20090049 Ver 2_Year 4 Monitoring Report_20191217

ID#* 20090049 Version* 2
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 12/18/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal - 12/17/2019
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream Pr Wetlands r- Buffer r` Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Harry Tsomides
Project Information
........................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20090049
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Glade Creek II
County: Alleghany
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*2
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Glade II_ 92343_MY4_2019.pdf 22.64MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Harry Tsomides
Signature:*

MONITORING YEAR 4
ANNUAL REPORT

Final

GLADE CREEK II RESTORATION PROJECT
Alleghany County, NC
DEQ Contract 6843
DMS Project Number 92343
USACE Action ID 2009-00589

Data Collection Period: March – October 2019
Submission Date: December 13, 2019

PREPARED FOR:

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203

December 13, 2019

Mr. Harry Tsomides
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801

RE: Monitoring Year 4 (MY4) Report – Draft Submittal
Glade Creek II Mitigation Project
DMS Project # 92343
Contract Number 6843
New River Basin - CU# 05050001 - Alleghany County, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Tsomides:

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Draft Monitoring Year 4 report for the Glade Creek II Mitigation Project. The following Wildlands
responses to DMS’s report comments are noted in italics lettering.

DMS comment; 1.2.6 – Wetland Assessment – In light of the wetland gauge data showing success for
100% of the growing season (169 consecutive days), can Wildlands describe the general appearance of
the wetland with regard to standing water (or lack of)?

Wildlands response; Each time that the groundwater gage was downloaded in MY4, standing water was
observed in the area surrounding the gage in Wetland D. This is corroborated by the groundwater gage
data which plots water levels above the ground’s surface for a majority of the growing season. Text has
been added to section 1.2.6.

DMS comment; 1.2.7 – Wetland Areas of Concern – During a recent site visit with the IRT, it was
questioned whether or not the Wetland A pocket preservation wetlands along the preservation
section of UT to Glade still existed on the site. In the absence of another delineation, does Wildlands
feel there are still wetlands visually apparent where Wetland A is shown on the map? If not, it should
be noted as a possible change in site conditions in that area since the delineation was performed.

Wildlands response; Absence of a formal delineation, Wetland A visually appears to exist as small
terraces adjacent to the channel of UT to Glade Creek with hydrology influenced by the tributary’s water
table. Netted chain fern (Woodwardia aereolata) was the predominate herbaceous plant observed at the
time of the most recent site walk (December 2019) which is a facultative wetland (FACW) plant.

DMS comment; 1.2.7 – Wetland Areas of Concern – It was noted during the recent IRT site visit that, in
the wetland restoration area (Wetland D), that woody vegetation that was described in the mitigation
plan and part of the construction planting plans, seemed lacking and not meeting performance
standards. Since there is no plot in wetland D, there is no data. However, can Wildlands offer a visual

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
assessment of the percentage of wetland lacking planned vegetation, versus the total wetland area on
the site?

Wildlands response; Based on a visual assessment, the area lacking woody vegetation corresponds with
the area normally observed to have standing water in Wetland D. This accounts for approximately 6
percent of the total wetland area on the Site (roughly 0.05 acre/0.84 acre). Text has been added to
section 1.2.7.

DMS comment; Table 3 project contact table – Please delete entries where there is no contractor
listed.

Wildlands response; Table 3 has been updated.

Enclosed please find two (2) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy on CD of the Final Monitoring
Report and all digital support files. Please contact me at 704-941-9093 if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Kirsten Y. Gimbert
Project Manager
[e-mail]

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) completed design and construction management on a design-
bid-build project at the Glade Creek II Restoration Site (Site) for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS) in Alleghany County, NC. The project components included restoring and enhancing
2,579 linear feet (LF) and preserving 129 LF of perennial stream, restoring 0.16 acre of wetlands, and
preserving 0.84 acre of existing wetland. Riparian buffers were also established by removing exotic
invasive plants and installing a variety of native vegetation. The Site is expected to generate 2,166.467
stream mitigation units (SMUs) and 0.33 wetland mitigation units (WMUs) for the Glade Creek
watershed (Table 1). The Site is located off US Highway 21 in the northern portion of Alleghany County,
NC in the New River Basin, eight-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 05050001 and the 14-digit HUC
05050001030020 (Figure 1). The project streams consist of one unnamed tributary, UT to Glade Creek,
and two reaches along Glade Creek mainstem (Reach 1 and Reach 2) (Figure 2). Glade Creek flows into
the Little River four miles northeast of the Site near Fox Trot Lane in the Town of Hooker, North
Carolina. The land adjacent to the streams and wetlands is primarily maintained for forestry production
of White Pine trees.
The Glade Creek II Restoration Project is located within a DMS Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) (Brush
Creek, HUC 05050001030020), as documented within the 2009 River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP)
for the New River Basin. Furthermore, the project site is located within Middle Glade Creek, a priority
subwatershed for stream and wetland restoration (and habitat protection), as identified within 2006
Local Watershed Plan and Preliminary Project Atlas for Little River and Brush Creek. Primary stressors
within the Brush Creek TLW and the Middle Glade Creek subwatershed include stream channelization,
livestock access, degraded riparian buffers, and Christmas tree farming. Glade Creek is also classified as
a trout water and the project will help improve trout habitat in the watershed.
The project goals established in the mitigation plan addendum (Confluence, 2013) were completed with
careful consideration of goals and objectives described in the RBRP and to address stressors identified in
the LWP. The following project goals established include:
• Improve water quality by repairing eroding stream banks and establishing riparian buffers;
• Improve the community structure of the buffers;
• Improve stream function and habitat by re-establishing stream-to-floodplain connections;
• Restore long-term stability through the restoration of channel dimension, pattern and profile;
• Improve in-stream habitat using in-stream structures; and
• Remove exotic invasive plant species.
The Site construction was completed between December 2015 and April 2016. Planting was completed
in February 2016. The as-built survey was completed in January 2016 with Monitoring Year (MY) 0
beginning in May 2016. Storm repairs were completed prior to the end of the construction phase in April
2016. MY4 activities occurred between March and October 2019.
The MY4 morphological surveys and visual assessments indicate that the majority of Glade Creek
appears stable and functioning as designed; however, sediment deposition has caused a loss of channel
function along a portion of UT to Glade Creek. The MY4 vegetation assessment resulted in an average
planted stem density of 519 stems per acre and is exceeding the final success criterion of 260 stems per
acre. In addition, five out of six plots individually met this requirement. The Site’s groundwater gage met
the performance standard for MY4. The bankfull performance standard was met for the project in MY2.
The MY4 visual assessment revealed a few areas of concern including pockets of invasive species
present on the Site and isolated areas of bank scour. The continual maintenance of these areas of
concern would benefit the Site long term and decrease additional impacts to the project.

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL ii
GLADE CREEK II RESTORATION PROJECT
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Monitoring Year 4 Data Assessment .......................................................................................... 1-2
1.2.1 Vegetation Assessment ...................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern ............................................................................................. 1-2
1.2.3 Stream Assessment ............................................................................................................ 1-3
1.2.4 Stream Areas of Concern ................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.5 Hydrology Assessment ....................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.6 Wetland Assessment .......................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.7 Wetland Areas of Concern ................................................................................................. 1-4
1.3 Monitoring Year 4 Summary ...................................................................................................... 1-4
Section 2: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 2-1
Section 3: REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 3-1

APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Table 4 Project Information and Attributes
Table 5 Monitoring Component Summary

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 6a-b Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 7 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Vegetation Photographs

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 9 CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 10a-b Planted and Total Stem Counts

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 12 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters – Cross-section)
Table 13a-b Monitoring Data – Stream Reach Data Summary
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Cross-section Plots
Reachwide and Cross-section Pebble Count Plots

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL iii
Appendix 5 Hydrology Summary Data and Plots
Table 14 Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 15 Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Groundwater Gage Plot
Monthly Rainfall Data

Appendix 6 Invasive Species Treatment Logs

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-1
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Site is a design-bid-build contract with DMS in Alleghany County, NC. The Site is located in the New
River Basin, eight-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 05050001 and the 14-digit HUC 05050001030020
(Figure 1). Located in the Blue Ridge Belt (USGS,2016), Blue Ridge physiographic province, the project
watershed includes primarily agricultural and forest land uses. The drainage area for the project site is
8.0 square miles.
The project stream reaches consist of Glade Creek and UT to Glade Creek (stream restoration). The
project wetland areas consist of restoration and preservation (Wetlands A-D). Mitigation work within
the Site included restoring and enhancing 2,579 linear feet (LF) and preserving 129 LF of perennial
stream, restoring 0.16 acre of wetlands, and preserving 0.84 acre of existing wetland and proposes the
generation of 2,166.467 SMUs and 0.33 WMUs. The stream and wetland areas were planted with native
vegetation to improve habitat and protect water quality. Construction activities were completed by
Carolina Environmental, Inc. in December 2015. Turner Land Surveying completed the as-built survey in
January 2016. Storm repairs prior to end of the construction phase were completed in April 2016 and
the repairs were judged to have not resulted in changes that would warrant a revised as-built survey. A
12.8-acre conservation easement was purchased in 2008 by the State of North Carolina and was
recorded with Alleghany County Register of Deeds. The conservation easement protects the project area
in perpetuity.
Appendix 1 includes detailed project activity, history, contact information, and watershed/site
background information. Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure 1 and project
components are illustrated for the Site in Figure 2. Please refer to the Project Component Map (Figure 2)
for the stream and wetland features and to Table 1 for the project component and mitigation credit
information for the Site.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction, the streams had been impacted by historic agricultural practices, silviculture and
valley filling. In addition, there was widespread bank erosion, especially along the outside meander
bends, and mid-channel deposition. The wetlands had been impacted by vegetation clearing, the
establishment of exotic invasive plant species, and the burial of the hydric soils layer from historic valley
fill. Table 4 in Appendix 1 and Tables 6a and 6b in Appendix 2 present the pre- and post-restoration
conditions in detail.
This mitigation site is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits within the New River Basin and
addresses habitat degradation, which is the primary water quality stressor described in the New River
RBRP (2009). While many of the benefits are limited to the immediate project area, others, such as
pollutant removal, reduced sediment loading, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have
farther-reaching effects. Expected improvements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined
below as project goals and objectives. These project goals were met by giving careful consideration to
the goals and objectives described in the RBRP.
The project specific goals of the Glade Creek II Restoration Site included the following:
• Improve water quality by repairing eroding stream banks and establishing riparian buffers;
• Improve the community structure of the buffers;
• Improve stream function and habitat by re-establishing stream-to-floodplain connections;
• Restore long-term stability through the restoration of channel dimension, pattern and profile;
• Improve in-stream habitat using in-stream structures; and

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-2
• Remove exotic invasive plant species.
The project objectives have been defined as follows:
• Restoration and enhancement of approximately 2,260 LF of Glade Creek;
• Restoration of 319 LF of the UT to Glade Creek;
• Preservation of 129 LF of UT to Glade Creek;
• Restoration of 0.16 acre of wetland by improving hydrologic connections;
• Preservation of 0.84 acre of existing jurisdictional wetland; and
• Establishment of riparian buffers by removing exotic invasive plants and installing a variety of
native vegetation.
The stream and wetland performance criteria for the Site follow approved performance standards
presented in the Glade Creek II Restoration Plan (Ward, 2008). Annual monitoring and semi-annual
site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished project. The stream restoration and
enhancement reaches (Glade Creek and UT to Glade Creek) of the project were assigned specific
performance standards for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation. Wetland restoration areas
were assigned specific performance standards for wetland hydrology and vegetation. The Glade Creek
Stream Restoration Project was instituted prior to 7/28/2010; therefore, the Site will be monitored for
five years post-construction.
1.2 Monitoring Year 4 Data Assessment
Annual monitoring was conducted between March and October 2019 to assess the condition of the
project. The stream restoration success criteria for the Site follows the approved monitoring plan
presented in the Glade Creek II Restoration Plan (Ward, 2008).
1.2.1 Vegetation Assessment
A total of six vegetation monitoring plots were established during baseline monitoring within the project
easement areas using a standard 10 by 10 meter or 5 by 20 meter plots. Please refer to Figure 3 in
Appendix 2 for the vegetation monitoring plot locations. The final vegetation success criterion is the
survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the riparian corridor along restored and enhanced reaches at
the end of year five of the monitoring period.
The MY4 vegetation survey was completed in September 2019, resulting in an average planted stem
density of 519 stems per acre. The Site is on track to meet the MY5 density requirement of 260 planted
stems per acre, with 5 of the 6 plots (83%) individually meeting this requirement. Vegetation plot 1 is
not currently meeting the final requirement with a density of 243 planted stems per acre. Though with
the inclusion of desirable volunteers in the stem density counts, plot 1 would be exceeding the
requirement. Approximately 81% of the planted stems have a health score (vigor) of 3 or greater.
However, about 13% of the stems have a vigor of 2 or less, and 6% of the stems are missing. The poor
health is a result of suffocation from dense herbaceous cover, insects, dry conditions, or other unknown
factors. Please refer to Appendix 2 for vegetation plot photographs and Appendix 3 for vegetation data
tables.
1.2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern
The MY4 vegetation monitoring and visual assessment revealed few vegetation areas of concern. Areas
noted at the beginning of the monitoring year with poor herbaceous cover and sandy deposition on the
floodplain of Glade Creek have recovered with vegetation becoming naturally well established. Small
pockets of invasive plant populations were identified in MY4 throughout the Site. Species included:
Oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), barberry (Berberis

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-3
thunbergii), and Kudzu (Pueraria montana). DMS has contracted with a provider for invasive species
treatment beginning in October 2019 and continuing through 2020. Please refer to the current condition
plan view (CCPV) Figure 3 in Appendix 2 for vegetation areas of concern and Appendix 6 for invasive
species treatment logs.
1.2.3 Stream Assessment
Morphological surveys for MY4 were conducted in April and May 2019. Along Glade Creek, the surveyed
longitudinal profile illustrates that bedform features are maintaining vertical stability for the majority of
the surveyed reaches. Profile dimensions for Glade Creek are showing little change between MY3 and
MY4. The longitudinal profile plot for UT to Glade Creek demonstrates the extent of aggradation that
has altered the channel profile, which is further discussed below in Section 1.2.4. Please refer to
Appendix 4 for longitudinal profiles with annual overlays and Table 13a-b for stream reach data
summaries.
Cross-section survey results indicate that channel dimensions are stable and functioning as designed on
Glade Creek with minimal adjustments. Some deposition was noted on the banks of Glade Creek thus
raising the low bank elevation and slightly increasing the low bank height ratio (XS2). Cross-sections
along UT to Glade Creek are representative of the significant sediment deposition and decreasing pool
depths occurring throughout the reach. The surveyed riffle cross-section along UT to Glade (XS5) has
been affected by sedimentation but has maintained channel dimensions. Please refer to Appendix 4 for
cross-section plots with annual overlays and Table 12 for morphology summaries.
In general, the reachwide pebble counts on Glade Creek show coarser materials in the riffles and fines in
the pools. The UT to Glade Creek reachwide channel materials resulted in a D50 of 0.3 mm (sand) during
MY4. This fining of sediment materials observed in MY3 has continued in MY4 for UT to Glade Creek.
Please refer to Appendix 4 for pebble count plots with annual overlays.
1.2.4 Stream Areas of Concern
UT to Glade Creek has continued to experience an increase in fine sediment throughout MY4. Large
bankfull events along Glade Creek are depositing sediment along the floodplain and within the channel
of UT to Glade Creek. In addition, land management activities upstream of the project are contributing
excessive sedimentation on UT to Glade Creek. At the start of UT to Glade Creek Reach 2, sediment
deposition has directed flow through Wetland D on the left floodplain of the channel resulting in active
braiding. However downstream of Wetland D, willows have become more established along the banks
and have helped maintain channel form and function.
Along Glade Creek, there are a few isolated areas with minor to moderate bank erosion occurring along
with loose coir matting. Previously noted in MY2, areas of scour near station 23+00 to 24+50 were
planted with live-stakes in April 2019 to help stabilize the bank. Areas of concern are depicted on the
CCPV Figure 3 and Table 6 in Appendix 2.
1.2.5 Hydrology Assessment
A bankfull event was documented for Glade Creek and UT to Glade Creek on March 11, 2019 based on
crest gage measurements. In MY1 through MY4, there has been at least four bankfull events for each
reach documented in separate years. The performance standard was met in MY2 with two bankfull flow
events documented on restoration reaches and occurring in separate years during the five-year
monitoring period. Refer to Appendix 5 for hydrologic data and graphs.
1.2.6 Wetland Assessment
One groundwater monitoring gage (GWG 1) was established during baseline monitoring within the
wetland restoration area using a logging hydrology pressure transducer. The gage was installed at an

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-4
appropriate location so that the data collected will provide an indication of groundwater levels
throughout the wetland restoration area. The target performance standard for wetland hydrology
success consists of the presence of groundwater within 12 inches of the ground’s surface for 21
consecutive days (12.5%) of the defined growing season for Alleghany County (April 26th to October 11th)
under typical precipitation conditions. The Site does not contain a rainfall gage; therefore, the daily
precipitation data was collected from closest NC CRONOS Station, Sparta 3.5 SSW. The GWG 1 recorded
169 consecutive days or 100% of the growing season; thereby exceeding the performance standard for
MY4. Each time that the groundwater gage was downloaded in MY4, standing water was observed in
the area surrounding the gage in Wetland D. This is corroborated by the groundwater gage data which
plots water levels above the ground’s surface for a majority of the growing season. Monthly rainfall data
in 2019 indicated higher than normal rainfall amounts occurred during the months of February, April,
June, and October and lower than normal rainfall amounts occurred during March and September 2019.
Please refer Figure 3 in Appendix 2 for the groundwater gage location, and Appendix 5 for hydrology
data and plots.
1.2.7 Wetland Areas of Concern
One headcut that was noted in MY3 at the outflow of Wetland B where it meets Glade Creek Reach 2
(around station 22+80), continues to be visible in MY4. This headcut is likely to migrate further into the
wetland without maintenance. Based on visual assessments in MY4, the area within Wetland D that is
normally observed to have standing water is also lacking woody vegetation. Please refer to the CCPV
Figure 3 in Appendix 2.
1.3 Monitoring Year 4 Summary
The MY4 morphological surveys and visual assessments indicate that the majority of Glade Creek
appears stable and functioning as designed; however, sediment deposition has caused a loss of channel
function along a portion of UT to Glade Creek. The MY4 vegetation assessment resulted in an average
planted stem density of 519 stems per acre and is exceeding the final success criterion of 260 stems per
acre. In addition, five out of six plots individually met this requirement. The Site’s groundwater gage met
the performance standard for MY4. The bankfull performance standard was met for the project in MY2.
The MY4 visual assessment revealed a few areas of concern including pockets of invasive species
present on the Site and isolated areas of bank scour. The continual maintenance of these areas of
concern would benefit the Site long term and decrease additional impacts to the project.
Summary information and data related to the 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 annual monitoring reports can be found in the Mitigation Plan
documents available on DMS’s website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices
are available from DMS upon request.

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 2-1
Section 2: METHODOLOGY
Geomorphic data was collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site:
An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). Longitudinal and cross-sectional data were collected using
a total station and were georeferenced. All Integrated Current Condition Plan View mapping was
recorded using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub-meter accuracy and processed using was Pathfinder
and ArcView. Crest gages were installed in surveyed riffle cross-sections and monitored semi-annually.
Hydrology attainment installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the USACE (2003)
standards. Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-NCEEP Level 2
Protocol (Lee et al., 2008).

Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 3-1
Section 3: REFERENCES
Confluence Engineering, P.C. (2013). Glade Creek II Restoration Project Final Mitigation Plan Addendum.
NCEEP, Raleigh, NC.
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.2. Retrieved from: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-
2.pdf
North Carolina Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast Database (NCCRONOS).
2019. State Climate Office of North Carolina. Version 2.7.2. Station ID Sparta 3.5 SSW. Accessed
October 2019.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2018.
Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2009. New River Basin Restoration Priorities.
Accessed from: https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Mitigation%20Services/PublicFolder/Work%20With/Watershed%20Planners/New_RBRP_200
9.pdf
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). Little River and Brush Creek Local Watershed
Plan. Accessed from: https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/documents/files/LittleRiver-
BrushCrk%20LWP%20FactSheet.pdf
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2016. North Carolina Geology. Accessed from:
http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/mapview/
Ward Consulting Engineers, P.C. (2008). Glade Creek II Restoration Project Restoration Plan. NCEEP,
Raleigh, NC.

APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures
05050001030020
05050001030030
03040101060030 03040101080010
05050001030015
The subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed
by a recorded conser vation easement, but is bordered
by land under private ownership. Accessing the site
may require traversing areas near or along the easement
boundary 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 stewardship of the restoration
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their
defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with DMS.
Directons to Site:
From Charlotte, travel Interstate 77 North. Take Exit 83, US-21
Bypass toward Roaring Gap/Sparta. Travel on US-21
approximately 21 miles. Bear right onto Sheriff Road and travel
Sheriff Road approximately 0.4 mile. Turn right onto Fox Ridge
Road. The project site is located approximately 0.2 miles on the left
side of Fox Ridge Road.
¹Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019Alleghany County, NC
0 10.5 Miles
Project Location
Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
DMS Targeted Local Watershed
Glade Creek
Reach 1
Glade Creek
Reach 2
UT to Glade
Creek Reach 1
UT to Gla de
Creek Reach 2
UT to Glade Creek
(Preservation)Wetland B
Wetland A
Wetland C
Wetland D
¹Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Alleghany County, NC
0 200100 Feet
Conservation Easement
Overhead Powerline Easement
Wetland Preservation
Wetland Restoration
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I; Reduced Credit
Stream Preservation
No Credit
Non-Project Streams
Reach Breaks2018 Aerial Photograph
DMS Project No. 92343
Riparian Wetland Buffer Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Type R R R RE
Totals 2,140.667 0.330 N/A N/A N/A
Existing Footage/
Acreage Approach
As-Built
Stationing/
Location
Mitigation Ratio Credits
(SMU/WMU)
1200 LF P2 10+00 - 21+70 1:1 1170.000
1074 LF P2
21+70-26+41;
26+86-29+69;
30+59-32+60
1.5:1 651.667
129 LF N/A 10+00 - 11+29 5:1 25.800
197 LF P1 11+29 - 14+48 1:1 319.000
0.84 AC N/A N/A 5:1 0.168
0.16 AC N/A N/A 1:1 0.160
Buffer (square feet)Upland (acres)
Riverine Non-Riverine
0.16
0.84
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Mitigation Credits
Stream Non-Riparian Wetland Phosphorous Nutrient Offset
Glade Creek Reach 1 Restoration (R) 1,170
RE
25.800 N/A
Project Components
Reach ID Restoration (R) or
Restoration Equivalent (RE)Restoration Footage/Acreage
STREAMS
Glade Creek Reach 2*Enhancement I (R) 1,090
UT to Glade Creek Preservation Preservation (RE)129
UT to Glade Creek Reaches 1 and 2 Restoration (R) 319
WETLANDS
Wetland A, B, C Preservation (RE)0.84
Preservation 129
Wetland D Restoration (R) 0.16
Component Summation
Restoration Level Stream (LF)Riparian Wetland (acres)Non-Riparian Wetland (acres)
Restoration 1,489
* Stream Enhancement I credit reduced; 90 LF removed at break in conservation easement and 45 LF reduced by 50% at overhead power easement.
Enhancement I 1,090
Enhancement II
Creation
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
DMS Project No. 92343
--- Data not provided
Invasive species treatment October 2019 October 2019
Live staking for small eroded sections along Glade Creek April 2019 April 2019
Seeding Contractor
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
PO Box 1905
Mt. Airy NC 27030
Seed Mix Sources Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Construction Contractor
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
PO Box 1905
Mt. Airy NC 27030
Planting Contractor
Keller Environmental
7921 Haymarket Lane
Raleigh, NC 27615
Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Monitoring, POC Kirsten Gimbert
704.941.9093
Designer
Andrew Bick, PE, CFM
Confluence Engineering, PC
16 Broad Street
Asheville, NC 28806
Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey 2020 November 2020Vegetation Survey 2020
1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Year 4 Monitoring Stream Survey May 2019 November 2019Vegetation Survey September 2019
Year 3 Monitoring Stream Survey June 2018 November 2018Vegetation Survey September 2018
Year 2 Monitoring Stream Survey May 2017 December 2017Vegetation Survey September 2017
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)January - May 2016 June 2016
Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey October 2016 December 2016Vegetation Survey October 2016
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments1 December 2015 - April 2016 April 2016
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments February 2016 February 2016
Construction December 2015 - April 2016 April 2016
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area1 December 2015 - April 2016 April 2016
Mitigation Plan Addendum January 2013 January 2013
Final Design - Construction Plans January 2015 January 2015
Mitigation Plan December 2008 December 2008
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Scheduled Delivery
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
UT to Glade Creek Reach 1 UT to Glade Creek Reach 2
1,170 1,090 129 319
--
--- Data not provided
Essential Fisheries Habitat N/A N/A N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA)N/A N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance N/A N/A The upper portion of Glade Creek is not currenlty mapped as
a regulated flood zone
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Glade Creek II Restoration Project; Ward Consulting
determined "no affect" on Alleghany County listed
endangered species
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes No recommendations received.
Yes Yes
Division of Land Quality (Erosion and Sediment Control)Yes Yes NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit
NCG010000
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable?Resolved?Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Nationwide Permit No.27 and DWQ 401 Water
Quality Certification No. 3885. Action ID # 2009-00589Waters of the United States - Section 401
Soil hydric status N/A
Source of Hydrology hillside seep
Restoration or Enhancement Method (hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)Preservation hydrologic/ vegetative
Wetland Type Riparian-Non Riverine
Underlying mapped soils Suncook
Drainage class frequently flooded, excessively drained
Parameters Wetlands A, B & C Wetland D
Size of Wetland (acres)0.84 0.16
FEMA classification no regulated floodplain no regulated floodplain
Native vegetation community White Pine Plantation
Percent composition exotic invasive vegetation -Post-Restoration 0%0%
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C; Tr
Morphological Desription (stream type)C4 B4
Underlying mapped soils Suncook
Length of reach (linear feet) - Post-Restoration
Drainage area (acres)5,120 13
NCDWR stream identification score 47 31
CGIA Land Use Classification 61% Forested, 35% Agriculture/Livestock, 3% Residential/Commercial
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Glade Creek
Reach 1
Glade Creek
Reach 2
DWR Sub-basin 05-07-03
Project Drainiage Area (acres)5,120
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <1%
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 05050001
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 05050001030020
Project Area (acres)44.50
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)36° 28' 37.0878"N, -81° 3' 42.7896"W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Blue Ridge Mountains
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Project Information
Project Name Glade Creek II Restoration Project
County Alleghany
River Basin New River
Table 5. Monitoring Component Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek UT to Glade Creek Wetlands
Riffle Cross Section 2 1 N/A
Pool Cross Section 1 1 N/A
Pattern Pattern Yes Yes N/A See Footnote1
Profile Longitudinal Profile Yes Yes N/A Annual
Substrate
Reach Wide (RW) /
Riffle 100 Pebble Count
(RF)
RW-1, RF 1 RW-1, RF-1 N/A Annual
Stream Hydrology Crest Gage 1 1 N/A Semi-Annual
Wetland Hydrology Groundwater Gages N/A N/A Enhancement I (R) Semi-Annual
Vegetation CVS Level 2 Annual
Visual Assessment All Streams Y Y Y Semi-Annual
Exotic and nuisance
vegetation Semi-Annual
Project Boundary Semi-Annual
Reference Photos Photographs Annual
6
9
1Pattern measurements will include sinuosity and meander width ratio and will be performed yearly. Measurements of radius of curvature will be monitored on newly
constructed meanders for the first year only.
Parameter Monitoring Feature Quantity/ Length by Reach Frequency
Dimension Annual
APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data
XY
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
!A
!A
!A
Glade Creek
Reach 1
UT to Glade Creek
(Preservation)
Glade Creek
Reach 2
UT to Glade Creek
Reach 2
UT to Glade Creek
Reach 1 XS 5XS 3
XS 1XS 4XS 2Wetland B
Wetland A
Wetland C
GWG
CG 2CG 1
3
8
9
7
6
5
4
2
1 4
3
5
6
2
1
Wetland D
¹Figure 3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019Alleghany County, NC
0 100 200 Feet
Conservation Easement
Overhead Powerline Easement
Gate
Wetland Preservation
Wetland Restoration
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I; Reduced Credit
Stream Preservation
No Credit
Non-Project Streams
Reach Break
Bankfull
Cross-Section (XS)
GF Photo Points
!A Groundwater Gage (GWG)
!A Crest Gage (CG)
Vegetation Monitoring Plot - MY4
Criteria Not Met
Critera Met
Areas of Concern - MY4
Barberry
Multiflora Rose
Oriental Bittersweet
Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Bank Instability
Sediment Deposition
XY Headcut2018 Aerial Photograph
Table 6a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Major Channel
Category Channel Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-Built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Aggradation 2 34 98%
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition Texture/Substrate 9 9 100%
Depth Sufficient 6 6 100%
Length Appropriate 6 6 100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of
meander bend (Run)6 6 100%
Thalweg centering at downstream of
meander bend (Glide)6 6 100%
1. Scoured/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
6 190 96%2 60 97%
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
6 190 96%2 60 97%
1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.6 7 86%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill 6 7 86%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.6 7 86%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. 6 7 86%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining
~Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth ≥ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
baseflow.
7 7 100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4. Thalweg Position
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek (2,260 LF)
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.
2. Bank
Totals
3. Engineered
Structures1
Table 6b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Major Channel
Category Channel Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-Built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Aggradation 1 160 64%
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition Texture/Substrate 2 5 40%
Depth Sufficient 2 4 50%
Length Appropriate 2 4 50%
Thalweg centering at upstream of
meander bend (Run)2 2 100%
Thalweg centering at downstream of
meander bend (Glide)2 2 100%
1. Scoured/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
0 0 100%n/a n/a n/a
1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.7 7 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill 7 7 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.7 7 100%
3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. 7 7 100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining
~Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth ≥ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
baseflow.
4 7 57%
2Applicable to only 2 meander bends because the other 2 meander bends are being impacted by sedimentation and the stream has braided.
3. Meander Pool
Condition
4. Thalweg Position2
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
UT to Glade Creek (448 LF)
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.
2. Bank
Totals
3. Engineered
Structures1
Table 7. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Planted Acreage 6.4
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
(acres)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material 0.1 3 0.03 0.5%
Low Stem Density Areas1 Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, 5, or 7 stem count
criteria.0.1 1 0.025 0.4%
4 0.1 0.9%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor1 Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring
year.0.25 0 0.0 0%
4 0.1 0.9%
Easement Acreage 12.8
Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping
Threshold (SF)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Easement
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).1000 10 0.11 0.9%
Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).none 0 0 0%
Total
Cumulative Total
1Acreage calculated from vegetation plots monitored for site.

Stream Photographs

Photo Point 1 – view upstream UT Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 1 – view downstream UT Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 2 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 2 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 2 – view upstream UT Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 3 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 3 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 4 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 4 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 5 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 5 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 6 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 6 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 7 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 7 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 8 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 8 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Photo Point 9 – view upstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019) Photo Point 9 – view downstream Glade Creek (04/30/2019)

Vegetation Photographs

Vegetation Plot 1 - (9/16/2019) Vegetation Plot 2 - (9/16/2019)

Vegetation Plot 3 - (9/16/2019) Vegetation Plot 4 - (9/16/2019)

Vegetation Plot 5 - (9/16/2019) Vegetation Plot 6 - (9/16/2019)

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Table 9. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Plot MY4 Success Criteria Met
(Y/N)Tract Mean
1 N
83%
2 Y
3 Y
4 Y
5 Y
6 Y
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------
Description
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
Report Prepared By
Date Prepared
Database Name
Database Location
Computer Name
File Size
Metadata
Proj, planted
Proj, total stems
Plots
Vigor
Vigor by Spp
Damage
92343
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
6
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
Project Code
project Name
Damage by Spp
Damage by Plot
6
Mimi Caddell
10/4/2019 11:00
cvs-eep-entrytool-v2.5.0 Glade MY4.mdb
L:\ActiveProjects\005-02161 Glade Creek II Monitoring\Monitoring\Monitoring Year 4\Vegetation Assessment
MIMI-PC
51773440
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data.
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes.
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.
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Table 10a. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
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 rubrum Red Maple Tree 3 3 3 5
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder Shrub Tree 2 1 1 10 1 3 3 4 1 1 31 7 7 7
Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Shrub Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Shrub Tree
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree
Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 2 2 2
Hamamelis virginiana Witch-hazel Shrub Tree 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Poplar Tree 3 3 3 8 8 9 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2
Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Physocarpus opulifolius Nine bark Shrub Tree 10 10 3 20 15 15
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 5 5 5 2 2 2 3 3 3
Quercus rubra Red Oak Tree 1
Salix Willow Tree 2 3
Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub Tree 1 1 1 2 2 3
6 6 18 14 14 35 16 16 22 15 15 36 15 15 66 11 11 29
3 3 5 7 7 9 5 5 8 8 8 9 6 6 8 4 4 6
243 243 728 567 567 1416 647 647 890 607 607 1457 607 607 2671 445 445 1174
Color for Density PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
Exceeds requirements by 10%P-all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%T: Total stems
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
Current Plot Data (MY4 2019)
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type
92343-WEI-0001 92343-WEI-0002 92343-WEI-0003 92343-WEI-0004 92343-WEI-0005 92343-WEI-0006
Stem count
size (ares)1 1 1
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
1
0.02size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
1 1
Table 10b. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Acer rubrum Red Maple Tree 3 3 8 3 3 23 3 3 4 3 3 3 6 6 6
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder Shrub Tree 12 12 55 12 12 74 12 12 57 13 13 20 14 14 14
Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Shrub Tree 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Shrub Tree 1
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood Shrub Tree 3
Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 11
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
Hamamelis virginiana Witch-hazel Shrub Tree 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Poplar Tree 18 18 19 21 21 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 28 28 28
Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum Tree 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 7 7 7
Physocarpus opulifolius Nine bark Shrub Tree 73
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 22 22 22
Quercus rubra Red Oak Tree 1
Salix Willow Tree 5
Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub Tree 3 3 4 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
77 77 206 81 81 167 86 86 132 91 91 99 110 110 110
10 10 13 10 10 11 10 10 10 10 10 11 10 10 10
519 519 1389 546 546 1126 580 580 890 614 614 668 742 742 742
Color for Density PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
Exceeds requirements by 10%P-all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%T: Total stems
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
Stems per ACRE
6
size (ACRES)0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
6size (ares)6 6 6
Species count
Stem count
MY2 (2017)
Annual Summary
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type
MY4 (2019)MY3 (2018)MY1 (2016)MY0 (2016)
APPENDIX 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Parameter Gage
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft)17.7 38.5 5.2 9.9 36.3 48.8 6.2 11.1 34.6 37.4
Floodprone Width (ft)47 115 7 12 69 118 14 46 99 165 22 33 106 111
Bankfull Mean Depth 2.6 2.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.3 0.9 0.5 1.9 2.2
Bankfull Max Depth 2.9 4.1 0.5 0.8 1.9 1.9 0.8 1.6 2.9 3.2
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)46.9 79.0 2.1 5.1 45.6 64.1 3.8 5.1 70.2 77.1
Width/Depth Ratio 6.7 18.8 17.3 26.8 40.3 37.2 6.9 24.2 15.5 19.9
Entrenchment Ratio 2.7 3.1 1.2 1.5 1.9 2.4 2.3 4.1 3.0 5.0 4.0 6.0 2.8 3.2
Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.1
D50 (mm)28.0 31.0 7.0 7.0 44.0 47.0 7.0 7.0 28.0 31.0
Riffle Length (ft)33 57 6.8 32.6
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0087 0.0271 0.0193 0.0964
Pool Length (ft)64.0 197.8 8.8 32.9
Pool Max Depth (ft)4.4 6.6 0.7 1.5 3.3 4.1 0.8 1.0 3.8 5.9
Pool Spacing (ft)107 353 33.0 70.0
Pool Volume (ft3)
Channel Beltwidth (ft)60 240 7 16 ------19 26 112 205 155 282
Radius of Curvature (ft)21 114 ------------59.0 99.0 59.0 99.0
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.2 3.0 ------------3.2 5.9 1.8 3.0 1.8 3.0
Meander Length (ft)1 ------------------------------230 425
Meander Width Ratio 3.4 6.2 1.3 1.6 ------2.5 3.5 3.4 6.2 3.1 7.0 4.5 7.5 3.1 7.0
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) lb/ft2 0.52 0.82 0.11 0.12
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (Capacity) W/m2
Drainage Area (SM)
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)3.8 5.3 3.8 4.9 3.1 4.4 4.5 6.1
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)250 300 8 25
Q-NFF regression (2-yr)
Q-USGS extrapolation (1.2-yr)
Q-Mannings 213 320 153 228
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
(---): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
1Meander Wave Length was adjusted in the MY2 report.
2 Channel was dry during survey, slope was calculated using channel thalweg
Dimension and Substrate - Shallow
N/A
33.0 5.4 5.3
61
Pre-Restoration Condition Reference Reach Data Design As-Built/Baseline
Glade Creek UT to Glade Creek Glade Creek Restoration UT to Little Pine Trib 1 Glade Creek
2.3 0.3 0.5
3.0 0.4 0.9
UT to Glade Creek Glade Creek UT to Glade Creek
11.4
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
7.0 90.0 32.0
76.5 1.7 2.4
14.2 17.4 11.8
N/A
------------
------------
------5 ---
0.8 5.0 1.5
------------
Pattern
N/A
17 75.0
30 30 30
5.5-6.0 5.5-6.0
150
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
N/A 0.11/0.63/13.3/176/241.4/>2048
------0.48
-/-/3.1/8.6/11.0/16.0 ----/0.1/0.2/0.5/4.0/8.0 0.1/3.0/8.8/77/180/-1/26.47/42.3/128/180/>2048
Additional Reach Parameters
N/A
8.00 0.02 4.60 0.05 8.00 0.02 8.00 0.02
------
E4/C4 F4/B4 C4 C4/B4 C4 B4 C4 B4
------------------
3.9 4.7 ------
200 23 300 8 ------
8
561 4 335
493 5 352
1,322 280
1200 197 ------2,120 197 2,120 326
------------1,322 280
0.0031 0.0326------------------
1.60 1.16
0.0038 0.048 0.0049 0.0473 0.0038 0.0440 0.0031 0.0397
1.68 1.04 1.18 1.09 1.68 1.14
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Dimension and Substrate MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
bankfull elevation (ft)2571.8 2571.8 2571.8 2572.0 2572.3 2569.7 2569.7 2569.7 2570.0 2570.1 2569.8 2569.8 2569.8 2569.9 2570.2
low bank elevation (ft)2571.8 2571.8 2571.3 2571.9 2572.3 2569.7 2569.7 2569.8 2570.1 2570.1 2569.8 2569.8 2569.6 2569.9 2570.2
Bankfull Width (ft)37.4 34.4 38.7 34.4 32.2 34.6 35.0 36.2 36.2 38.4 31.9 30.0 32.5 32.2 35.2
Floodprone Width (ft)106 106 102 101 102 111 110 93 104 104 ---------------
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.8
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2.9 2.9 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.7 4.6 4.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)70.2 66.9 70.2 64.0 63.1 77.1 78.0 77.6 79.2 95.9 89.0 88.4 91.5 87.9 99.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 19.9 17.7 21.3 18.4 16.4 15.5 15.7 16.9 16.5 15.4 11.5 10.2 11.6 11.7 12.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 2.8 3.1 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.6 2.9 2.7 ---------------
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio1,2,3 1.0 1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 ---------------
Dimension and Substrate MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
bankfull elevation (ft)2574.0 2574.0 2574.0 2574.3 2574.4 2573.6 2573.6 2573.6 2573.7 2574.0
low bank elevation (ft)2574.3 2574.3 2574.1 2574.3 2574.4 2573.6 2573.5 2573.5 2573.7 2574.0
Bankfull Width (ft)5.3 7.1 7.0 6.8 7.9 5.3 6.1 5.9 6.2 6.1
Floodprone Width (ft)---------------61 61 61 36 37
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.5 1.3 1.5 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.7 5.5 4.9 2.6 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.1 2.2 2.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 6.0 9.6 10.1 18.0 29.8 11.8 13.5 11.4 17.8 13.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio ---------------11.4 10.0 10.3 5.8 6.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio1,2,3 ---------------1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
---: not applicable
1Prior to MY3, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
Table 12. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Section)
Cross-Section 1, Glade Creek (Riffle)Cross-Section 2, Glade Creek (Riffle)Cross-Section 3, Glade Creek (Pool)
Cross-Section 4, UT to Glade Creek (Pool)Cross-Section 5, UT to Glade Creek (Riffle)
3BHRs that increased in MY4 were primarily due to additional floodplain deposition and not enlargement of the original baseline cross-section.
2MY3-MY5 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As-built (MY0) cross-sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The remainder of
the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY3 dimensions were updated in MY4.
Table 13a. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek
Parameter
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft)34.6 37.4 34.4 35.0 36.2 38.7 34.4 36.2 32.2 38.4
Floodprone Width (ft)106 111 97 106 93.3 102.0 101 104 102 104
Bankfull Mean Depth 1.9 2.2 1.9 2.2 1.8 2.1 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.5
Bankfull Max Depth 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 2.8 3.2 2.9 3.5 3.0 3.9
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)70.2 77.1 66.9 78.0 70.2 77.6 64 79.2 63.1 95.9
Width/Depth Ratio 15.5 19.9 15.7 17.7 16.9 21.3 16.5 18.4 15.4 16.4
Entrenchment Ratio 2.8 3.2 2.8 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.7 3.2
Bank Height Ratio 2,3 <1.0 1.0 <1.0 1.2
D50 (mm)39.8 47.7 46.5 52.5 44.0 52.8
Riffle Length (ft)33 57 20 57 20 85 19 80 21 105
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0087 0.0271 0.0065 0.0235 0.0011 0.0181 0.0012 0.0162 0.0014 0.0189
Pool Length (ft)64 198 66 190 62 222 56 240 65 229
Pool Max Depth (ft)3.8 5.9 4.4 5.4 3.7 5.8 4.1 6.4
Pool Spacing (ft)107 353 91 384 90 337 86 391 88 304
Pool Volume (ft3)
Channel Beltwidth (ft)155 282 155 280 155 283 155 283 155 283
Radius of Curvature (ft)59.0 99.0 59.0 99.0 59.0 99.0 59.0 99.0 59.0 99.0
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.8 3.0 1.7 2.8 1.6 2.6 1.6 2.6 1.6 2.6
Meander Wave Length (ft)230 425 227 435 216 445 216 445 216 445
Meander Width Ratio 4.5 7.5 4.5 8.0 4.2 7.3 4.2 7.3 4.2 7.3
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
1Meander Wave Length was adjusted for MY0 and MY1 in the MY2 report.
2Prior to MY3, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
1/26.47/42.3/128/180/>20435/19.49/30.4/97.6/137/2564/12.5/29.6/75.6/115.5/3623/11.0/27.6/109.5/172.5/51.2/0.6/11.0/64.0/113.8/256
0%0%2%6%8%
0.0031 0.0030 0.0027 0.0027 0.0031
0.0031 0.0031 0.0030 0.0025 0.0032
2,120 2,120 2,120 2,120 2,120
1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60
Pattern1
Additional Reach Parameters
C4 C4 C4 C4 C4
90.0 34.3
4.2
Profile
As-Built/Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3
3MY3-MY5 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As-built (MY0) cross-sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The
remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY3 dimensions were updated in MY4.
MY5
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
MY4
2.6
1.0 1.0 1.0
Table 13b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
UT to Glade Creek
Parameter
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
Bank Height Ratio 1,2
D50 (mm)
Riffle Length (ft)6.8 32.6 17.3 51.4 5.0 42.0 3.0 24.8 7.1 29.6
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0193 0.0964 0.0118 0.0866 0.0148 0.1416 0.0170 0.1410 0.0351 0.0646
Pool Length (ft)8.8 32.9 15.6 32.6 3.0 5.0 5.0 14.7 4.6 10.0
Pool Max Depth (ft)1.1 2.4 1.0 2.5 0.7 1.8
Pool Spacing (ft)33.0 70.0 38.8 84.0 16 99 13 68 13 229
Pool Volume (ft3)
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
Radius of Curvature (ft)
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
Meander Wave Length (ft)
Meander Width Ratio 3.1 7.0 3.1 7.0 3.1 7.0 3.1 7.0 3.1 7.0
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
1Prior to MY3, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
0%0%0%0%0%
11/0.63/13.3/176/241.4/>2019/4.65/11.9/124.6/163.3/2.2/0.4/0.8/111.2/151.8/256SC/SC/0.2/101.9/128.0/180.SC/0.1/0.3/16.0/41.3/180.0
0.0326 0.0317 0.0318 0.0362 0.0337
0.0397 0.0372 0.0323 0.0342 0.0261
1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16
326 326 326 326 326
Additional Reach Parameters
B4 B4 B4 B4 B4
5.5-6.0 5.5-6.0 5.5-6.0
150 150 150
5.5-6.0
150
5.5-6.0
150
Pattern
75.0 75.0 75.0
30 30 30
Profile
1.5 1.3
75.0
30
75.0
30
32.0 22.6 0.7 Silt/Clay 0.1
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
11.4 5.3 10.3 5.8 6.0
11.8 13.5 11.4 17.8 13.5
37
2.4 2.7 3.1 2.2 2.8
0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.9
2MY3-MY5 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As-built (MY0) cross-sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The
remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY3 dimensions were updated in MY4.
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
5.3 6.1 5.9 6.2 6.1
As-Built/Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5
61 32 61 36
DMS Project No. 92343
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek Reach 1 and 2 (STA 10+00 - STA 31+20)XS 1XS 2XS 3Reach
Break
2560
2562
2564
2566
2568
2570
2572
2574
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 2150Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
TW (MY0-05/2016)TW (MY1-09/2016)TW (MY2-5/2017)TW (MY3-6/2018)TW (MY4-4/2019)WSF (MY4-4/2019)BKF (MY4-4/2019)STRUCTURE (MY4-4/2019)
2560
2562
2564
2566
2568
2570
2572
2574
2150 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550 2600 2650 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 3000 3050 3100 3150 3200 3250 3300Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
TW (MY0-05/2016)TW (MY1-09/2016)TW (MY2-5/2017)TW (MY3-6/2018)TW (MY4-4/2019)WSF (MY4-4/2019)BKF (MY4-4/2019)STRUCTURE (MY4-4/2019)
DMS Project No. 92343
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
UT Glade Creek (STA 11+29 - STA 14+48)
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Reach Break
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
2580
2581
2582
2583
2584
1125 1150 1175 1200 1225 1250 1275 1300Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
TW (MY0-05/2016)TW (MY1-09/2016)TW (MY2-5/2017)TW (MY3-6/2018)TW (MY4-4/2019)WSF (MY4-4/2019)BKF (MY4-4/2019)STRUCTURE (MY4-4/2019)XS 4XS 52568
2569
2570
2571
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
2577
2578
2579
1275 1300 1325 1350 1375 1400 1425 1450Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
TW (MY0-05/2016)TW (MY1-09/2016)TW (MY2-5/2017)TW (MY3-6/2018)TW (MY4-4/2019)WSF (MY4-4/2019)BKF (MY4-4/2019)STRUCTURE (MY4-4/2019)
DMS Project No. 92343
Cross-Section 1 - Glade Creek
Bankfull Dimensions
63.1 x-section area (ft.sq.)
32.2 width (ft)
2.0 mean depth (ft)
3.0 max depth (ft)
33.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.9 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.4 width-depth ratio
102 W flood prone area (ft)
3.2 entrenchment ratio
0.9 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:04/2019
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Cross-Section Plots
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
View Downstream
2568
2570
2572
2574
2576
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120Elevation (ft)Width (ft)
12+28 Riffle
MY0 (5/2016)MY0 Bankfull XS Area Elevation MY1 (09/2016)MY2 (5/2017)
MY3 (06/2018)MY4 (04/2019)Bankfull Floodprone Area
DMS Project No. 92343
Cross-Section 2 - Glade Creek
Bankfull Dimensions
95.9 x-section area (ft.sq.)
38.4 width (ft)
2.5 mean depth (ft)
3.9 max depth (ft)
40.2 wetted perimeter (ft)
2.4 hydraulic radius (ft)
15.4 width-depth ratio
104.0 W flood prone area (ft)
2.7 entrenchment ratio
1.2 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:04/2019
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Cross-Section Plots
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
View Downstream
2566
2568
2570
2572
2574
2576
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110Elevation (ft)Width (ft)
19+64 Riffle
MY0 (5/2016)MY0 Bankfull XS Area Elevation MY1 (09/2016)MY2 (5/2017)
MY3 (06/2018)MY4 (04/2019)Bankfull Floodprone Area
DMS Project No. 92343
Cross-Section 3 - Glade Creek
Bankfull Dimensions
99.7 x-section area (ft.sq.)
35.2 width (ft)
2.8 mean depth (ft)
4.6 max depth (ft)
37.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
2.6 hydraulic radius (ft)
12.4 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:04/2019
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Cross-Section Plots
2565
2567
2569
2571
2573
2575
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160Elevation (ft)Width (ft)
20+85 Pool
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (09/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (06/2018)MY4 (04/2019)Bankfull
DMS Project No. 92343
Cross-Section 4 - UT to Glade Creek
Bankfull Dimensions
2.1 x-section area (ft.sq.)
7.9 width (ft)
0.3 mean depth (ft)
0.6 max depth (ft)
8.1 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.3 hydraulic radius (ft)
29.8 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:04/2019
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Cross-Section Plots
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
70 80 90 100 110 120Elevation (ft)Width (ft)
12+48 Pool
MY0 (5/2016)MY1 (09/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (06/2018)MY4 (04/2019)Bankfull
DMS Project No. 92343
Cross-Section 5 - UT to Glade Creek
Bankfull Dimensions
2.8 x-section area (ft.sq.)
6.1 width (ft)
0.5 mean depth (ft)
0.9 max depth (ft)
6.4 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4 hydraulic radius (ft)
13.5 width-depth ratio
37.0 W flood prone area (ft)
6.0 entrenchment ratio
1.1 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:04/2019
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Cross-Section Plots
2572
2573
2574
2575
2576
90 100 110 120 130Elevation (ft)Width (ft)
13+50 Riffle
MY0 (5/2016)MY0 Bankfull XS Area Elevation MY1 (09/2016)MY2 (5/2017)
MY3 (06/2018)MY4 (04/2019)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 1 1 1 1
Reach SummaryParticle Count
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Very fine 0.062 0.125 6 6 6 7
Fine 0.125 0.250 13 13 13 20
Medium 0.25 0.50 12 12 12 32
Coarse 0.5 1.0 9 9 9 41
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 5 5 5 46SAND
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 46
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 46
Fine 4.0 5.6 46
Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 2 2 48
Medium 8.0 11.0 1 1 2 2 50
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 2 52
Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 1 3 3 55
Coarse 22.6 32 6 6 6 61
Very Coarse 32 45 9 9 9 70
Very Coarse 45 64 14 14 14 84GRAVEL
Small 64 90 9 9 9 93
Small 90 128 3 3 3 96
Large 128 180 3 3 3 99
Large 180 256 1 1 1 100COBBLE
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 = 256.0
Channel materials (mm)
0.2
0.6
11.0
64.0
113.8
ReachwideBOULDERTotal
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
Glade Creek, Reachwide
Glade Creek, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
SummaryRiffle 100-
Count
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 1
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0SAND
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 4
Coarse 16.0 22.6 6 6 10
Coarse 22.6 32 12 12 22
Very Coarse 32 45 30 30 52
Very Coarse 45 64 32 32 84GRAVEL
Small 64 90 14 14 98
Small 90 128 2 2 100
Large 128 180 100
Large 180 256 100COBBLE
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 = 128.0
Channel materials (mm)
26.9
37.1
44.0
64.0
83.7
Cross-Section 1BOULDERTotal
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 1
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 1
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
SummaryRiffle 100-
Count
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 2
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0SAND
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 2
Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 2 4
Coarse 22.6 32 14 14 18
Very Coarse 32 45 22 22 40
Very Coarse 45 64 22 22 62GRAVEL
Small 64 90 20 20 82
Small 90 128 8 8 90
Large 128 180 8 8 98
Large 180 256 2 2 100COBBLE
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 = 256.0
Channel materials (mm)
30.4
41.6
52.8
98.3
158.4
Cross-Section 2BOULDERTotal
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 2
Glade Creek, Cross-Section 2
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 10 10 20 20 20
Reach SummaryParticle Count
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
UT to Glade Creek, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Very fine 0.062 0.125 18 2 20 20 40
Fine 0.125 0.250 2 6 8 8 48
Medium 0.25 0.50 1 9 10 10 58
Coarse 0.5 1.0 3 3 3 61
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 4 4 4 65SAND
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 65
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1 1 66
Fine 4.0 5.6 2 1 3 3 69
Fine 5.6 8.0 2 1 3 3 72
Medium 8.0 11.0 7 2 9 9 81
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 1 3 3 84
Coarse 16.0 22.6 7 7 7 91
Coarse 22.6 32 1 1 1 92
Very Coarse 32 45 3 1 4 4 96
Very Coarse 45 64 2 2 2 98GRAVEL
Small 64 90 1 1 1 99
Small 90 128 99
Large 128 180 1 1 1 100
Large 180 256 100COBBLE
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
60 40 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 = 180.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.1
0.3
16.0
41.3
ReachwideBOULDERTotal
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
UT to Glade Creek, Reachwide
UT to Glade Creek, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 17 17 17
SummaryRiffle 100-
Count
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
UT to Glade Creek, Cross-Section 5
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Very fine 0.062 0.125 31 31 48
Fine 0.125 0.250 31 31 79
Medium 0.25 0.50 14 14 93
Coarse 0.5 1.0 93
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 93SAND
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 93
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 93
Fine 4.0 5.6 3 3 96
Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 97
Medium 8.0 11.0 97
Medium 11.0 16.0 1 1 98
Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 2 100
Coarse 22.6 32 100
Very Coarse 32 45 100
Very Coarse 45 64 100GRAVEL
Small 64 90 100
Small 90 128 100
Large 128 180 100
Large 180 256 100COBBLE
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 = 22.6
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.1
0.1
0.3
5.0
Cross Section 5BOULDERTotal
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Individual Class PercentParticle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000Percent Cumulative (%)Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0 (05/2016)MY1 (10/2016)MY2 (05/2017)MY3 (07/2018)MY4 (05/2019)
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
UT to Glade Creek, Cross-Section 5
UT to Glade Creek, Cross-Section 5
APPENDIX 5. Hydrology Summary Data and Plots

Table 14. Verification of Bankfull Events
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek, UT
Reach MY of
Occurrence
Date of
Occurrence
Date of Data
Collection Method
MY1 6/27/2016 10/4/2016 Crest Gage
MY2 10/9/2017 12/4/2017 Wrackline
MY3 2/11/2018 4/2/2018 Wrackline
MY4 2/24/2019 3/11/2019 Crest Gage
MY1 6/27/2016 10/4/2016 Crest Gage
MY2 10/9/2017 12/5/2017 Wrackline
MY3 2/11/2018 4/2/2018 Crest Gage
MY4 2/24/2019 3/11/2019 Crest Gage
Table 15. Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Year 1 (2016)Year 2 (2017)Year 3 (2018)Year 4 (2019)Year 5 (2020)
1 Yes/127 Days
(75.6%)
Yes/169 Days
(100%)
Yes/169 Days
(100%)
Yes/169 Days
(100%)
Wetland success criteria is 12.5% of growing season (21 consecutive days).
Summary of Groundwater Gage Results for MY4
Gage Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (%)
Glade Creek
UT
Groundwater Gage Plot
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Start of Growing Season4/26/2019End of Growing Season10/11/2019JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Rainfall (in)Water Level (in)Monitoring Year 4 -2019
Rainfall Gage #1 Criteria Level
Glade Creek Groundwater Gage #1
Monthly Rainfall Data
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 4 - 2019
1 2019 rainfall collected from NC CRONOS Station Name: Sparta 3.5 SSW (NCSU, 2019)
2 30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from weather station Sparta, NC8158 (USDA, 2019)
-1.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
7.00
9.00
11.00
13.00
Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19Precipitation (in)Date
Glade Creek 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2019 Alleghany County, NC
NC CRONOS Sparta 3.5 SSW 30th percentile 70th percentile
APPENDIX 6. Invasive Species Treatment Logs
MEMO
To: Harry Tsomides, NCDEQ
From: Joe Secoges
Date: 10/17/2019
Subject: Glade Creek II Mitigation Site Maintenance Report
Tasks Preformed, -
On October 1, 2019 kudzu was treated with Transline® herbicide (with surfactant and
spray pattern indicator) at a rate of 21 oz per acre (max amount allowed on an acre in one
year). The kudzu infestation is estimated to be about 1/3 of an acre.
Other Notable -Information.-
Due to the contract start date being September 30"' (at the end of the growing season) in
addition to the extremely dry conditions, no other invasive plants were treated in 2019.
However, due to the expectation that the kudzu will need treatments in multiple years for
adequate control, Eastern Forest Consultants wanted to make sure that it was treated in
2019. A follow-up application on kudzu and initial treatment of all other target species
will be conducted with leaf -on conditions in 2020.

PESTICIDE/HERBICIDE APPLICATION RECORD
PROPERTY OWNER/MANAGER:
Name: Harry Tsomides
NC DEQ DMS
Address:
Telephone #: [phone]
ADDRESS/LOCATION OF APPLICATION SITE (if different than above):
Address/Location: Glade Creek II Mitigation Site — Alleghany County
CERTIFIED APPLICATOR:
Joseph M. Secoges (Applicator Cert. # 026-34911 / Consultant Cert. # 030-1312)
Eastern Forest Consultants LLC
P.O. Box 1577
Clemmons, ITC 27012
240-446-1583
DATE + START/END TIME OF APPLICATION: 10/l/2019; 1300-1400
RESTRICTED ENTRY INTERVAL (REI):
DURATION (# OF HOURS): 12 Hours
EXPIRATION (DATE/TIME): 10/2/19.@ 0200
PLANTS/SITES TREATED: Upland Area around Stream
PRINCIPLE PESTS TO BE CONTROLLED: Kudzu
ACREAGE, AREA, OR NUMBER OF PLANTS TREATED:
Approx 1/3 Ac

IDENTIFICATION/AMOUNT OF PESTICIDES USED:
1) Brand/Common Name: Transline
EPA Reg. Number: 62719-259
Amount Applied to Site: 7 oz
Application Rate: 21 oz / 12 gallons
2) Brand/Common Name: CWC 90 Surfactant
EPA Reg. Number: N/A
Amount Applied to Site: 4 oz
Application Rate: 1 oz / gallon
3) Brand/Common Name: Bullseye Spray Pattern Indicator
EPA Reg. Number: N/A
Amount Applied to Site: 4 oz
Application Rate: 1 oz / gallon
4) Brand/Common Name:
EPA Reg. Number:
Amount Applied to Site:
Application Rate:
DILUENTS USED (Water, Oil, Fuel, etc.):
1) Diluent:
Amount Applied to Site:
Application Rate:
2) Diluent:
Amount Applied to Site:
Application Rate:
Water
4 gallons
12 gallons / acre
TYPE OF APPLICATION EQUIPMENT USED: Back -pack Sprayer

WEATHER:
Temp: 80-85 deg F
Wind Speed: 0-5 mph
Wind Direction: variable
NOTES: