OCUME T------
Metadata
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary ofproject(s) and
project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This
excludes live stakes.
Proj, 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,
missin ,etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for allplots.
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 sterns impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage bv Plot
Damage values tallied by type 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
volunteers combined) for each lot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY------ ----- --
Project Code 95024
project Name Jacob's Landing
Description Stream Restoration Site
River Basin Yadkin-Pee Dee
length(ft) 4593
area (s q m) 0.72
Required Plots calculate 13
,SampledPlots 13
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 29 2018– MY05

Tacoh's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project# 95024 30 2018—MY05
Current Plot Data (MY5 2018)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95024-01-0001
95024-01-0002
95024-01-0003
95024-01-0004
95024-01-0005 1
95024-01-0006
95024-01-0007
95024-01-0008
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T Pnol-S P -all T Pnol-S P -all T PnoLS P -all T
Acer negundo
boxelder
Tree
1
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
8 8
8
2
2
2 4
41 4
1
1
1
11
1
101
10
101
2
21
2
Callicarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1
11
11
2
2
2
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
7
1
1
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
1
4
2
3
6
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
14
15
3
5
34
16
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1 1
1
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
3
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
3
3
3 11
1 1
2
2
2
2
2
2
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
2 2
2
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
6 6
6
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
3 3
3
1
1
1
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
2
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
Unknown
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
7
7
23
10 10
15
6
6 7
6
6 30
9 9 13
5
5
15
15
15
59
10
10
31
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
41 4 7 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 6 2 2 4 3 3 6 4 4 9 2 2
6
283 283 931 405 4051 6071 2431 2431 2831 2431 243112141 3641 36415261 2021 20216071 6071 607123881 4051
55
Tacoh's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project# 95024 30 2018—MY05

Current Plot Data (MY5
2018)
Scientific Name
Acer negundo
Common Name
boxelder
Species Type
Tree
95024-01-0009
95024-01-0010
95024-01-0011
95024-01-0012
95024-01-0013
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
1
PnoLS
P -all
T
2
PnoLS
P -all
T
3
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
3
7
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
Callicarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
12
2
23
7
21
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
2
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
1
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
3
2
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
2
1
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
7
7
7
5
5
5
8
8
8
9
9
9
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
Unknown
jShrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
11
111
27
111
111
16
13
13
43
10
10
19
131
131
41
1
1
1
1
1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
3
3
6
3
3
6
4
4
10
31
31
5
4
4
9
445
445
1093
445
445
647
526
S261
17401
4051
405
769
526
526
1659
Tacoh's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project# 95024 31 2018—MY05

Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project#95024 32 2018—MY05
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY5 (2018)
MY4 (2017)
MY3 (2016)
MY2 (2015)
MY1 (2014)
MYO (2014)
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
Acer negundo
boxelder
Tree
7
4
6
6
3
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
1
1
2
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
40
40
41
40
40
40
41
41
42
43
43
45
44
44
44
44
44
44
Callicarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
6
6
6
7
7
7
9
9
9
9
9
9
11
11
12
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
4
4
3
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
11
11
11
11
11
11
9
9
11
9
9
9
1
1
1
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
9
7
1
3
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
18
11
2
4
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
152
126
206
171
272
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
11
1
7
1
1
6
1
1
9
3
3
10
11
11
17
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
1
1
1
11
1
1
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
4
1
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
12
12
17
12
12
18
12
12
17
16
16
19
21
21
32
3
3
3
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
2
Quercus
oak
Tree
I
1
1
1
ill
11
11
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
21
4
21
2
2
4
4
4
3
3
4
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
5
5
5
5
5
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
40
40
41
41
41
41
43
43
43
46
46
46
41
41
41
54
54
54
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
51
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
5
51
5
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
2
2
3
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
1
1
1
6
6
6
133
133
133
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
126
126 339
129
129
299
1321
132 372
144
144 344
149
149
444
2461
2461
246
13 13 13 13 13 13
0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
11 11 21 121 12 21 11 11 20 11 11 17 11 11 14 6 6
6
392 392 1055 402 402 931 411 411 1158 448 448 1071 464 464 1382 766 766
766
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates ofNorth Carolina
DMS Project#95024 32 2018—MY05

Appendix D
Stream Survey Data
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 33 2018— MY05

Cross -Section Plots
Yadkin -Pee Dee^
Jacob's Landing
XS -1
0.21
12/19/2018
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
SUMMARY DATA
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
Bankfull Width:
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
Entrenchment Ratio:
802
801
796.6
8.5
2.0
12.2
798.0
44.4
1.
0.7
3.6
Jacob's Landing, XS -1, Riffle, Tl
r
#
f y,.
River Basin:
Site:
XS ID
Drainage Area (sq mi):
Date:
Field Crew:
4
Station Elevation
0.00 800.53
3.09 800.11
6.41 799.51
11.18 797.42
14.39 796.20
16.38 796.21
19.36 796.16
23.33 796.39
24.92 796.36
26.14 795.35
26.76 795.21
28.02 795.35
28.63 795.59
29.56 795.35
31.28 796.14
33.15 796.24
35.53 796.22
39.12
796.26
ftftt
800
799
43.14 796.00
47.38 796.37
51.16
796.70
798
53.93 797.83
57.65
799.24
�
58.98
799.59
c
797
--
796
-- -
---
--
61.56 799.87
64.50
799.77
W
795
64.55 799.89
794
793
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
60
MY03 MY04
MY05
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone Area WOO0 MY01 W02
4
W / D Ratio:
17.5
ht
Bank Hei Ratio:
0.7
MY03 MY04
MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Site:
Jacob's Landing
XS ID
XS -2
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.21
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Y a
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
794.29
Current Bankfull Elevation:
792.7
y . 1
1.56
794.05
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
10.0
4.38
793.31
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.6
9.01
792.15
Bankfull Width:
11.6
16.19
792.15
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
794.2
25.51
792.29
Flood Prone Width:
77.3
32.80
792.30
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
37.70
792.67
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
39.79
792.06
W / D Ratio:
13.5
40.99
791.73
Entrenchment Ratio:
6.7
41.85
791.24
Bank Height Ratio:
0.8
43.53
791.14
44.70
791.34
45.27
791.67
Jacob's Landing, XS -2, Riffle, Tl
46.09
792.20
796
47.23
791.98
49.31
792.36
53.75
792.41
795
61.22
792.57
69.94
792.88
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
794
------
73.50
793.28
77.82
794.31
w
77.95
794.81
793
------ --------------------------------
------------------
------------
0
c
792
W
791
790
0 10
20
30
40 50
60 70
Station (feet)
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone
Area
WOO0
MY01 W02
MY03 MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
18.1
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
Site:
Bankfull Width:
38.6
Jacob's Landing
Flood Prone Width:
r,
XS ID
1.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
XS -3
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Drainage Area (sq mi):
Bank Height Ratio:
0.36
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
0.00
793.99
- -- � Bankfiill MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY04 MY05
0.92
793.80
3.22
792.90
7.92
791.44
10.36
791.09
16.46
791.09
24.68
791.46
F
30.50
791.33
a=
x.,
34.89
791.18
37.73
791.34
--. w_-
38.70
791.03
40.53
790.76
41.32
790.60
42.29
790.53
Jacob's Landing, XS -3, Pool, Tl
43.38
790.28
795
44.23
790.43
44.90
791.22
794
46.08
791.70
46.68
791.72
793
50.57
791.48
52.94
791.73
792
55.72
792.59
59.22
793.67
791
61.59
793.74
61.84
794.18
0
•�
790
c
�
789
W
788
787
0 10
20
30 40
50 60
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Current Bankfull Elevation:
791.63
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
18.1
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
5.2
Bankfull Width:
38.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Flood Prone Width:
---
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
---
Bank Height Ratio:
---
- -- � Bankfiill MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
l
Site:
6.6
Bankt'ull Width:
Jacob's Landing
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
791.5
XS ID
61.2
Max Depth at Bankfull:
XS -4
Mean Depth at BankfulL•
0.7
Drainage Area (sq mi):
15.7
0.36
5.5
w
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
a MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY04 MY05
0.00
792.21
2.42
791.70
-
5.97
790.36
9.17
789.95
13.75
790.20
18.99
789.88
26.06
789.77
'
28.08
789.56
29.87
789.30
31.10
789.03
31.96
788.51
32.81
788.85
34.04
789.14
34.52
789.41
Jacob's Landing, XS -4, Riffle, Tl
36.28
789.54
795
37.33
790.10
38.85
790.12
794
41.32
790.40
43.74
790.30
47.65
790.30
793
52.43
790.32
58.56
790.18
w
792
61.31
790.49
m
64.59
791.75
�
791
67.47
792.90
0
67.59
793.62
�
790
W
789
788
0 10 20
30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
• Bankfull - � � •Flood Prone Are
SUMMARY DATA
Current Bankfull Elevation:
790.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.9
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.6
Bankt'ull Width:
11.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
791.5
Flood Prone Width:
61.2
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
Mean Depth at BankfulL•
0.7
W / D Ratio:
15.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.5
Bank Height Ratio:
0.8
a MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Site:
Jacob's Landing
XS ID
XS -5
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.36
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
818.69
Current Bankfull Elevation:
813.6
_
0.20
817.83
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.0
3.49
816.55
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.4
" <
_
8.24
813.88
Bankfull Width:
11.4
10.40
813.64
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
815.1
14.19
15.75
813.64
813.11
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth Bankfull:
27.3
1.6
at
r
17.18
813.28
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
18.11
812.48
W / D Ratio:
14.5
19.58
812.13
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.4
20.77
812.00
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
21.59
812.11
' o>
22.30
812.38
23.71
813.14
Jacob's Landing, XS -5, Riffle, T2
24.76
813.28
818
25.79
813.57
30.29
813.65
817
30.33
813.64
35.09
816.06
39.57
817.33
816
a815
- - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
E
814
0
c
�
813
W
812
811
0 5
10
15
20 25 30 35
40
Station (feet)
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone
Area
WOOMY01
W02
MY03 MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
'
Site:
Jacob's Landing
L2
XS ID
XS -6
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.67
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
812.29
Current Bankfull Elevation:
809.8
6.41
811.43
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.8
MY03 MY04 MY05
12.58
810.40
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.0
15.00
809.90
Bankfull Width:
11.5
18.44
809.85
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
811.4
20.83
809.60
Flood Prone Width:
36.7
22.99
808.61
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
::.
24.70
808.21
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
25.65
808.47
W / D Ratio:
15.0
26.87
808.61
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.2
27.07
808.75
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9
28.59
809.42
31.68
810.16
34.15
810.31
Jacob's Landing, XS -6, Riffle, T2
38.43
810.47
815
42.36
811.14
46.62
812.68
814
46.39
813.87
813
812
- --
- -
811
e
•O�
810
c
___________________________
___________________ __________________________
�
809
W
808
807
0 5 10
15
20 25 30 35 40 45
Station (feet)
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone Area
WOOMY01
W02
MY03 MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Site:
Jacob's Landing
---
I'
XS ID
XS -7
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.67
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
810.73
Current Bankfull Elevation:
806.2
0.40
810.00
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
13.8
1.45
809.78
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
15.9
2.74
809.21
Bankfull Width:
10.1
5.14
807.66
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
7.54
807.11
Flood Prone Width:
8.85
807.00
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.
10.98
806.84
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
12.70
806.27
W / D Ratio:
---
MY02 MY03 MY04
13.73
805.91
Entrenchment Ratio:
---
14.48
804.67
Bank Height Ratio:
---
15.87
804.60
17.37
804.46
18.83
804.29
Jacob's Landing, XS -7, Pool, T2
20.47
804.48
812
22.36
805.27
22.80
806.14
811
23.95
806.41
26.61
806.56
810
28.32
806.62
809
31.22
806.89
34.66
806.52
808
36.86
806.87
�
39.38
807.98
807
42.47
809.19
0
c
806 ------------------------
----------
-------- - -------------------------
-----
W
805
804
803
0 5
10
15
20 25 30
35 40
Station (feet)
- -- � Bankfiill
WOOW01
---
9
MY02 MY03 MY04
MY05

Cross -Section Plots
1.1
SUMMARY DATA
2.33 804.74
9.63 802.25
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Jacob's Landing
XS -8
0.70
12/19/2018
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
806
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
Jacob's Landing, XS -8, Riffle, T2
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
- '
c
River Basin:
Site:
XS ID
Drainage Area (sq mi):
Date:
Field Crew:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
Station Elevation
0.00 805.49
0.07 805.03
W / D Ratio:
3.90 804.36
6.80 803.24
2.9
11.26 801.98
14.43 801.67
15.88 801.58
17.35 801.18
18.49 800.30
19.95 800.03
20.39 799.80
21.47 799.63
22.52 799.71
23.79 799.56
24.45 800.01
25.72
800.62
805
27.25 801.27
28.19
801.31
804
29.92 801.31
32.59
801.14
w
803
34.14 801.85
35.40
802.62
�
0
�
802
801
----------------------------------
-----------------
------
------------------
MY03
MY04 MY05
36.95 803.21
39.67 804.21
41.50
804.66
W
800
799
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Station (feet)
35 40
--- • Bankfull - -- Flood Prone Area WOO 00 MY01 W02
SUMMARY DATA
2.33 804.74
9.63 802.25
Current Bankfull Elevation:
801.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.7
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
12.2
Bankfull Width:
9.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
802.7
Flood Prone Width:
27.4
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
9.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.9
Bank Height Ratio:
MY03
MY04 MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Current Bankfull Elevation:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.2
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.3
Site:
14.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
Jacob's Landing
Flood Prone Width:
44.9
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
XS ID
0.6
W / D Ratio:
XS -9
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.1
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.70
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
0.00
801.51
1.50
801.16
a
4.79
799.93.
MY05
7.71
798.51
-
12.11
798.04
+n
15.68
797.97
17.61
797.82
18.34
797.68
;.
1
19.55
797.07
f - ,fir
20.63
796.58
22.01
796.84
23.31
796.76
24.77
797.05
25.68
797.22
Jacob's Landing, XS -9, Riffle, T2
27.21
797.97
802
28.34
798.25
31.56
798.23
801
36.10
798.13
42.03
798.15
46.85
798.25
800
50.70
799.52
51.59
799.65
w
799
52.46
799.79
m
52.56
800.27
798
0
c
�
797
W
796
795
0 10
20
30
40
50
Station (feet)
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone Are
SUMMARY DATA
Current Bankfull Elevation:
798.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.2
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
6.3
Bankfull Width:
14.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
799.5
Flood Prone Width:
44.9
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
23.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.1
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9
a
MY00
MY01 MY02 MY03 MY04
MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Site:
Jacob's Landing
XS ID
XS -10
-
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.70
s -
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
797.72
Current Bankfull Elevation:
796.5
0.04
5.30
796.46
796.52
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
14.5
13.9
�W
10.77
796.67
Bankfull Width:
16.2
16.94
796.63
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
22.57
796.25
Flood Prone Width:
---
24.41
796.09
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.3
s'
25.10
795.75
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
MY02 MY03 MY04
MY05
25.26
794.86
W / D Ratio:
---
27.09
794.18
Entrenchment Ratio:
---
28.21
794.43
Bank Height Ratio:
---
29.13
794.56
29.65
794.61
31.77
795.21
Jacob's Landing, XS -10, Pool, T2
32.74
796.55
800
35.07
796.59
37.45
796.91
42.73
796.61
799
50.83
797.11
55.80
797.85
798
59.36
799.34
w
797
c
796
W
795
794
4 14
24
34 44
54
Station (feet)
- -- � Bankfiill WOOW01
MY02 MY03 MY04
MY05

Cross -Section Plots
River Basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
Site:
Jacob's Landing
XS ID
XS -11
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.70
Date:
12/19/2018
Field Crew:
T. Seelinger and B. Rose
s
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
794.14
Current Bankfull Elevation:
793.6
-
6.04
793.95
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.5
12.68
793.72
Total Cross -Sectional Area:
7.6
15.74
793.49
Banktull Width:
13.3
17.36
793.20
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
795.2
19.09
792.84
Flood Prone Width:
53.3
19.83
792.50
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
21.12
792.15
Mean Depth at BankfulL•
0.7
22.28
792.08
W / D Ratio:
18.7
23.77
792.40
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.0
24.72
793.03
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9
26.22
793.43
27.17
793.53
32.02
793.34
MY03 MY04 MY05
Jacob's Landing, XS -11, Riffle, T2
39.25
793.31
797
46.52
793.48
50.41
794.37
55.88
795.93
796
55.90
796A6
795 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
a
794
0
c
793
W
792
791
0 10
20
30
40 50
Station (feet)
--- • Bankfull - -- •Flood Prone Area
WOOMY01
W02
MY03 MY04 MY05

799
797
795
793
c
0
791
a
LU
789
787
785
783
Longitudinal Profi
Jacob's Landing
DMS Project Number -
Station 10+50 - 24+0(
■
SWS = -0.0071
+ 804.24
1080 1180 1280 1380 1480 1580 1680 17
Stationing
MYR1, 10/27/14 MYR2, 8/10/15 MYR3, 6/10/16 MYR4, 5/31/17

Cross -Section 1 Riffle - MY -05
100%
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs
LandSilt/Clay
aXS 1 Riffle g
Particle Millimeter Count
< 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062-.125 S JL
Fine .125-.25 A 5
Medium .25-.50 N 15
Coarse .50-1 D 26
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 27
Very Fine
2 - 4
23
's 80%
E
�?
60%
Fine 4-5.7 G
Fine 5.7-8 R
0 As Built
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
L
"
MY -01 (2014)
—� MY -02 (2015)
Medium 11.3- 16 V
Coarse 16-22.6
E
2
40%
e
—� MY -03 (2016)
—R—MY-04(2017)
t MY -OS (2018)
Coarse 22.6-32 L
VeryCoarse
32-45
S
1
20%
0%
0.01
0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse 45-64
Small 64-90 C
Small 90-128 O
Large 128-180 B 1
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362
B
Size
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
(mm)
0.42
0.75
1.1
1.6
2.8
3.9
Size Distribution
mean 0.9
dispersion 3.1
skewness -0.07
Type
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
0%
73%
26%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Small 362-512 L
Medium 512-1024 D
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024-2048 R
Bedrock >2048 BDRK
Total 100
Note:

Cross -Section 2 Riffle - MY -05
100%
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs
LandSilt/Clay
aXS 2 Riffle g
Particle Millimeter Count
< 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062-.125 S JL
Fine .125-.25 A 12
Medium .25-.50 N 24
Coarse
.50-1
D
26
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 15
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
80%
E
60%
Fine 4-5.7 G 1
0 As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R 2
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
w
tMY-01(2014)
—�MY_oz(zols)
—*— MY -03 20 6)
Medium 11.3- 16 V
Coarse 16-22.6
E
40%
A
w
e
20%
—M— MY -04 (2017)
t MY -OS (2018)
Coarse 22.6-32 L
Very Coarse
32-45
S
0%
0.01
5�x/
0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse 45-64 2
Small 64-90 C
Small 90-128 O 5
Large 128-180 B 5
Large 180-256 L 1
Small 256-362
B
Size
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
(mm)
0.28
0.49
0.73skewness
1.1
4
140
Size Distribution
mean 1.1
dispersion 4.0
0.15
Type
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
0%
77%
12%
11%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Small 362-512 L
Medium 512-1024 D
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024-2048 R
Bedrock >2048 BDRK
Total 100
Note:

Cross-Section 3 Pool - MY-05
15%
Particle
Millimeter
gravel
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
15
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
4
Fine
.125-.25
A
2
Medium
.25-.50
N
21
Coarse
.50-1
D
28
Very Coarse
1 - 2
S
14
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
Fine
4-5.7
G
7
Fine
5.7-8
R
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
Medium
11.3-16
V
2
Coarse
16-22.6
E
Coarse
22.6-32
L
VeryCoarse
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
Medium
512-1024
D
,rg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
w
0
20%
0% IAS;
15%
0.01
0.1
gravel
Size (mm)
D16
0.074
D35
0.4
D50
0.61
D65
0.88
D84
2
D95
5
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 3 Pool
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 0.4
dispersion 5.8
skewness -0.17
t MY -01 (2014)
-� MY -02 (2015)
-� MY -03 (2016)
-1M- MY -04 (2017)
t MY -05 (2018)
1000 10000
silt/clay
15%
sand
69%
gravel
16%
cobble
0%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross -Section 4 Riffle - MY -05
0%
Particle
Millimeter
gravel
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
1
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
2
Fine
.125-.25
A
2
Medium
.25-.50
N
17
Coarse
.50-1
D
14
Coarse
1 - 2
S
5
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
2
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
3
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
2
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
4
Coarse
16-22.6
E
Coarse
22.6-32
L
4
Coarse
32-45
S
7
—Very
Very Coarse
45-64
13
Small
64-90
C
13
Small
90-128
O
2
Large
128-180
B
5
Large
180-256
L
4
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Medium
512-1024
D
Lrg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
w
0
20%
0%
0%
0.01
0.1
gravel
Size (mm)
D16
0.41
D35
1
D50
13
D65
48
D84
79
D95
170
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 4 Riffle
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 5.7
dispersion 18.9
skewness -0.24
As Built
+ MY -01 (2014)
—a— MY -02 (2015)
—� MY -03 (2016)
—1M— MY -04 (2017)
+MY -05 (2018)
1000 10000
silt/clay
0%
sand
40%
gravel
36%
cobble
24%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross -Section 5 Riffle - MY -05
100%
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs
aXS 5 Riffleng
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062-.125 S
Fine .125-.25 A 3
Medium .25-.50 N 7
Coarse
.50-1
D
6
1 4
80%
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 10
Very Fine 2 - 4 14
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
E
Z
60%
_ As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R 4
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
2
d
MY -01 (zola)
MY -02 (2015)
Medium 11.3- 16 V
Coarse
16-22.6
E
e
40%—�
20%
—� MY -03 (2016)
—M—MY-04(2017)
Coarse 22.6-32 L 2
Coarse
32-45
S
1
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
+MY -05 (2018)
—Very
Very Coarse 45-64 3
Small 64-90 C 15
Small 90-128 O 13
Large 128- 180 B 18
Large 180-256 L
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Size (mm)
D16 1
D35 3.1
D50 32
D65 82
D84 130
D95 160
Size Distribution
mean 11.4
dispersion 18.0
skewness -0.31
Type
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
0%
26%
28%
46%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Medium 512-1024 D
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024- 2048 R
Bedrock >2048
BDRK
Note:
Total 100

Cross -Section 6 Riffle -MY-05
9
Particle
Millimeter
gravel
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
3
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
3
Fine
.125-.25
A
4
Medium
.25-.50
N
9
Coarse
.50-1
D
7
Coarse
1 - 2
S
11
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
15
Fine
4-5.7
G
5
Fine
5.7-8
R
2
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
1
Medium
11.3-16
V
1
Coarse
16-22.6
E
4
Coarse
22.6-32
L
3
Coarse
32-45
S
3
—Very
Very Coarse
45-64
8
Small
64-90
C
11
Small
90-128
O
4
Large
128-180
B
4
Large
180-256
L
2
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Medium
512-1024
D
Lrg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
0
20%
0% !
9
0.01
0.1
gravel
Size (mm)
D16
0.4
D35
1.8
D50
3.6
D65
22
D84
75
D95
140
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 6 Riffle
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 5.5
dispersion 14.9
skewness 0.12
As Built
+MY -01 (2014)
+MY -02 (2015)
—� MY -03 (2016)
—l[— MY -04 (2017)
+MY -05 (2018)
1000 10000
silt/clay
3%
sand
34%
gravel
42%
cobble
21%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross -Section 7 Pool -MY-05
2
100%
80%
Particle Size Distribution
JacobsXS 7 PoolLanding
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 11
Very Fine .062-.125 S 13
Fine .125-.25 A 9
Medium .25-.50 N 13
Coarse .50-1 D 1
VeryCoarse 1 - 2 S
Very Fine
2 - 4
8
a
'
60%
Fine 4-5.7 G 4
Fine 5.7-8 R 2
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
5
H
MY -01 (2014)
—A,—MY-oz(2015)
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 8
Coarse
16-22.6
E
4
a
0
40%
—AMY -03 (2016)
MY -04 (2017)
t MY os (2015)
Coarse 22.6-32 L 6
32-45
S
4
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
—VeryCoarse
Very Coarse 45-64 4
Small 64-90 C 1
Small 90-128 O 2
Large 128-180!asbedrock
Large 180-256
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
Size (mm)
D16 0.081
D35 0.28
D50 2.6
D65 10
D84 32
D95 180
Size Distribution
mean 1.6
dispersion 22.2
skewness -0.13
Type
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
11%
36%
45%
3%
0%
5%
0%
0%
0%
Medium 512-1024
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024-2048
Bedrock >2048 K 5
al 100
Note: Lots of saprolite, recorde

Cross-Section 8 Riffle -MY-05
2%
Particle
Millimeter
gravel
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
2
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
2
Fine
.125-.25
A
4
Medium
.25-.50
N
5
Coarse
.50-1
D
4
Very Coarse
1 - 2
S
10
Very Fine
2 - 4
5
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
1
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
Medium
11.3-16
V
1
Coarse
16-22.6
E
1
Coarse
22.6-32
L
4
Very Coarse
32-45
S
7
Very Coarse
45-64
11
Small
64-90
C
19
Small
90-128
O
16
Large
128-180
B
6
Large
180-256
L
1
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Medium
512-1024
D
,rg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
99
100%
w
0
20%
0% I=�
2%
0.01
0.1
gravel
Size (mm)
D16
0.82
D35
20
D50
50
D65
73
D84
110
D95
140
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 8 Riffle
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 9.5
dispersion 31.6
skewness -0.49
As Built
+ MY -01 (2014)
—� MY -02 (2015)
—� MY -03 (2016)
—t[— MY -04 (2017)
t MY -05 (2018)
1000 10000
silt/clay
2%
sand
25%
gravel
30%
cobble
42%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross -Section 9 Riffle - MY -05
�
Particle
Millimeter
gravel
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
2
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
1
Fine
.125-.25
A
1
Medium
.25-.50
N
4
Coarse
.50-1
D
4
Coarse
1 - 2
S
1
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
1
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
1
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
1
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
3
Coarse
16-22.6
E
1
Coarse
22.6-32
L
4
Coarse
32-45
S
8
—Very
Very Coarse
45-64
10
Small
64-90
C
9
Small
90-128
O
27
Large
128-180
B
18
Large
180-256
L
2
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Medium
512-1024
D
Lrg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
w
0
20%
0% I
�
0.01
0.1
gravel
Size (mm)
D16
6
D35
47
D50
80
D65
110
D84
140
D95
170
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 9 Riffle
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 29.0
dispersion 7.5
skewness -0.38
As Built
+MY -01 (2014)
+MY -02 (2015)
f MY -03 (2016)
tet— MY -04 (2017)
t MY -05 (2018)
1000 10000
silt/clay
2%
sand
11%
gravel
31%
cobble
56%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross -Section 10 Pool - MY -05
11F�
Particle Millimeter
0.1
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
5
Very Fine .062-.125
S
9.4
Fine
.125-.25
A
2
Medium
.25-.50
N
2
Coarse
.50-1
D
12
Coarse
1 - 2
S
17
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
11
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
2
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
3
Coarse
16-22.6
E
Coarse
22.6-32
L
5
32-45
S
4
—VeryCoarse
Very Coarse
45-64
2
Small
64-90
C
7
Small
90-128
O
13
Large
128-180
B
11
Large
180-256
L
4
Small 256-362
Small 362-512
Medium 512-1024
B
L
D
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
w
0
20%
0% I
11F�
0.01
0.1
Size (mm)
D16
0.75
D35
1.8
D50
9.4
D65
64
D84
120
D95
170
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 10 Pool
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 9.5
dispersion 12.6
skewness 0.00
1000 10000
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
t MY -01 (2014)
—� MY -02 (2015)
—� MY -03 (2016)
—� MY -04 (2017)
t MY -05 (2018)
5%
33%
27%
35%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%

Cross -Section 11 Riffle - MY -05
!I!�
Particle
Millimeter
A
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
1
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
35
Fine
.125-.25
A
1
Medium
.25-.50
N
7
Coarse
.50-1
D
8
Coarse
1 - 2
S
9
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
12
Fine
4-5.7
G
4
Fine
5.7-8
R
4
Medium
8 - 11.3
A
8
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
3
Coarse
16-22.6
E
2
Coarse
22.6-32
L
5
Coarse
32-45
S
4
—Very
Very Coarse
45-64
4
Small
64-90
C
10
Small
90-128
O
13
Large
128-180
B
5
Large
180-256
L
Small
Small
256-362
362-512
B
L
Medium
512-1024
D
Lrg- Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
w
0
20%
0% I
!I!�
0.01
0.1
Size (mm)
D16
0.92
D35
3.4
D50
9.4
D65
35
D84
95
D95
130
Particle Size Distribution
Jacobs Landing
XS 11 Riffle
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 9.3
dispersion 10.2
skewness 0.00
1000 10000
silt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
hardpan
wood/det
artificial
As Built
+ MY -01 (2014)
—� MY -02 (2015)
—� MY -03 (2016)
—t[— MY -04 (2017)
t MY -05 (2018)
1%
25%
46%
28%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%

Table 10a. T1 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Parameter
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean Med
Max
n Min
can Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.5
9.1
4 6.9
1
11.5
12.2
10.1
11.0
12.1
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
1
26
4 23
1
1
25
70
40
56
71
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
1.8
4 1.1
1
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.1
2.8
4 1.6
1
1.5
1.6
1.2 1
1.3
1.4
3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
8.6
12.1
4 7.4
1
11.2
12.6
7.9
8.8
10.0
3
Width/Depth Ratio
3.7
9.6
4 6.4
1
12.0
12.0
12.9
13.8
14.6
3
Entrenchment Ratio
1.5
3.3
4 3.4
1
2.2
4.9
3.7
5.1
5.9
3
Bank Height Ratio
1.6
2.2
4 1.0
1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
13
26
2 14
2638
2
25
50
25
38
50
Radius of Curvature (ft)
6
30
2 12
19
25
2
20
45
20
33
45
Rc:Bankf ill width (ft/ft)
0.7
4.6
2 1.7
2.7
3.6
2
2.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Meander Wavelength (ft)
75
110
2 43
73
102
2
65
125
65
95
125
Meander Width Ratio
1.4
4.0
2 2
3.8
5.5
2
1.9
3.5
1.9
3.0
3.5
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
11
22
32
21
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.007
0.043
2 0.011
0.025
2
0.007 0.012
0.001
0.013
0.026
21
Pool Length (ft)
16
23
12
30
6
18
38
23
Pool Spacing (ft)
28
57
20
75
30
56
79
23
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95(mm)
0%/ 24%/ 76% / 0% / 0% / 0%
1/5/7/10/17/25
0%/25%/ 52% /23%/ 0% / 0%
5/15/22/38/94/143
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
1,330
1,305
1,305
Drainage Area (SM)
0.40
0.16
0.40
0.40
Rosgen Classification
G4
E4
C4
C4
Sinuosity
1.07-1.15
1.18
1.09-1.12
1.09-1.12
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.009-0.014
0.0070
0.007-0.010
0.007
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 58 2018- MY05

Table 10b. T1A Baseline Stream Data Summary
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Parameter
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean Med
Max
n
Min
Mean Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.7
1
6.9
1
8.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
15
1
23
1
19
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
1
1.1
1
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.2
1
1.6
1
1
1
1.2
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area ft2
6.4
1
7.4
1
6.2
Width/Depth Ratio
9.3
1
6.4
1
12.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.9
1
3.4
1
2.2
Bank Height Ratio
2.2
1
1.0
1
1
1.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
20
75
1
14
26
38
2
19
24
Radius of Curvature (ft)
8
24
1
12
19
25
2
10
25
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1
3.1
1
1.7
2.7
3.6
2
1.2
2.9
Meander Wavelength (ft)
25
50
1
43
73
102
2
50
55
Meander Width Ratio
2.6
9.7
1
2
3.8
5.5
2 1
2.2
2.8
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.013
0.019
1
0.011
0.025
2
0.010 0.012
Pool Length (ft)
16
23
7
14
Pool Spacing (ft)
28
51
22
34
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%MMML-
or
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
294
178
178
Drainage Area (SM)
0.21
0.40
0.21
0.21
Rosgen Classification
E4
B4c
B4c/C4
B4c/C4
Sinuosity
2.10
1.20
1.11
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.023
1
0.013
0.017
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 59 2018- MY05

Table 10c. T2 Baseline Stream Summar
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Parameter
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean Med
Max
n Min
Mean Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
8.8
112.3
4 6.9
1
10.4
11.6
10.4
10.9
12.0
5
Floodprone Width (ft)
17
20
4 23
1
23
50
27
32
42
5
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
1.0
4 1.1
1
0.9
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.9
5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.8
4 1.6
1
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.4
5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area(ft)
9.2
11.7
4 7.4
1
9.1
11.1
8.8
9.2
9.7
5
Width/Depth Ratio
8.4
12.9
4 6.4
1
12.0
12.0
11.8
12.9
15.2
5
Entrenchment Ratio
1.4
2.3
4 3.4
1
2.2
4.3
2.6
3.2
4.2
5
Bank Height Ratio
1.5
4.7
4 1.0
1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
5
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
10
60
2 14
26
38
2
25
50
25
38
50
Radius of Curvature (ft)
8
35
2 12
19
25
2
20
45
20
33
45
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
0.9
3.9
2 1.7
2.7
3.6
2
2.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Meander Wavelength (ft)
65
130
2 43
73
102
2
60
130
60
95
130
Meander Width Ratio
1.1
6.8
2 2
3.8
5.5
2
2.2
4.8
2.2
4.0
4.8
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
14
22
36
33
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
0.011
2 0.011
0.025
2
0.006 0.017
0.004
0.016
0.041
33
Pool Length (ft)
16
23
2
8
35
7
18
35
31
Pool Spacing (ft)
28
57
2
30
95
42
59
107
31
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95(mm)
6%/25%/68%/1%/0%/0%
1/2/3/6/12/24
0%/ 6%/ 58% / 32% / 3% / 0%
16/30/44/65/109/144
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
2,935
2,641
2,641
Drainage Area (SM)
0.31
0.16
0.31
0.31
Rosgen Classification
E4, F4
E4
C4
C4
Sinuosity
1.09-1.45
1.18
1.16-1.31
1.16-1.31
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.007-0.010
0.0007
0.009-0.0100
0.009
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 60 2018- MY05

Table 10d. T2A Baseline Stream Data Summary
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Parameter
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min Mean Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.6
1
6.9
1
6.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
11
1
23
1
14
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.5
1
1.1
1
0.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.1
1
1.6
1
0.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area ftZ
3.4
1
7.4
1
3.5
Width/Depth Ratio
12.8
1
6.4
1
12.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.7
1
3.4
1
2.2
Bank Height Ratio
6.3
1
1.0
1
1.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
8
15
1
14
38
2
8
15
Radius of Curvature (ft)
10
12
1
12
25
2
10
25
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1.5
1.8
1
1.7
A2.7J
3.6
2
1.5
3.8
Meander Wavelength (ft)
50
63
1
43
102
2
50
63
Meander Width Ratio
1.2
2.3
1
2
5.5 1
2
1.2 1
2.3
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.010
0.017
1
0.025
2
0.010 0.012
Pool Length (ft)
E28
23
2
4
15
Pool Spacing (ft)
57
2
22
42
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa/o G% C% B% / Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
465
465
465
Drainage Area (SM)
0.06
0.40
0.06
0.06
Rosgen Classification
G4
B4c
B4c/C4
B4c/C4
Sinuosity
1.16
1.20
1.13
JL
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.019
0.013
0.014
in
Jacob's Landing Site KCl Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 61 2018- MY05

Table 11. Cross -Section Morphology Data Tables
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Pi
and Substrate
Baseline Bankfull
Bankf ill Width
)odvrone Width
Bankfull Mean Deptl
Bankfull Max Deptl
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area
Total Cross -Sectional Area
Bankfull Width/Depth F
Bankf ill Entrenchment F
Bankfull Bank Height F
d50 (
Baseline Bankfull
Bankfull Width
)odvrone Width
Bankfull Mean Deptl
Bankfull Max Deptl
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area
Total Cross -Sectional Area
Bankfull Width/Depth F
Bankfull Entrenchment F
Bankfull Bank Height F
d50 (
Baseline Bankfull
Bankfull Width
)odvrone Width
Bankfull Mean Deptl
Bankfull Max Deptl
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area
Total Cross -Sectional Area
Bankfull Width/Depth F
Bankfull Entrenchment F
Bankfull Bank Height F
d50 (
Base
10.8
40.0
0.8
1.3
8.5
8.5
13.7
3.7
1.0
2.1
Base
10.6
29.0
0.8
1.3
8.8
8.8
12.8
2.7
1.0
49
Base
12.0
51.4
0.8
1.4
9.5
9.5
15.2
4.2
1.0
16
# 95024
Cross -Section 1 (T1 -Riffle)
Station 12+29
813.3
795.8
MY1
MY2
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
10.6
10.1
12.8
11.6
12.2 1
12.1
40.9
40.9
41.8
41.3
44.4
71.0
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.4
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
10.0
8.8
8.3
4.6
4.1
2.0
10.0
13.2
11.9
19.2
15.8
17.5
14.6
3.9
4.1
3.3
3.6
3.6
5.9
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.4
27
1.1
1.1
1.1
28
Cross -Section 6 (T2 -Riffle)
Station 56+18
15.1
16.2
797.8
809.5
MY1
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
11.5
11.0
12.4
11.7
11.5
13.3
32.0
33.3
32.8
33.7
36.7
-
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.9
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
13.8
8.8
7.9
6.3
7.3
6.0
13.8
15.0
13.7
17.4
15.4
15.0
-
2.8
3.0
2.6
2.9
3.2
-
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
60
45
6.9
2.0
3.6
-
Cross -Section 11 (T2 -Riffle)
Station 72+48
793.5
MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
11.7 11.4 16.1 19.2 13.3
52.2 51.8 52.2 53.3 53.3
0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.7
1.5 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.6
9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5
9.6 9.7 5.9 6.4 7.6
14.5 13.8 27.4 38.8 18.7
4.5 4.5 1 3.2 1 2.8 4.0
0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9
3.1 14 1.8 11 9.4
Cross -Section 2 (Tl -Riffle)
Station 17+79
813.3
792.4
MY1
MY2
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
13.3
12.4
12.8
12.1
11.6 1
15.5
69.7
72.1
74.0
70.7
77.3
-
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
2.8
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
18.1
10.8
10.2
7.6
8.0
6.6
18.1
17.6
15.3
16.4
14.6
13.5
-
5.2
5.8
5.8
5.9
6.7
5.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.0
0.8
-
12
11
0.8
0.9
0.7
-
Cross -Section 7 (T2 -Pool)
Station 60+09
15.1
16.2
797.8
806.4
MY1
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
13.0
14.5
12.8
11.8
10.1
10.7
-
-
-
-
-
30.0
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.4
0.9
1.8
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.3
13.8
13.8
13.8
13.8
13.8
9.7
17.0
13.9
13.5
16.1
15.9
9.7
-
10.6
-
10.7
-
11.8
-
3.6
-
2.8
2.9
2.8
-
0.9
-
1.1
-
1.0
40
-
61
-
1 50 1 J1
66
Cross -Section 3 (T1 -Pool)
Station 19+25
813.3
791.3
MY1
MY2
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
13.7
14.8
30.2
21.0
38.6 1
10.1
-
-
-
-
-
58.0
1.3
1.2
0.6
0.9
0.5
0.8
3.0
2.8
1.6
3.0
1.4
1.2
18.1
18.1
18.1
18.1
18.1
7.9
17.1
17.1
6.5
16.3
5.2
7.9
-
-
-
-
-
12.9
-
5.8
-
5.5
2.6
5.7
-
0.8
-
0.8
1.0
1.0
-
-
2.7
-
47
35
Cross -Section 8 (T2 -Riffle)
Station 63+84
15.1
16.2
797.8
801.4
MY1
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
Base
11.8
10.1
10.7
10.2
9.6
10.8
27.9
28.3
28.9
28.3
27.4
42.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.2
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.2
11.8
13.2
10.4
11.6
12.2
9.2
10.2
10.6
11.8
10.7
9.4
12.7
2.82.8
3.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.9
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
40
100
61
1 45
1 50 1 J1
41
Cross -Section 4 ( T1 -Riffle)
Station 21+36
813.3
789.9
MY1
MY2
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+ Base
11.0
9.9
10.4
10.3
11.1
1 10.4
59.1
59.7
60.7
59.6
61.2
27.0
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.3
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
9.0
8.6
6.3
5.1
7.0
6.6
1 9.0
15.2
12.3
13.7
13.3
15.7
12.0
5.4
6.1
5.8
5.8
5.5
2.6
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.0
44
56
27
2.7
13
47
Cross -Section 9 (T2 -Riffle)
Station 66+63
15.0
15.1
16.2
797.8
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+ Base
13.3
13.3
13.5
12.1
14.6
12.5
44.0
44.2
43.2
43.4
44.9
17.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.6
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.8
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
14.5
8.0
7.6
6.3
8.2
6.3
14.5
19.3
19.3
19.8
15.9
23.3
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.6
3.1
0.9
0.8
1
0.9
1.0
0.9
37
29
44
100
80
Cross -Section 5 (T2 -Riffle)
Station 52+53
813.3
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
10.3
10.4
11.4
11.5
11.4
26.5
26.2
26.8
26.9
27.3
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
10.5
10.0
8.1
8.5
6.4
11.7
12.1
14.5
14.6
14.5
2.6
2.5
2.3
2.3
2.4
1.0
1.1
1.0
0.9
1.0
63
61
3.7
5.5
32
Cross -Section 10 (T2 -Pool)
Station 68+61
796.5
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY+
15.1
15.5
15.0
15.1
16.2
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
1.9
2.3
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
17.7
17.6
15.6
E14.5
5
13.9
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 62 2018- MY05

Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 63 2018- MY05
Table 11b. Stream Reach Morphology Data Tables
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Reach: Tl (2,389 ft.)
Parameter
MY01 (2014)
MY02 (2015)
MY03 (2016)
MY04 (2017)
MY05 (2018)
Dimension
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.6
11.6
11.0 13.3
1.5
3.0
9.9
10.8
10.1 12.4
1.4
3
10.4
12.0
12.8 12.8
1.4
3
10.3
11.3
11.6 12.1
0.9
3
11.1 11.6
11.6 12.2
0.6
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
40.9
56.6
59.1 69.7
14.6
3.0
40.9
57.6
59.7 72.1
15.7
3
41.8
58.8
60.7 74.0
16.2
3
41.3
57.2
59.6 70.7
14.8
3
44.4 61.0
61.2 77.3
16.5
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.8
0.8 0.8
0.0
3.0
0.8
0.8
0.8 0.8
0.0
3
0.7
0.8
0.8 0.8
0.1
3
0.7
0.8
0.8 0.8
0.1
3
0.7 0.8
0.7 0.9
0.1
3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.4
1.4 1.4
0.1
3.0
1.4
1.4
1.4 1.5
0.1
3
1.4
1.4
1.4 1.5
0.1
3
1.3
1.4
1.4 1.5
0.1
3
1.4 1.5
1.5 1.6
0.1
3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft2)
7.9
8.8
8.5 10.0
1.1
3.0
7.9
8.8
8.5 10.0
1.1
3
7.9
8.8
8.5 10.0
1.1
3
7.9
8.8
8.5 10.0
1.1
3
7.9 8.8
8.5 10
1.1
3
Total Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
8.6
9.4
8.8 10.8
1.2
3.0
6.3
8.3
8.3 10.2
2.0
3
4.6
5.8
5.1 7.6
1.6
3
4.1
6.4
7.0 8.0
2.0
3
2 5.1
6.6 6.6
2.7
3
Width/Depth Ratio
13.215.3
15.2 17.6
2.2
3.0
11.9
13.2
12.3 15.3
1.9
3
13.7
16.4
16.4 19.2
2.8
3
13.3
14.6
14.6 15.8
1.3
3
13.5 15.6
15.7 17.5
2.0
3
Entrenchment Ratio
3.9
4.8
5.2 5.4
0.8
3.0
4.1
5.3
5.8 6.1
1.1
3
3.3
5.0
5.8 5.8
1.4
3
3.6
5.1
5.8 5.9
1.3
3
3.6 5.3
5.5 6.7
1.6
3
Bank Height Ratio
0.8
0.9
1 1.0 1.0
0.1
3.0
0.8
0.9
0.9 0.9
0.1
3
0.7
0.8
0.8 0.8
0.1
3
0.7
0.9
0.9 1.0
0.2
3
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.8
0.1
3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
25.0
38.0]IF3.050
Radius of Curvature (ft)
20.0
33.0
if
Rad. of Curv.: Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
2.0
3.0
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Meander Width Ratio
65.0
1.9
95.0
3.0
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
3.0
34.0W62.O233.0
16.1
21.0
10.9
31.1
31.9 44.6
10.1
21
4.3
27.5
28.9 66.5
14.6
22
6.5
26.4
25.3 52.0
13.6
18
8.8 24.4
24.3 40.2
9.6
12
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.01
0.02
0.01
20
0.006
0.01
0.01 0.03
0.007
21
0.0002
0.01
0.01 0.04
0.009
22
0.001
0.02
0.01 0.04
18
0.002 0.0168
0.012 0.036
0.012
12
Pool Length (ft)
4.0
13.0
7.4
14.0
4.0
9.7
8.7 21.5
4.4
17
5.3
11.3
11.0 22.8
5.1
18
5.8
13.5
10.5 31.0
801
8.1
18
4.9 9.3
5.5 17.5
7.1
3
Pool Max Depth (ft)
3.0
3.0
1
2.8
2.8
2.8
1
1.6
1.6
1.6
1
3.0
3.0
3.0
1
1.4 1.4
1.4
1
Pool Spacing (ft)
41.0
83.0
60.4
13.0
36.9
74.5
56.2 231.1
51.6
16
16.1
71.6
67.6 196.6
45.7
17
14.4
67.8
60.0 253.8
50.5
17
280.2 398.8
398.8 517.5
167.8
2
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,305
1,305
1,305
1,305
1,305
Sinuosity
1.09-1.12
1.09-1.12
1.09-1.12
1.09-1.12
1.09-1.12
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0068
0.0066
0.0070
0.0072
0.0071
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0068
0.0064
0.0067
0.0068
0.0071
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
29%/22%/36%/14%/0%/0%
l l %/22%/35%/32%/0%/0%
4%/55%/29%/12%/0%/0%
2%/62%/28%/8%/0%/0%
4%/65%/9%/0%/0%
d16/d35/d50 / d84 / d95
7/10/14/49/88
7/11/24/104/128
1/2/8/14/46/98
0.36/0.74/1.4/11.5/20/67
0.3/0.7/3.9/22/80
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 63 2018- MY05

Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 64 2018- MY05
Table IIc. Stream Reach Morphology Data Tables
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 95024
Reach: T2 (2,084 ft.)
Parameter
MY01(2014)
MY02 (2015)
MY03 (2016)
MY04 (2017)
MY05 (2018)
Dimension
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.3
11.7
11.7 13.3
1.1
5
10.1
11.2
11.0 13.3
1.3
5
10.7
12.8
12.4 16.1
2.1
5
10.2
12.9
11.7 19.2
3.6
5
9.6
12.1
11.5 14.6
1.9
5
Floodprone Width (ft)
26.5
36.5
32.0 52.2
11.1
5
26.2
36.8
33.3 51.8
10.9
5
26.8
36.8
32.8 52.2
10.7
5
26.9
37.1
33.7 53.3
11.1
5
27.3
37.9
36.7 53.3
11.3
5
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.8
0.8 1.0
0.1
5
0.7
0.8
0.8 1.0
0.1
5
0.6
0.7
0.7 0.9
0.1
5
0.5
0.8
0.8 1.0
0.2
5
0.6
0.8
0.8 1.0
0.1
5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.4
1.5
1.4 1.6
0.1
5
1.3
1.5
1.4 1.7
0.2
5
1.3
1.4
1.4 1.6
0.1
5
1.4
1.5
1.4 1.7
0.1
5
1.5
1.6
1.6 1.6
0.04
5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
8.8
9.2
9.2 9.7
0.4
5
8.8
9.2
9.2 9.7
0.4
5
8.8
9.2
9.2 9.7
0.4
5
8.8
9.2
9.2 9.7
0.4
5
8.8
9.2
9.2 9.7
0.4
5
Total Cross -Sectional Area (ft)
8.0
9.7
9.6 11.8
1.5
5
7.6
9.7
9.7 13.2
2.2
5
5.9
7.4
6.3 10.4
1.9
5
6.4
8.4
8.2 11.6
2.0
5
6
7.7
6.4 12.2
2.6
5
Width/Depth Ratio
8.0
9.7
9.6 11.8
1.5
5
7.6
9.7
9.7 13.2
2.2
5
5.9
7.4
6.3 10.4
1.9
5
6.4
8.4
8.2 11.6
2.0
5
6.0
7.7
6.4 12.2
2.6
5
Entrenchment Ratio
10.2
14.1
14.5 19.3
3.5
5
10.6
13.9
13.7 19.3
3.3
5
11.8
18.2
17.4 27.4
6.0
5
10.7
19.1
15.4 38.8
11.2
5
9.4
16.2
15 23.3
5.2
5
Bank Height Ratio
2.6
3.2
2.8 4.5
0.8
5
2.5
3.2
3.0 4.5
0.8
5
2.3
2.8
2.7 3.2
0.4
5
2.3
2.9
2.8 3.6
0.5
5
2.4
3.1
3.1 4.0
0.6
5
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
25.0
38.0
50.0
Radius of Curvature (ft)
20.0
33.0
45.0
Rad. of Curv.: Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
2.0
3.0
4.0
Meander Wavelength (ft)
60.0
95.0
130.0
Meander Width Ratio
2.2
1 4.0
1 M 4.8
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
5.0
14.0
17.0 24.0
5.9
15
7.8
32.4
30.4 61.6
11.5
27
6.2
23.1
21.6 46.8
8.9
32
8.1
24.4
23.6 40.5
7.3
31
14.2
32.0
26.2 87.6
18.1
26
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.007
0.02
0.02 0.05
0.01
14
0.001
0.02
0.02 0.03
0.006
27
0.002
0.02
0.02 0.04 0.007
32
0.000
0.02
0.02 0.04
0.01
31
0.001
0.015
0.014 0.041
0.009
26
Pool Length (ft)
4.1
15.8
14.7 26.9
6.5
29
5
13
12 28
6
25
3.5
13.3
11.8 29.5
5.8
30
7.6
15.6
13.1 27.4
6.0
31
5.7
12.1
10.182 24.7
5.158
31
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.8
1.9
1.9
2
2.0
2.1
2.1
2
1.9
2.0
2.0
2
1.9
1.9
1.9
2
1.9
2.1
2.3
2
Pool Spacing (ft)
31.8
61.8
54.4 160.9
29.0
28
42.7
69.5
59.9 173.7
34.2
24
41.9
60.1
55.9 127.6
18.5
29
33.8
57.9
56.0 128.2
17.2
30
1 42.084
57.9
1 54.311 101.9
12.69
30
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
2,641
2641
2641
2,641
2,641
Sinuosity
1.16-1.31
1.16-1.31
1.16-1.31
1.16-1.31
1.16-1.31
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0106
0.0107
0.0104
0.0104
0.0105
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0109
0.0106
0.0100
0.0103
0.0103
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
29%/22%/36%/14%/0%/0%
6%/10%/46%/38%/0%/0%
7%/35%/27%/30%/0%/0%
0/%29%/36%/32%/0%/2%
3%/27%/36%/33%/0%/1%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95
12/21/32/46/83/127
14/26/38/105/134
0.4/6/17/45/98/140
3.7/17/29/57/107/193
1.4/11/27/100/156
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Jacob's Landing Site KCI Associates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 64 2018- MY05

Appendix E
Hydrologic Data
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 65 2018— MY05

Photo 1. Bankfull indicators T1, 12/17/2015 Photo 2. Bankfull indicators T2, 12/17/2015
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 66 2018— MY05
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Jacob's Landing Stream Restoration Site DMS Pro'ect # 95024
Date of Data
Collection
Date of
Occurrence
Method
Photo Number
4/19/2015
4/19/2015
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
10/3/2015
10/3/2015
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
11/9/2015
11/9/2015
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
Unkown
12/17/2015
Wrack lines and flattened vegetation observed at bankfull
1 - 2
12/23/2015
12/23/2015
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
12/30/2015
12/30/2015
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
2/23/2016
2/23/2016
On-site automatic gauge T1 only)
N/A
5/16/2016
5/16/2016
On-site automatic gauge T1 only)
N/A
5/25/2016
5/25/2016
On-site automatic gauge T1 only)
N/A
6/14/2016
6/14/2016
On-site automatic gauge T1 only)
N/A
10/8/2016
10/8/2016
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
6/5/2017
6/5/2017
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
6/13/2017
6/13/2017
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
6/19/2017
6/19/2017
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
6/20/2017
6/20/2017
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
9/1/2017
6/20/2017
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
2/7/2018
2/7/2018
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
9/16/2018
9/16/2018
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
10/11/2018
10/11/2018
On-site automatic gauge
N/A
11/12/2018
11/12/2018
On-site automatic gauge (T1 only)
N/A
Photo 1. Bankfull indicators T1, 12/17/2015 Photo 2. Bankfull indicators T2, 12/17/2015
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 66 2018— MY05

793
792
Jacob's Landing Restoration Site
Stage Hydrograph
Stream Gauge 1
790
789
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
788
00
L 1
1
,L4 JL
�■
L ��
_
IJ' 1
■
■
..
L_ ■
. T
-4
i J�
1
■
-IM.L
1,
� I=
.1.
it ■
i ■
O.0
�
00vo
Vi
lO
�y
rl
w
,a
w
00
'✓
>
�
W
_�
'�
O
o
L
o
C
d
'�
C7
d
Date
Rainfall -Stage — Bankfull

Jacob's Landing Restoration Site
Stage Hydrograph
Stream Gauge 2
795
ww-
794 Gauge malfunction
792
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
791 _ L 1 1 �4 JL �■ L �� _ IJ' 1 � ■ ■ �.. . _ I ■ . T -4 i J� 1 ■ -IM.L 1!� I=. .1. it ■ k ■ � 0.0
71 oo N cn w w
Vi lO W T O W J O A N �D J
�' w ,a w '✓ > c O O 71 0 o o d C7 d
00 L
00
Date
Rainfall -Stage — Bankfull

Appendix F
Additional Information
Jacob's Landing Site KCIAssociates of North Carolina
DMS Project # 95024 69 2018— MY05

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
May 22, 2014
ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center H, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Mr. Todd Tugwell
Regulatory Division
Wilmington District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587
And:
Mr. Tim Baumgartner
Deputy Director
NC DENR
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Subject: Jacob's Landing (95024) Stream Restoration Project
Request for Mitigation Plan Amendment
Dear Mr. Tugwell and Mr. McDonald,
This letter is in response to the discussions at an Interagency Review Team (IRT) meeting attended by
KCI on May 13, 2014. During this meeting KCI presented a request to modify the allocation of stream
mitigation credits on the Jacob's Landing stream restoration project. Citing procedural reasons, the IRT
requested that KCI submit a formal request to reallocate credits. This letter will serve as that request.
Request
KCI requests the following changes to the credit table provided in the Jacob's Landing Stream
Restoration Site - Final Mitigation Plan dated September 2012 (requested changes shown in red).
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A. www.kei.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

Reach
Mitigation Type
Priority
Approach
Existing Linear
Footage
DesignedMitigation
Linear
Footage
Units
T1-1
Restoration
P2
326
303
303
T1-2
Enhancement II
158
109*
44
T1-3
Restoration
P2
846
893
893
T1A
Restoration
P2
294
178
178
T2-1
Restoration
P2
1,800
1,581*
1,581
T2-2
Restoration
P2
1,135
1,060*
1,060
T2A
Restoration
P2
465
465
465
Total Stream Enhancement I
0
0
0
Total Stream Enhancement II
158
109
44
Total Stream Restoration
4,866
4,015
4,480
Total Mitigation Units
4,524
Justification
The 465 linear feet of stream channel associated with reach T2 -A was identified during the Proposal
Stage (including an IRT site walk) as Enhancement Level 1 at a 1.5:1 ratio. As a matter of practice, KCI
attempts to be consistent with the credit -types requested in the Proposal during the assessment and the
design stages of the project. During the assessment and design stage for Reach T2 -A, a more aggressive
restoration approach was determined to be needed. This was primary due to the confinement of the
valley, the difficulty of access, the absence of a functional floodplain and the poor condition of the valley
walls leading down to the stream. These reasons and others resulted in ultimate decision to completely
change the stream type from a G -type channel to a CB -type channel. This approach was in fact a
restoration approach, although it never was properly identified as such in the Mitigation Plan. The
approach included the following restoration initiatives:
1. Channel type changed from a G4 channel to a C4/134 channel by installing a typical riffle cross
section with a 3.6' bankfull bench and a 0.9' bank height.
2. Adjusted thalweg and centerline (planform) slightly throughout the reach to allow for the
incorporation of the bankfull bench. Bench location and width varied from cross section
depending on condition of valley and the ability to accommodate the full bankfull width given the
valley condition.
3. Installed significant number of structures (5 step pools, 8 riffle grade controls, 8 riffle
enhancements) to stabilize the profile and create in -stream habitat.
4. Added bedform diversity and stabilized the planform.
5. Stabilized the valley walls and contributing drainage features.
All of the items mentioned above support the reallocation of credit type to restoration (or enhancement at
a higher ratio). KCI requests that the IRT support the correction of the 1.5:1 Enhancement I ratio
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A. www.kei.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

proposed for Reach 2A in the Final Mitigation Plan to 1:1 ratio. KCI can provide amended copies of the
Mitigation Plan, if desired.
We hope you find this information appropriate in order to move forward with your decision. If you have
further questions or comments, feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511 or tim.morris(a-)kci.com .
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
cc: Joe Pfeiffer, KCI (email)
Adam Spiller (email)
Tim Baumgartner, EEP (email)
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A. www.kei.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
REPLY TO r
ATTENTION OF: September 2, 2014
Regulatory Division
Re: Request for Modification to the Jacob's Ladder and Jacob's Landing Mitigation Sites (USACE
AIDs 2012-01007 and 2012-01006)
Mr. Tim Baumgartner
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Mr. Baumgartner:
Please reference the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT) meeting of May 13, 2014,
during which we discussed the Jacob's Ladder and Jacob's Landing stream mitigation projects. The
discussion dealt with a request by NCEEP to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
(District) to modify a reach within each project resulting in a change in the mitigation approach and
associated credit.
During the IRT meeting, we asked that a written request be submitted to provide information on
the specifics of each project modification so that the IRT could review the requests and provide
comment back to us. Two letters dated May 22, 2014, were prepared by the project provider (KCI, Inc.)
and distributed to the IRT. The following responses were received from the IRT agency members:
Travis Wilson, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 5/29/2014:
A switch from enhancement to restoration should have been addressed earlier during design. As
I understood it during the presentation most of the design elements outlined in the modification
request were incorporated under the enhancement level and only slight changes occurred during
construction, and I don't want to establish a practice where the IRT is constantly reviewing
requests from providers on a credit hunt to cover contractual deficiencies. However, with that
said, I agree the improvements on the two subject reaches are consistent with a restoration
approach, and if successful it will provide a restoration level of uplift. WRC does not object to
the modification request.
2. Eric Kulz, North Carolina Division of Water Resources, 5/29/2014:
The approaches described in the mitigation plans for the referenced reaches were fairly non -
quantitative and appeared to represent an Enhancement I approach, which was approved by the
IRT. The activities conducted appeared consistent with the descriptions of mitigation measures
proposed in the approved mitigation plans. Again, the mitigation plans were not quantitative in
nature, and E1 spans a wide variety of mitigation treatments.

During the analysis phase of these projects, if the provider and EEP felt the initial assessment
and proposal were incorrect/inappropriate, consultation with the IRT and re -review of the project
stream conditions and mitigation approaches should have been requested and approval of
revisions sought (note process taken with the Pancho bank site).
Minor adjustments often occur during construction and are expected, and are described in the as -
built report. Linear footage/acreage of mitigation and associated credits are then normally
finalized. However, in this case changing the name of the mitigation approach and associated
credit after construction does not appear warranted as the activities conducted appear to be fairly
consistent with what was described in the approved mitigation plans.
In addition to the responses above, we conducted a review of the information submitted and
other information available regarding the two projects, including the mitigation plans for the projects. In
the May 22nd request letters for the two projects, the explanation for the additional credit request was
based on the fact that a more aggressive restoration approach was determined to be needed during the
assessment and design stages of the two projects. The new approach for the streams on both projects
was similar, in that it included such activities as adjusting the thalweg and centerline of the streams,
installing a significant number of structures, incorporating bankfull benches, and adding bedform
diversity.
In the case of both Jacob's Ladder and Jacob's Landing, the IRT reviewed the projects in the
field in August, 2011, and agreed to the mitigation approach described in the respective mitigation plans,
which were finalized in September, 2012. As noted by Mr. Kulz' comments, the work that was done
and is now the basis for the request for additional credit appears to be fairly consistent with what was
proposed in the mitigation plan. In the case of Jacob's Ladder, the mitigation plan states that for
Tributary T2-1 "Enhancement will include shaping the banks, creating a bankfull bench, creating a more
stable and heterogeneous stream bed, and replanting the riparian buffer to achieve a mix of native tree
species." For Jacob's Landing, the mitigation plan states that for Tributary T2A "This reach will be
enhanced by shaping the banks to creating a bankfull bench, and installing grade control structures to
gradually drop the bed elevation down. The reach will be stabilized by replanting the riparian buffer to
achieve a mix of native tree species." Despite this fact, if the amount of functional uplift resulting from
the work is sufficient to be credited at a 1:1 ratio, we do not want to penalize these projects for failing to
identify an appropriate credit ratio up front in the mitigation plan.
Another concern that arises from these requests is the way in which the changes to mitigation
plan and credit yield were handled. As stated in the documentation submitted to the IRT, the need for a
more aggressive approach was identified during the assessment and design stages of the mitigation
process. This implies that the need to modify the approaches and associated credit structure for these
tributaries was known well before construction yet not brought to the IRT's attention until the as -built
stage of the project. Any modification to a project that results in a change to the mitigation approach
substantial enough to warrant a different credit amount must be approved by the District prior to
implementing that modification. In this case, the IRT was not notified of the change until the as -built
stage of the project.
Lastly, the information submitted in support of the requested change is not consistent. The final
credit amounts presented during the IRT meeting do not match the credit amounts listed in the
supporting information that was submitted after the meeting. Specifically, Jacob's Landing was shown

to have 4,528 credits (SMUs) in the presentation and 4,524 credits in the supporting letter dated May 22,
2014. Similarly, Jacob's Ladder was shown to have 5,231 credits in the presentation and 5,203 credits
in the supporting letter. In order to fully resolve this issue, please explain the discrepancy and identify
the correct amount of credit to be generated by the two projects.
To conclude, it is our intention to make sure that the amount of credit generated by mitigation
projects, as expressed by the mitigation ratio, is supported by the level of uplift resulting from the work.
In the case of these two projects, we agree that the uplift provided by the mitigation activities conducted
in the two reaches in question may be credited at a 1:1 ratio. However, for future projects, changes such
as this that result in a modification to the amount of credit must be approved in advance so that the
District and IRT has the opportunity to comment and agree with the proposed approach. For all NCEEP
projects that were instituted after the approval of the Instrument on July 28, 2010, such modifications
should be approved in accordance with the streamlined review process outlined in Section 332.8(g)(2) of
the Federal Mitigation Rule, unless the district engineer determines those changes are of a significant
nature and must be processed through the normal procedures. In cases where such modifications are
time -sensitive (e.g., construction is on-going), we will endeavor to expedite the review and approval to
the extent allowable under the Rule.
Thank you for working with us to address these issues. Please contact me if you have any
questions about this letter, or if there is any additional information you need. I can be contacted at
telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Todd Tugwell
Special Projects Manager
Enclosures
Electronic Copies Furnished:
Mr. Tim Morris, KCI, Inc.
NCIRT Distribution List