20130428 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20191023

Stream and Wetlands Restoration
Year 1 (2019) Monitoring Report
Unnamed Tributary to Michael's Branch
Haw River Basin
Hillier-Keziah Family LLC Tract
Burlington, NC
October 12, 2019
USACOE SAW-2013-00847 / NCDENR DWQ#13-0428
f
.4k
HABITAT ASSESSMENT & RESTORATION PROFESSIONALS
301 McCullough Orin, Ah Floor W— 704.841.28M
Charlotte, NC 28262 Fax [phone]

Table of Contents
Page
Section 1. Restoration Project Backgound (abbreviated from as -built report) 3
A. Setting and Goals 3
B. Post Restoration As -built Conditions 4
Section 2. Monitoring Protocol 5
Section 3. 2019 (Yr 1) Monitoring Results 6
A. Overall Site Monitoring Stations and Photolog 6
a. Site Monitoring Station Map 6
b. Photolog for fixed Photostations 6
B. Fluvial Geomorphology 12
a. Summary of Results
b. Dimensional Stability: Surveyed Cross Sections 13
c. Profile Stability: Surveyed Longitudinal Profile 14
C. Vegetation Monitoring 15
a. Summary of Results 15
b. Bottomland Forest Woody Vegetation Assessment Data 16
c. Bottomland Swamp Forest Woody Vegetation Assessment Data 18
d. Wetland Herbaceous Vegetation Assessment Data 19
e. Riparian (stream bank) Woody Vegetation Assessment Data 20
D. Wetland Hydrology 21
E. Summary of Monitoring for Year 1 (ending September, 2019) 24
a. Areas of Concern (if any)
b. Status of future NW 39 permitted stream crossing
c. Contingency Plans (if any)
F. Appendices 25
Table of Planting Plan (Table 4 of initial "Restoration Plan")
Survey Table for Stream Profile
Survey Table for Cross Sections
Survey Table for Vegetation Plots
p. 2

Section I. Background
A. Restoration Project Goals
The location of this stream and wetlands restoration project is shown in figure AB-1 . The restoration
reach lies within headwater catchments of Haw River Basin and is an unnamed tributary of Michael's Branch.
This area of the upper Haw River Basin lies within the North Carolina Piedmont Physiographic Region. The
drainage basin contributing to stream flow at the lower end of the proposed restoration site is approximately
207 acres or 0.33 square miles.
In March of 2012 a NW27 404/401 Permit to restore original aquatic functions within the watershed
reach traversing the property was obtained to restore to a natural watershed condition approximately 1,400
linear feet of an unnamed tributary to Michael's Branch (tributary of Back Creek, Haw River Basin; located
near the intersection of Hwy 70 (Church Steet) and University Drive in western Burlington, NC and
approximately 1 acre of riparian bottomland wetlands. The wetland work focussed on the re-establish and
enhance the ecological and hydrological relationship between riparian wetlands (at the eastern end of the
Family Tract) and stream flow within the floodplain bottomlands of a restoration corridor on the property to
improve function and value of wetlands on the property. It also served to remove two —70 year old man-made
dams and impoundments on the property that pose safety concerns.
The restoration of stream and wetlands performed under this NW 27 permit was based on the original
plan in the permit and resulted in 1335 linear feet of restoration and about .9 acres of wetlands. The as -built
planform map with stations is shown in Figure AB-4. The map is based on in field triangulation with survey
grade tape from established baselines during construction followed by verification with post construction
retriangulation as well as by overlay of aerial photographs, and a drone -based orthometric mosaic of the site
obtained June/July of 2018.
p. 3

Section 2. Monitoring Protocol
The monitoring for the wetland and stream restoration is on annual basis for a period of 5 years
commencing at the date of completion of the final planting schedules within the various habitat zones. The
basis of monitoring is this protocol and the submission of an As -built Document (this report) providing
detailed information on all wetlands and stream restoration work. The monitoring and the As Built report is
broken into three basic components: Stream Morpholigic Stability, Buffer and Wetland Plant Communities,
and Wetland Hydrology. These are discussed below.
Stream Morphologic Stability. For streams, this includes the constructed pattern, dimension and profile
at locations in each of the three sub -reaches. The planform sheet show the location of all in stream structures,
established photo stations, vegetation monitoring plots, and locations of cross sections. Photo stations are set
up for up and down stream tie in points, representative meander and inflection zones, and locations where
structures have been installed. Cross section and photo stations have permanent benchmarks and all grade
elevations are tied to a common permanent benchmark. The areas of new wetland restoration is also
demarkated on the As -Built Planform Map of Figure AB-4.
Stream Bank (Riparian), Buffer and Wetland Vegetation Monitoring. For stream bank vegetation, newly
established stream bank woody plants shall be monitored using either total stem counts or representative 50'
long bank reaches of sample plots collocated at monitoring cross section locations along each bank.
Survivorship shall be 80%. If representative plots are used, a semi -quantitative survey of the stream must be
made for areas larger than 5' in length for poor plant development. If areas of failure are found, these areas
must be mapped and counted in detail.
For wetland plant communities, a yearly population survey of plantings is required to demonstrate
survivorship on a plot -by -plot basis. Both Facultative and Obligate woody vegetation is to be demonstrated in
all wetland monitoring plots. Survivorship shall be 320 trees or more per acre.
For the Piedmont Bottomland Forest Habitat areas (that are to be planted with woody trees and shrubs 8'
on center) native species of trees are to be counted each monitoring cycle and survivorship shall be 320
trees/acre or better. The monitoring plan community plots are shown on both Figures AB-4 and 7.
Wetland Hydrology. The monitoring for wetlands hydrology is based on the early growing season

monitoring of groundwater levels for five years between March 1' and May 30' and shall be implemented
with automated water level recorders recording at a frequency of at least every 12 hours at no less than one
sampling at each of the three mitigation areas. The recorders will be deployed in the Spring of 2019.
Saturated conditions in the upper 12" needs to be demonstrated for at least 25 days after March 15"
Alternatively, continuous shallow groundwater monitoring can be preformed and demonstrate saturated
conditions for 12.5% of the growing season (200 days).
M

Section 3. Year 1 Monitoring Results
A. Year 1 Monitoring Photolog for Established Photo Stations
r7 7', is r "I .'
25 September 2019
Photo Station #1, Station 00 ft, Looking upstream (east) at lowest most pool above
Univ. Drive Double Box Culvert.

Photo Station #3, Station #140 ft. looking upstreaam.
p. 7

Photo Station #4, Station #340 ft, looking down stream.
_. .,y��� .fir: a 7q •?i}'a` ti'?1''f' �+F,+, - tr t•.��r�b".1. :y+ ..r h � _ ,k..� � � -.u, .�T�'. i`:�
`Y• ,tt s,.
' 25 September 2019`.:.:
Photo Station #5, Station #375, looking upstream.
M

li, a
'r
a � � �.�� ,� Y � _ ��r' � fir •:. ��
71,
41
P {.
- 10 .✓ -
_-w t.
r*1•
1

Y,TO
' -� ..
Cam• -
4'

B. Fluvial Geomorphology
a. Summary of Monitoring Results for Geomorphic Stability
The monitoring of the restored stream's geomophic stability is composed of three
elements: 1) comparison of photos taken in successive years from the established
photostations, 2) comparison of surveyed cross section between the as -built conditions, and
each of the successive 5 years of monitoring at the established representative cross sections
for inflection and meander sections of the restored reach, and 3) comparison of a surveyed
longitudinal profile between as -built conditions and each of the successive five years of
monitoring.
The stream bank and bed conditions as represented in the above section's 10 photos
can be seen to shown fully vegetated and stable overbank, bank, and stream bed conditions.
The following figure showing a comparison of surveyed cross sections between the
as -built and year 1 monitoring conditions shows all sections stable with no significant
departures from the as -built conditions for stream bank or bed conditions. A few minor
areas in the overbank floodplain areas (between bankfull and 2xbankfull heights (e.g.
Rosgen `floodprone' areas) show aggradation of floodplain due to deposition of sediment
during overbank storm events. The dynamic conditions observed in these overbank areas
were anticipated and serve to provide stability (via attenuation of shear stresses) and water
quality benefits (via removal of clays and silts in saltation and suspended transport.
The second following figure or exhibit shows a comparison of the surveyed
longitudinal stream profile between the as -built and Year 1 monitoring conditions
(stationing from lower tie in (station 00 ft) to the upper tie in at the Huffinan Lane box
culvert ( — station 1350 ft). Again one observes that all the established sills that were
constructed at the transitions from the restored streams inflection (riffle and runs) and
meander pool reaches have maintained stable elevations. The only significant departures
from the as -built conditions are found between sills with the development of deeper pools as
storm flow dynamically adjusts the bed profile to achieve an equilibrium in the typical
`channel -forming' bankfull flow event's bed shear stress.
p. 12

w
620 South Cross—Section-1 North
616
0
� 610
m
w
605
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60
Distance [(t)
620
South Cross Section 92 North
= 815
a
610
m
w
605
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance (ft)
820
South Cross Section #3 North
� 615
0
610
m
w
605
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance (ft)
620
South Cross Section #4 North
615
0
> 61❑
m
W
605
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance (ft)
630 South Cross Section #5 North
625
0
� 620
m
w
615
0
10 20 30 40 50 6o 70 80
Distance (ft)
630
South Cross .Section #6 North
625
0
620
m
w
615
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance ift)
630
South Cross Section #7 North
625
a
7 620
m
w
615
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance (ft)
$30
South Cross Section 98 Now
625
a
620
m
w
615
0 10 20 30 40 50 6❑ 70 80
Distance (ft)
�. As built Year 1 (2018)
(� � Gm�M Ebra�en � Gmu� f brmion
�Nmtx Ebvaw� wsex Eb�atnn ilillie1 KOxiWl Family LLC
HARP Burlinglon Re%lnma on i ureA&7. Year 1 Monitoring Cross Sections srl4ito19
P"""' of Restored Stream
snw-mtsapea�

UT to Michael's Branch Longitudinal Profile 5T# 1333
WAI.
I I
620
v I
0 Rosgen-Type
615 B21 B3 I —�
(6 I I Rosgen-Type
7 I I E-C1-2
M
LU
610
I I
Rosgen-Type
C2
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Thalweg Distance (ft)
Univ. Drive
Double Box
Culvert
L E G E N❑
AsWilt (2018) Year 1 (2019)
Bed Elegy. Bed Elev.
Water Elegy. Water Elegy.
L:::] Pool Zone
U Riffle Zone
1400
Huffman Lane
Box Culvert
Hillier Kenah family LLC
HARP , Burlinglon Revoralion Fgure AR. Year 1 LongiNdnal Profile of 1014019
Project Restored Stream
SAW-201MOB47
0

C. Vegetation Monitoring
a. Summary of Results
Vegetative monitoring consists of surveying of vegetation along and within transects,
plots and representative lengths of stream banks and then comparing the number (e.g.
density) of living native herbaceous and woody plants on the species level. The asbuilt
conditions are those documented in restoration schedule, and for each of the 5 successive
monitoring events the botanist resurveys each of the established stations to quantitatively
assess and document herbaceous and wood species that are present. The observations are
broken up and documented for bottomland transects some of which are within the restored
and enhance floodplain wetlands (NC Piedmont Swamp Forest) and the remained within the
NC Piedmont Bottomland Forest, a small sample of lm x lm plots within these two types
of communities to provide representative assessment of the understory herbaceous
community, and then a table shown the density and species present as riparian woody bank
vegetation. Each of these tabulated elements follow.
Woody and herbaceous vegetation continues to flourish across the site. Trees per
acre estimates range from a low of 1,042 for Transect #4 to 3,151 for Transect #3. The
average for the 4 transects is 1,838. The stream is shaded for most of its length by Hazel
alder (Alnus serrulata) and in other areas by Black willow (Salix nigra). Many trees are
estimated to be 15 feet and more in height. Some Cottonswoods (Populus deltoides) are
approximately 30 feet. Herbaceous growth is dense and varied. Jewelweed (Inpatiens
capensis), Arrowleaf tearthumb (Polygonatum pensylvanicum), and Common rush (Juncus
effusus) are found along the restored reach and are quite dense in places. Blackberry (Rubus
sp.) is established up and down the reach and becoming fairly impenetrable. Ten woody
species are commonly found as volunteers with Sycamore (Platnus occidentalis) being most
abundantly found. Silk tree (Albizia julibrissin) is found in several places and may need to
be removed.
p. 15

b. Tabulated Assessment of Piedmont Bottomland Forest Transects 1-4.
?T5 Burlington Woody Transects 11-12 September 2019
Transect #1
Common name
Scientific name
Count
American black elderberry
Sa.-.)ucus rugra ssp. canadensis
1
American sycamore
Ra.a!lus omdentalis
10
Black walnut
JLc:- a:,s :, c- a
1
@ X-sec #1
(I&X8U)
Black willow
Sa'), n:g;'a
13
Hazel alder
A;nc:s se c::ara
8
Ironwood
Carps nris carc::n:ana
2
Loblolly pine
Pings taeda
1
N-1'imosa
Albizia julibrissin
1
Red maple
Acer rubrurn
2
River birch
Setula nigra
2
Silky dogwood
Gomus amorourn
13
Sweetgum
s'vi ac::c:a
3
Tulip tree
Lr odendre".ICa;;];-2'a
1
Winged elm
Ulrous alata
3
Square feet: 1280 Total 61
Acres: 0.029384756657484
Trees per acre: 2076
Transect #2
Common name
Scientific name
Count
American elm
Urous americana
1
Black willow
Sa::x n:gra
20
a@ X-sec #4
(16WT)
Green ash
F7; ax.,)Lis pen 0sylvariica
4
Hazel alder
A;n�is serrulata
3
Red maple
Acer rubrurn
1
Silk-.,, dogwood
Comus arnorourn
1
Swamp crestnut oak
Quercus raichauxii
1
Sweetcum
Liquidarobar styracitlua
2
Square feet: 1328 Total 33
Acres: 0.03048668503214
Trees per acre: 1083
p. 16

b. Tabulated Assessment of Piedmont Bottomland Forest Transects 1-4. (cont.)
W
Budmom Woody Transoms 11-12 Sepbmiber 2019
Common name
Scientific name
Count
American sycamore
PiaMnue nccidenAaia
12
Black -gum
Nyssa syfvafca
Robirriapseudoacacia
Pop..rw ab&Ndea
1
Black locust
Eastern colIlDrnrood
2
1
Trnnsed#3
It X-sec #6
Eastern red cedar
Junoerus vin2rniana
FraKkwEpennsylvaraica
Akwa serndala
5
Gre- ash
#
Hamel alder
14
{1Erx71Yj
klinosa
A2WzmpAbrissir
Quercus lyrasra
14
Overoup oak
1
Pawpaw
Aaimina hbaba
3
Persimman
Red maple
Short Ileaf pine
Silky dogwoDd
D-spy— vrayirr—'
#
Acwridmurn
#
Pings ea,hmala
1
C.omus amnrrrrrm
2
Southern red oak
Qrrersus fak*da
1
Swamp chesbrut oak
Queraws nTk* uaw
1
SweeWum Lkpndamber atyr-ae#kra 11
Squena feet: 1120 Trul 81
Acres: DA25711B62U75299
Trees per acre: 3151
Common name
American block eldedmny ;
American sycamore Ii
7ransect #4I
[germ ase
(M X-sec #7
Hozel alde
(1 d'x81 j
Hickory
Pawpaw
Red maple
River birch
Square feet: 1.2M
Acres: D.t729752DW11SM3
Trees per acre_ 1 M2
comma name •.ot
mom ssp_ eanademsis 1
cum 1
ina bdcba 1
rr�nirn 1
a mryra 1
as arrmmrrm 1
Tdel 31
p. 17

c. Tabulated Assessment of Woody Vegetation in Wetland (Piedmont Bottomland Swamp Forest)
Transects 1 -4.
]Ts Burlington Wetland Plots 11-12 September M 19
VVetlIand
Trar,sect r
0;
Common name
r'en IC name
CGLint
Indicator
Arierlcan black elderberry
am ucUs nrgra ssg. cans ns,s
FAC
BIacl..%:•�ilow
SMIXnrgfa
R i: e r b i rc 7
Lwarivia nrgra
F-(: ;'•:
Sill:- dociv,-ood
JUDMUSarnnrnUm
I
Stir:i:orship:—27001acre Total 6
Percent of Dominant Species that are 4BL, FACW, FAC
uC
Wetland
Trarsect#2
16 xi 6'}
Common name
Scientific name
Count
[indicator
B I a ck vrl I I ow
sisfix nrgra
Green as
raxxnus penpsyyval3rca
wee gum
LYqUf1IEIMDEIfs cr Ua
FAC
Survivorship: N1300iacre Total 6
Percent of Dominant Species that are 4BL; FACW, FAC
CIO
Wetland
Transect#3
A6'At 6',
Common name
cr'en r. name
Count
Indicator
mencan sycamore
- 3r3:,us occ-oen rs
—7777—
Black cherry
v servo aFAUIJ
as ern cottonv000d
b 7 Fffetc : es
Eastern red cedar
e• ,• ; •3 a
reen as
-Ja r u3oer:,, :a •:a
aze a er
_ r,;;sserri a53
Ilnosa
¢r,a ::
Hea maple
Silky dogvjood-
= - - -
Southern red oak
Swamp chestnut oak
QUercUsmichaUxii
1
FACW
Sweetgum
i_igUidambarsl!}racigua
6
FAC
Survivorship: N6970facre Total 41
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, FAC
100
Wetland
Transect#4
(I5XI6')
Common name
Scicntiric name
COLint
nr Icator
Annerican sycamore
- - - -
h. ;•:
Green as
Rea maple
7377 -TUFT-Um
U
Fh.C:
170iacre Total
Percent of Dominant Species that are 4BL, FACW, FAC
QC
p. 18

d. Tabulated Assessment of Herbaceous Vegetation in Wetland (Piedmont Bottomland
Swamp Forest) Transects 1 -4.
West Burlington Herbaceous Wetland Data —2019
Herbaceous Vegetation % Cover
Plant Species
Wetland
Indicator
Transect
1
Transect
2
Transect3
Transect
4
Percent of plot without vegetation
10
54
8
0
Virginiathreeseed mercury
Acalyphovirginica
FACU
2
Shal I ow sedge
Corex lurida
OBL
2
Common rush
Juncus efjfusus
FACW
35
9()
50
Jewelweed
fmputrens—pensis
FAC.L'a'
15
4Ci
Small carpetgrass
Arthraxon hispidus
FAC
30
Virginia water horehound
Lyeapus virginecus
OBL
2
Arrowleaftearthumb
Polygonumsagittatum
OBL
50
Pennsylvania smartweed
Polygonumpensylvarri:cum
FACW
2
Strawcoloredflatsedge
Gyperasstrigosrrs
FACW
10
Total Herbace-ous Vegetation coverage in Plot
94
46
1 92
1 100
Coverage oT plof 15y or wetter pan
Dominate ties in p or wetter
rage Sy rnr ME speciles
P. 19

e. Tabulated Assessment of Riparian (stream bank) Woody Vegetation
WEST BURLINGTON STREAM BANK WOODY VEGETATION
18. October 2019
Common Name
Scientific Name
At Transectranse
ransect 11
vans
Right Bank
Left Bank
Right Bank
Left Bank
Right Bank
Left Bank
Right Bank
Left Ban
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
Upstream
25 teet
25 feet
25 t
25
25 eet
25 eet
25 eet
25 et
BlackWillaw
Salixnigro
1
2
Eastern red cedar
Juniperus virginiana
1
1
Elderberry
Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis
Green as
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
1
Hazel alder
A nus serru ata
2
3
4
5
11
1
12
Loblollypine
Pinus tae a
Mimosa
Albiziajulibrissin
1
Overcupoak
Quercus yrata
1
Red Maple
Acer rubrum
1
2
Silky dogwoodCornus
amomum
5
3
Sweet gu m
Liquidambar styrad uo
1
Sycamore
P atoms occf enta is
3
2
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
25 eet
2S eet
2S eet
25
2S eet
25 eet
2S eet
25 eet
B ac Wa n ut
lug ans mg-
1
Black Willow
Sa ix mgro
3
Eastern red cedar
Juniperus virginiana
Elderberry
Sam ucus nigra ssp. canadensis
1
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
2
1
Hazel alder
Anus serru ato
4
5
13
13
8
13
7
Loblollypine
Pinus tae a
1
Mimosa
Albiziajulibrissin
1
Red Maple
Acerru m
1
Silky dogwood
Cornus omomum
4
4
2
Sweet gu m
LJquidambar styracifluo
1
3
1
Sycamore
P atunus occidentafts
2
1
1
1
Total stems per stream bank: 16 21 21 5 24 33 17 23
p. 20

D. Monitoring of Wetland Hydrology
a. Protocol: The monitoring protocol for determining the success of
the wetland enhancement and restoration areas was stated in the asbuilt
report to be based on recording waterlevels using `continuous' water level
loggers from March 15 (leaf on) for a period of approximately 8 weeks at
the start of the growing season, which is the period within which
`seasonal' wetlands are anticipated to experience high water tables after
last frost in North Carolina. However, due to transitions in the ownership
of the restoration tract, the waterlevel loggers could not be installed to
meet the March 15th deadline. Thus this data is not available for Year 1.
The new owner (Venn University LLC) will purchase the require loggers
and these are to be installed prior to March 15t" of 2020. Future data must
demonstrate sufficiently high water tables for the remaining monitoring
years.
In lieu of having this water leval logging data for year 1, the wetland
areas were assessed for their current waterlevels (Oct 11, 2019) by hand
auger to a minimum depth of approximately 20 inches. The locations of
the wetland auger holes are shown in the attached map, and the recorded
water level observations tabulated in the following table. 2 of the eight
auger holes had water levels in the upper 12 inches for a period within
which seasonal wetlands are normally dry in the upper 12". At the current
time the wetland hydrologic data does not suggest there will be a problem
with meeting wetland hydrologic success criteria, but additional data is
needed to demonstrate the success of the wetlands work.
p. 21

al
r i
t rpf
L. r
, � r
ILA
"'ems -- � •" -�L __ �
r
S Heearn Resrom[wn PrajaCci
.
SAW-2013-HO47

c. Tabulated Groundwater Levels for the Wetland Auger Hole Sites.
Ground Water Sample Points 11 Oct 2019
Sample Point
Auger Depth
(inches.)
Water Depth
(inches)
Ground Surface
to Water (inches?
WB GWL A
16
1i�
WB GWL B
26.5
-
2A
WB GWL C
25
- -
1 c
WB GWL D
14
11
WB GWL G
22
0
>22
WB GWL H
30
0
>30
WB GWL I
23
2.5
25.5
WB GWL J
23
0.25
27.75
WB GWL K
34
1
33
WB GVVL L
24
1.5
22.5
WB GWL M
27
0
>27
p. 23

E. Summary of Monitoring for Year I (ending September, 2019)
a. Overall Year 1 Restoration Status. The photostations, cross sections and longitudinal
profile all demonstrate that a stable, (equilibrium) stream has been successfully established across
the valley bottom previously occupied by the two former ponds. There is one 40-45' section and a
lower check dam 15-20 section that have not been restored due to actions yet to be completed under
the allied NW39 permit for a road crossing (future Hillier Drive). Should that culvert crossing not
be completed prior to the expiration of that permit, these two outliers shall be restored prior to the
termination of the 5 year monitoring period for the NW27 permit. Vegetation is also well
established within the restoration corridor. As noted above, one invasive species is going to be
monitored and if compromises native populations/communiti3es shall be treated. Wetland
hydrology needs to be further assessed (in accordance the above monitoring protocol) but the
limited data gathered in the year 1 monitoring effort suggests that the bottomland wetlands will
maintain st least seasonal high water table conditions.
b. Contingency Plans.
1) Invasive species are to be carefully monitored during year 2.
2) If the NW 39 crossing is not completed the rip rap located in the lower check
dam and future culvert crossing are to be removed, and bed and banks restored
to the reference reach conditions.
3) Finally, prior to March 15t' of 2020 an array of water level loggers are to be
installed within the bottomland wetlands to demonstrate at a minimum seasonal
high water table conditions that meet jurisdictional wetland criteria for the NC
Piedmont.
c. Misc. Matters.
The property owner prior to May of 2019, Hillier Keziah Family LLC, authorized HARP, Inc to
represent them in the application for a permit (NW39) for impacts necessary to install a road crossing using a
48" culvert with up and down stream prefabricated concrete headwall assemblies and a maximum impact of
45' along the stream. The location of this road crossing is shown on the As -Built Planform in Figure AB-4.
The verification was issued on April 13, 2017 and expires on March 18' of 2022..
During 2019 ownership of the restoration corridor and adjoining parcels under commercial
development were transferred via a foreclosure process from Hillier Keziah Family LLC to Venn University
LLC. The Managing Partner of Venn Univerisy LLC is Shawn Cummings. At the request of Mr. Cummings
future monitoring shall be conducted under the supervision of Dr. Randall Forsythe, President of
Terradigital, Inc. The year 1 monitoring was also completed under Dr. Forsythe's supervision, but under a
subcontract arrangement with HARP, Inc.
p. 24

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data
Cress Sedan 51
Mean der
JrS
12-run-19
:Yell
Back
SW
Frelpht ar
rrehu��rrt
Fore Water
Sight 6
water
Elerstim
B@tlrG ra LLntl
ELeYallon
commend
7E)M iY1
10.55
623.96
613 41
W na haomerorheaawa-'Jnlaers 81w.
0
11-57
612-29
Steel Ferrae Pa61, Len Bank
S
12.06
Si i A8
10
12.29
511.67
20
12.60
511.16
25
13.04
610.92
30
13.68
614108
30A
13.52
610- d
7bp arCat LAN
31-7
14.10
609-56
M-2
14.54
6ff%42
Rack
35-7
15.67
"1
&N-W
605.29
Raet Battam
35-9
15M2
OAR
&N-81
606.14
ITIhahyN, Rockeatlem
39
15.55
-1.413
1 &N-7B
605.35
Ract Battam
39-4
14.77
609.19
4aA
14.34
509.62
41 5
14.14
- C-_ .82
Tap or Cut Lag
42
14.52
. _ :.32
. ==.16
45
14.64
50
14.91?
55
14.37
66
14.78
65
14.62
=-.34
Q=
75
13.32
610.54
EA.5
11.31
612.65
ENL7, 61eel Fenoe Past, i gammon to x�ea 2)
Croea S@c11an 52
Inrlectlan
JfS
12-Jur-19
s6rtFon
Back
S
Height ol
Lneteement
Far@
S t
water
De
Watm
Elevation
Bt}tllGraurtl
ELeY9tran
Cammenfb
IBM V
I Um-
iorih o.rrer ea wa . JnNeraffy 81W.
0
11.57
612.39
I Fence Pxwit Lell Bank
5
11113
612-13
10
12.13
611-63
25
12.99
610.97
27-8
13.28
616.6k
28-9
13.03
616.93
Tap ar Cdr LOg
33
14.06
509.96
35-d
15.19
.1.00
&N-77
5013.77
Ract
39-2
15.41
-1.26
&N-81
605.55
T1lah4eg, Rack
39-7
1437
1
609.09
Ract
40.6
14.135
Raft
4,2.5
14.15
609.81
Tap ar Cot Lag
43
14.65
609.31
45
14.%
509.30
56
13.75
61 D-21
55
14.63
609-33
6a
14.51
65
14.55
6C&41
76
13.97
5r19�99
13.27
610-69
11-31
END. Skied Fence Past, i common 1b x-sE: i
p. 25

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
Croaa Seth on V
Mean der
JfS
13-Ju1w19
SWIM
Batt
Sift
Flelplltor
tie4 mt
F�
Sl It
WSA*r
tinter
Ele
i�mbm
BedlGrOu,ed
EA.
Cammen#
-By
A_30
520.63
61 E 33
eel Plpe
a
4,F4
515.09
Steel Fence Post Len Bank
5
4.5E
b HX03
16
525
615.36
is
EMT=
20
5 10
614.53
25
7.18
613,45
30
7.H
513.04
32-8
B.D3
612.63
332
B.69
0.14
511.68
611-7a
35
9.11
0,32
611.64
61 T, 2
Thahneg
36.2
B_Ba
OA0
611.79
611.79
EUge
37
B_12
6 12.51
40
7.93
512.70
40.7
7.67
b 12.75
41.3
72m
613,43
Top or Cot Log
42
7.58
612.95
45
7_m
612.63
58
7.62
d 12.B1
55
7.73
612.90
60
7.54
613.09
65
7.38
b 13.25
76
7.57
513.06
77.5
5_Ba
614.79
END. 61ee1 Fence Post
Crone SaoUun 54
Ineeacm
JiS
13-Jur.-19
itltYan
Back
SW
FIe1011tof
Imhuaerrt
Fore
Slit
Water
Dapth
Water
EWntkn
9edfOrornd
Elwfdlnn
Comments
TBMV
2.50
518.83
13113_33
S1eeIPl
5
3.EA
515.19
10
4.L}0
414.83
15
4.73
614.10
30
5.52
b 13.21
35
5 7a
613,09
0
5.72
613.11
46
fi_Ba
0.20
612.19
{r11.99
Behind Rost Sill i.Upetream)
48.3
6-90
0.20
612.13
611-93
Thahweg. Roct
49.2
6_B1
.1.10
612.12
b12.112
Raet
49.5
6103
512.86
52
E 16C
52.6
5.0a
b 13.79
Top at Cdr Log
53.3
5_GO
613.23
55
S_M
613.02
60
5.42
b 13.41
65
527
76
S132
613.51
75
5.52
b 13.31
86
523
b13_EA
83
4.111
614.73
EM6, Steel Fence Post
p. 26

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
Craaa 5ec11On #S
Inlleeba-n
JiS
13-Juo-19
:hbm
Beet
Sight
Flelplltaf
tr .01t
Fore Water
Sight k
W8tel
Elerstlm
BedlGraund
Elevation
conmente
TBhi #B
3.91
626.1 B
622 27
Veel Pipe
0
2-n
623.95
Sbeel Fence Post Leif Bank, {mmrnon to xa ec 61
5
3.53
622.65
1 a
4A3
621.75
2d
411
621AT
25
496
621.22
3a,3
5.72
624IL46
30.7
613a
619_BB
Rost SO
32
6.60
fl_15
619.73
619.55
Tha". Rnck 511
34A
6-60
9.15
619_i3
619.55
ROM SO
35
Rai
62B.3T
R=
37-5
S133
626.B5
39
4.9a
621.24
40
4-W
621.29
45
S_efi
621.13
60
4.98
621.20
55
4.63
621.35
60
4A5
621.73
65
4.33
421.B5
7Q
4.8a
621.34
74
4.39
621.%,
END. Bieel Fence Past
Uwo SecilonAG
Mean dEFr
Jib
13-Ju1w19
S-StlOR
EWKI
Slit
He1g11101
tretnment
F-mrm
SW
Watw
WeOF
EYevatlon
BOWGraurd
Elevabon
Calrlmenta
-3tF 26
4.34
U6.61
622 2'
Sleel Pipe
0
2fi6
623.95
1 Fence Post Lett Bank. icornmon to x-*ec 5'1
5
426
62235
10
4.93
621.66
26
4.N
621.66
25
S_12
621.49
3D
5.78
620.63
32A
6-83
Sand
32A
61B5
C-00
fi19.36
619.75
1=dge
352
7.17
fl25
619.79
619.44
Tharweg
36
TIM
(1.18
519.79
619.61
or ac
46
SA7
621.14
45
sm
621.41
56
sm
621.32
55
4_T5
621.35
66
4.68
65
5.11
621. 08
67
4.75
62L66
']-3
459
62-01
IEND.nX4Fence Pad
p. 27

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
Crms Secilon V
Meander
JrS
1 S-Juo-7 9
SWIMSIB
back
Of
eetnmanl
Fore avatar
Slipht De th
Water
Elevailon
BediGrnund
Eleratlon
Cammente
-Bw *4
124
E 28.85
62c 61
-, eel Pipe, 'or -pet v omer',
6
2.4.1
625.45
Steel Fence Pass, Lel1 Bank
5
4.61
524.84
10
4-7a
524.11
13-5
SA8
OAO
fQZ-J7
623-37
Edge
15-5
fti_CA
OA2
6m 36
622.75
113
S-50
OAO
6MAS
623-35
EUge
20
SA3
623-42
25
5.38
623.47
311
5-12
523-73
35
5.51
523-34
36A
5A8
523.37
TOP Of Car
37A
5.05
523.B11
382
5.65
523-20
MIA
5.55
623,20
41
6.14
522.71
41.7
7.59
-1.35
621.51
521-25
42.5
7.92
153
621.56
520.93
Tll@hv
44.2
7.32
1.30
621.53
C1.53
Edge
44.5
5.90
622.95
45
5.37
623.46
Tap ar Car Lag
S6
5.57
623-26
66
5.52
623,23
65
5.9
622.95
76
5.67
622.9B
W5.97
522.E3
EMp
5.53
523-32
8,
1 624-96
JEND. Steel Fence Post, rwmrnon Le x-sEv 6'1
Cross 5ecilon 0
ml actlam
.r:
14-Jun-19
ilatlan
Back I
SW
Helphlo?
Rehument
Farm
SWA
Water
Depth
Wker
Elry'atlon
BEdrGrarnd
Elevatiam
Cammemte
Me Pipe,,, r.pe Omer,
Fence 13061, Lefl BaMIL
5
S-53
623-46
10
5A5
623-56
is
S131
623-67
25
623.45
30
523.4B
35
5-44
623.57
41)
SA1
523.0
41.8
5-54
42.7
5-16
523.85
Tap ar Cdr I-Gg
41
5.53
623.43
4E
5.82
523-19
45.5
5.06
622.95
4E
5.7d
..0
Edge, Rack SIII
47.7
6.79
110
62222
522.22
Tllahrreg, Rock SIII
45
7.02
:24
62221
521.99
Edge
49.3
5.50
522.41
56
6.05
1
622.95
52.2
5.33
623.611
SE
5.39
523.62
6C
5.&1
523.36
6E
5.62
623-39
622.94
7E
6.15
522.85
81
4.66
624.35
Bd
4.05
624.96
ENQ. Steel Fence Post, icomrnon to-:-Gea 7)
p. 28

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
Longitudinal Profile
JTS
23-25 Sep 2019
Station
Back
Sight
Heightof
Instrument
Fore
Sight
Water
Depth
Water
Elevation
BedJGround
Elevation
Comments
TBM #1
5.75
619.16
-----
-----
-----
613.41
x' north corner of headwall, University Blvd.
rr=k
-----
-----
rew D river
ravel bed ov er ill
Toe ec am
ec k Darn
44
6j Sill
Pool, GOrye 27
7
..r
-----
-----
crew D rreer
51.1
6.06
0.19
603.91
603.73
Rock Sill
Pool, Giirve 25
Toe or Sill
Rock
82.2
5.75
0.59
609.62
609.04
Pool, Gurye 25
Toe cvF Sill
Roe k Sill
Pool, Gurye 24
TP#3
5.24
616.32
3.71
-----
-----
611.08
Rock Point
4e of Sill
Rork Sill
e
112.3
5.95
0.55
611.02
610.47
Guhert'OUT:
-TTT7r--Wood
Hub
144.7
616.93
610.42
Gulvert'IN'
151.7
4.72
0.15
611.38
611.23
Top of Riffle
4C
Pool. Gorye 23
4C
215.7
4.49
0.16
611.62
611.46
Pool, Gurye 22
4C
-----
-----
crevr rner
259.4
6.84
0.62
612.03
611.41
Pool, Gurye 21
Rock
ao, urve
306.0
6.34
0.42
612.33
611.91
PG-20
ocit of Rock
Rock
04, urve
-
ee ence Post
ROM of Me
lcpctRrrtle,t - ocSill
cc. L, urve 16
p. 29

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
Lonohrunal PrD111e
JT3
2325 Sep 2319
station
Hack
S
Helghtof
InRtrumeltt
Fora
hl
Water
Du h
WaW
Elevation
BBOGKKM
EJevBllon
ComnYe11t8
6-..6
6.83
--
--
6'=.62
- of Woo] Stake
439.9
6.59
D23
513.67
613.45
BomoreorRrle
455.4
5,8D
D_D5
514.29
614.25
Rock Su, I171`-17j
459.7
6-71
1-03
514.34
613.34
Pack Curve 17
46fl.4
6A1
0-32
514.36
614.114
PC-17
-
--
616.51
Tos crr WaW SLqhe
514.1
5-60
0-35
514.36
614.01
PIF-115
Foot of VegetitLd SIF-
51a.6
5-35
0-13
514.39
614.25
VegetAetl SIII
527.3
5-75
0-M
514.41
613.B5
Pad, Curve 15
541.1
5A9
0A7
614.99
514.52
PC-16
Mal
4-81
0-19
B15.15
614.80
BwomolFUME
551.2
3.90
0.05
615.73
615.71
Roct 9111, (PT-15)
572.1
424
1 Q39
B15.76
615.37
Pack Curve 15
Ad)Miffd to CrOeB 55CUon M Rod( SIII
o_
--
--
101 O
563.E
4A9
020
516.66
616.46
PC-15
516.2
5A2
095
516.70
615.75
Pack Curve 14
526.4
521
0.79
516.65
615.B6
PC-14
TIP n
A 52
62- _t
'L.74
616.47
Ocrew DMmr
635.0
4Ai
0-00
516.68
616.65
Rock M. -13
665.E
4-98
DA2
516.53
616.11
Pack Curve 13
-F s10
`- 27
3_ 2 _-
=.29
--
--
616.SD
Screw Dryer
6`7.0
5-53
D.36
516.92
616.54
Foot W RD2 3111
J Bedrock
707.2
A-64
D_19
517.62
617.43
Foot XRod SO
717.1
4-79
D_133
518.08
617.26
Pack Curve 12
TP iv11
3 `-9
623 N
2.59
-
-
619.46
Too It3ke
727.4
5-54
0.55
518.06
617.53
FC-,. 1: `. v II
728.4
5A2
0-02
518.07
618.05
R,,, ;DC-12
737.9
525
028
518.09
617.B1
Fr-'.:' ?oa 3r
741.9
4136
0-111
518.79
618.69
RwA v 1, PT-11
751.7
4,56
0131
518.80
618.49
Pap, Curve 11
704.6
425
QA1
519-M
618.B1
PT-113
F c
%s_
.,cre'Y Drhw
795.1
5-15
0-59
519.0
618.75
Pack Curare 10
SD5.2
-72
0-30
519.49
619.19
PC-10
Sbi.4
4-99
MA
519.58
618.92
Foot of Rod SO
845.4
4-33
1 DAI
519.58
619.55
RD=SO, -9X-SEC*5
4.52
1 D.28
619.67
6-9.39
Pad, Curve9
-B U #S
3 73
625-yj
--
--
--
622.27
.^, Po
-P #13
2 57
52353
5.0A
--
--
520.9E
D
90.2
425
DA5
519.72
619.27
Foot of Rod M
919.3
A-75
127
52D.D4
618.77
PODI,aNve8
934.9
4A6
Q58
520.103
619.45
PC-B
2_F1
621-5Z
2.71
-
-
52(1.82
Gore'A'DrwEr
962.4
3-79
0-32
520.116
619.74
Foot 09 Rock M
9 4
2-84
Q03
£211.72
EM.69
Rod Sri, (PT-7)
962.0
4-11
1,33
520.75
619.42
Pack Curve 7
-F gi 5
3.75
525-33
1.96-
-
621.5?
Screw Dryer
p. 30

F. Appendices: Tabulated Cross Section and Longitudinal Profile Survey Data (cont.)
UNVO MM Plonle
HS
23-25 3e'p 2019
Sh11on
BM%
S
""Pt
ImommaTt
Sgrit
MpFth
Elexlttlon
BBWGraund
Elevahan
com mde
10322
SJ32
DA3
620.74
620.31
PT-B
1053_7
526
6.55
520.72
620.67
Rd. CwteS
iP*16
3.90
525.16
3.17
--
--
822."
Toy of W6G] v ke
1075.1
4-82
D-40
520.74
620.34
PC-6
109d2
SJ32
D-61
620.75
6M.14
Foot bi Roc! SO
-F #17
324
525.5E
2.82
--
--
622.3.4
at Woad 5L3ke
a
1128.3
4_77
0-39
23
62-3.81
PC 5
1147.4
4_7B
0-4a
23
620.80
PT-4
-F a16
238
625. 22
2.74
--
P621.2.7
622.59
E of Vio[d S ke
I1Ye
11a3.5
526
d.70
E2A.57
F60t61Rod SO
11BB.7
4A6
6.CU
82
E;21.62
Root SO, 3-P
#19
3.50
526.59
2.73
--
-
623.G3
To.- at Wo[4 8 ke
1221.1
43d
d.d9
621.98
621.B9
PC-3
a259.3
5A1
1.N
622.44
E30.55
POM Cove 2
-
-
p ar WaW Stahe
275.8
5_ig1
1.55
622.41
E M B6
PC 2
265A
3.99
6.03
522.60
62257
Rad Sin
,295.8
3.9a
a.05
522.63
622.55
Rud SIII
131413
S.a6
1.9fi
622.65
621.10
Pod, C. 1
1332-8
=.1 E
t}.35
622.73
6MM
PL}1, Headwall Em CuNert
p. 31