20130957 Ver 1_MP Final Draft_20130904

20130957
DRAFT FINAL
MITIGATION PLAN
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration
Union County, North Carolina
EEP Project Number: 95022
Yadkin River
03040105
Prepared for:
r "kl-
-d�j
N stem
,I I01101t
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
August 2013
a
FEP - 4 2013

DRAFT FINALMITIGATION PLAN
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration
Union County, North Carolina
EEP Project Number: 95022
Yadkin River
03040105
Prepared for:
osyystem
1 ►11 lai ,elll - nt
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
A=COM
701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: 919 - 854 -6200
Fax: [phone]
August 2013

DRAFT Tnbutanes of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auaust 2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration Project, located in Union County, North
Carolina involves the restoration and enhancement of three perennial unnamed tributaries to
Wicker Branch, and the preservation of one intermittent tributary to Wicker Branch The project
is located in the Yadkin River Basin, USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040105, and 14 digit HUC
03040105081010, which is an NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) Targeted
Watershed It is also located within the watershed of Lanes Creek, a 303d- listed stream and
Water Supply Watershed
i The project site consists of four stream channels that currently flow through agricultural land and
are devoid of riparian vegetation Past and present agricultural use of the land has severely
impacted and degraded the channels Farm equipment driven through the channels has created
instability in bedform and loss of channel definition Row crops are planted directly up to the
streambanks Runoff from the surrounding terrain and farming practices creates high levels of
sedimentation within the channels, and the channels are unstable as they attempt to respond to
this increased sediment regime The channels all show signs of manipulation and incision As a
? result of these impacts, all of the reaches exhibit unstable bedform, eroding banks, little to no
sinuosity and possess almost no in- stream habitat for aquatic organisms The channels are
generally incised with areas of deposition, and at several locations the channel definition is lost
! completely One of the tributaries (Tributary 1) flows for part of its length through a wooded
area, but the understory vegetation is dominated by the exotic invasive Chinese privet
(Ligustrum srnense)
The project proposes to restore or enhance three of the four channels Tributary 1 will undergo
Priority 1 Restoration in its upper portion (Tributary 1A) (approximately 1,293 linear feet existing
channel) by returning it to a stable pattern, dimension, and profile based upon reference reach
criteria, which will produce approximately 1,390 stream mitigation units The lower portion of
Tributary 1 (Tributary 1B), approximately 1095 feet in length, will be enhanced and will undergo
- removal of exotic and invasive vegetation, which will produce 265 stream mitigation units
Enhancement Level I activities on Tributary 3 will enhance approximately 1,184 feet of existing
channel dimension and profile, generating 789 stream mitigation units Tributary 4 will undergo
Enhancement Level II activities on approximately 631 feet of existing channel including the
establishment of grade control, which will generate approximately 252 stream mitigation units
Riparian buffers will be planted along all reaches to assist with uplifting the ecological functions
Tributary 2, an intermittent channel, will be planted with a buffer to augment functional uplift of
the overall project, this could be used to generate additional credits ifthere are credit reductions
elsewhere on the project, but no mitigation credit is currently being proposed
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal
Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332 8
paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14)
• NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated
July 28, 2010

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
{ 1
Union County, NC
August 2013
These documents govern NCEEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory
mitigation
Mitigation credits will be generated as outlined in the following table
Summary of Proposed Mitigation Credits
'Possible candidate for Enhancement Level II but with a reduced 31 Mitigation Credit Ratio, per
discussions with EEP at a field visit on May 3, 2013
2Tributary 2 can be used to offset reduced credits elsewhere throughout the project depending on the
results of project closeout
Drainage
Area
acres
Existing
Length
feet
Restored
Length
feet )
Mitigation
Type
Ratio
Mitigation
Credits
(MCU
Tributary 1A
71 5
1293
1,390
R
1 1
1,390
Tributary 1 B
945
1095
1,095
Ell
3 1'
365
Tributary 2
176
330
330
None
N/A 2
0
Tributary 3
327
1184
1,184
El
1 51
789
Tributary 4
298
631
631
Ell
2 5 1
252
Total
4,533
4,630
2,796
Total Intermittent
330
330
0
Total Perennial
3,970
4,300
2,796
'Possible candidate for Enhancement Level II but with a reduced 31 Mitigation Credit Ratio, per
discussions with EEP at a field visit on May 3, 2013
2Tributary 2 can be used to offset reduced credits elsewhere throughout the project depending on the
results of project closeout

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Table of Contents
1 0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
6
2 0 SITE SELECTION
6
21 DIRECTIONS
6
2 2 SITE SELECTION
7
2 3 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
14
3 0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
17
3 1 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT SUMMARY INFORMATION
17
3 2 EASEMENT MARKING
17
4 0 BASELINE INFORMATION
19
41 WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION
19
4 2 REACH SUMMARY INFORMATION
21
4 3 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
29
5 0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
29
6 0 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
31
7 0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
32
7 1 TARGET STREAM TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES
32
7 1 1 Target Stream Type
32
7 1 2 Target Plant Communities
33
7 2 DESIGN PARAMETERS
33
7 2 1 Reference Reaches
33
7 2 2 Channel Design Approach
38
7 2 3 Natural Plant Community Restoration
46
7 3 DATA ANALYSIS
48
7 3 1 Sediment Transport Analysis
48
7 3 2 FEMA Floodplain Issues and Hydrological Trespass
49
8 0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
50
9 0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
50
9 1 STREAMS
51
9 2 VEGETATION
51
10 0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
51
10 1 STREAMS
52
10 2 VEGETATION
52
11 0 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
m
53

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
12 0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 53
13 0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES 53
14 0 OTHER INFORMATION 54
141 DEFINITIONS 54
14 2 REFERENCES 54
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
8
Figure 2
Existing Conditions
9
Figure 3
Historic Site Conditions
11
Figure 4
Proposed Conditions
12
Figure 5
Site Protection Instrument
18
Figure 7
NRCS Soil Survey Map
22
Figure 8
Current Vegetation Conditions
23
Figure 9
Bank Erosion Hazard Index Evaluation
25
Figure 10
Spencer Creek Reference Reach Vicinity Map
34
Figure 11
Spencer Creek Reference Reach Watershed
36
Figure 12
Rockwell Pastures Reference Reach Vicinity Map
39
Figure 13
Rockwell Pastures Reference Reach Watershed
40
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
Summary of Proposed Mitigation Credits
13
Table 2
Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
17
Table 3
Project Information
19
Table 4
Baseline Information
21
Table 5
Reach Summary Information
28
Table 6
Regulatory Considerations
29
Table 7
Determination of Credits
30
Table 9
Stability Indices for Spencer Creek
37
Table 10 Summary of Bankfull Discharge and Storm Flows
41
Table 11
Maintenance Requirements
50
Table 12 Monitoring Requirements
52
IV

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
APPENDICIES
Appendix A — Site Protection Instrument
Appendix B — Baseline Information Data
USACE Routine Wetland Determination Forms
NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form
FEMA Compliance - EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Appendix C — Mitigation Plan Data and Analysis
Channel Morphology Data
Morphology Table
Cross - Sections
Longitudinal Profiles
Pebble Counts
Cross - Section Summaries
Bankfull Velocity Discharge Estimates
HEC -RAS Analysis
Sediment Transport Analysis
Appendix D — Project Plan Sheets
v

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auqust 2013
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
NCEEP develops River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRPs) to guide its restoration activities
within each of the state's 54 cataloging units RBRPs delineate specific watersheds that exhibit
both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration These
watersheds are called Targeted Local Watersheds (TLWs) and receive priority for NCEEP
planning and restoration project funds
The 2009 Lower Yadkin Pee Dee RBRP identified HUC 03040105081010 (Upper Lanes Creek)
as a Targeted Local Watershed (NCDENR 2009) The Upper Lanes Creek watershed, which is
approximately 33 square miles in size, consists of approximately 50% agricultural land and 34%
forest, with approximately 0 6% impervious cover There are over 30 animal operations in the
watershed Approximately 9% of the streams are classified as impaired due to the poor health of
the aquatic community and are likely being impaired by point and non -point source pollutants
such as wastewater and runoff (NCDENR 2009) Urban land use, if following current trends, is
projected to increase by over 350% in Union County by 2030
The 2009 RBRP identified agricultural practices and development impacts as mayor stressors
within this TLW The Tributaries of Wicker Branch project was identified as a stream restoration
opportunity to improve water quality within the TLW, and to protect several reaches of streams
heavily impacted by agricultural practices
The project goals address stressors Identified in the TLW and include the following
• Improved water quality in Wicker Branch
• Improve aquatic habitat in the tributary channels
• Provide aesthetic value, wildlife habitat, and bank stability through the creation of a
riparian zone
• Create a contiguous wildlife corridor, with connection of some isolated adjacent natural
habitats to larger downstream forested tracts
• Provide shading and biomass input to the stream and mast for wildlife when vegetation
is mature
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives
• Restoration and enhancement of stream channels to stabilize channels to reduce
erosion and improve aquatic habitat
• Remove nutrients and sediment influx from surrounding agricultural fields
• Establishment of a riparian buffer on project streams to reduce nutrients and
sedimentation from agricultural processes, and connect adjacent isolated habitats to
larger contiguous downstream habitats
• Improve aquatic habitat in the tributary channels by removing excess sediment,
providing a variety of habitat (pools and riffles), and a riparian buffer
2.0 SITE SELECTION
2.1 DIRECTIONS
To get to the project site from Raleigh, take 1-40 West to US 1 South Follow US 1 South 91
miles to US 74 West towards Monroe Follow US 74 West 47 miles to US Highway 601 Take

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
US Highway 601 South 6 3 miles to Griffin Cemetery Road Turn left onto Griffin Cemetery
Road Follow Griffin Cemetery Road approximately a mile to its intersection with Old Pageland-
Monroe Road Take Old Pageland- Monroe Road right to address 3301 Turn right into the
I- project property Take the gravel drive around behind the house to get to the project site
- To get to the project site from Charlotte, take US 74 East approximately 24 miles to US Highway
601 Take US Highway 601 South 6 3 miles to Griffin Cemetery Road Turn left onto Griffin
Cemetery Road Follow Griffin Cemetery Road approximately a mile to its intersection with Old
Pageland- Monroe Road Take Old Pageland- Monroe Road right to address 3301 Turn right into
the project property Take the gravel drive around behind the house to get to the project site
2.2 SITE SELECTION
The Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration project is located in southeastern Union
County approximately 8 5 miles southeast of the city of Monroe (Figure 1) The project site is
located in the Carolina Slate Belt ecoregion (Griffith et al, 2002)
The portion of the Carolina Slate Belt in which the project site is located, is characterized by a
volcanic- sedimentary sequence overlying what is often referred to as the Charlotte belt It
i I consists of various granitoid gneisses, biotite muscovite schists, and biotite muscovite gneisses
At the base of the Carolina slate belt is a unit of mafic volcanic and sedimentary rocks including
dark - green, gray, and black, fine- to coarse - grained amphibolite, hornblende schist, hornblende
gneiss, actinolite schist, and chlonte schist, some dionte, metagabbro, biotite gneiss, and
_! numerous basic dikes of several ages and relations are also present Overlying these mafic
rocks are pyroclastic and volcaniclastic rocks (including agglomerate, breccias, tuffs, and flows),
^� predominately felsic but containing some mafic units They are intruded by numerous
!_ > metamorphosed mafic dikes which do not appear to cut the overlying argillite The uppermost
rocks of the Carolina slate belt in this area are green and greenish -gray argillite or slates and
graywacke (Bell et al, 1974)
L. The project site consists of four stream channels that currently flow through active agricultural
land and are devoid of riparian vegetation (Figure 2) Tributary 1 enters the tract as a first order
stream and is joined by first order Tributary 2 becoming a second order stream Tributary 3 and
` —' 4 are both first order tributaries in their entirety within the project site Tributary 1 originates from
an outfall and spillway from an upstream pond, while Tributary 2 originates from roadway runoff
Tributary 3 and 4 are both first order tributaries in their entirety within the project site Tributary 3
originates from seepage arising from the dam of the upstream pond, and lastly Tributary 4 starts
from the outfall and spillway from another upstream pond, located to the northeast of the project
site
The primary adjacent land use throughout the project watershed consists of active agricultural
land containing annual crops, small scattered rural residential areas, and forested land Past
and present agricultural use of the land has severely impacted and degraded the channels
Farm equipment driven through the channels has created instability in bedform and loss of
channel definition in several locations Row crops are planted immediately up to the
i streambanks Based on communication with the landowner, the types of crops planted on the
property are wheat and soybeans, with plans to begin a corn crop in 2013 Wheat and soybeans
r
c
7

tlb-Nao-
C
r!__f'
.1
�a
D:
TO
0
C?
SiteBoundary
k
C
J Win __aA -e
74 r
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
N
�a
STANLY
l t
I ANSON
Qa
e`er
0
1. Vicinity Map
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
a
JAG
Gr
a
�a
G
0
o�
�Q
�
sh
G'�
�,A
Oiv,
A
,Q�
d9
ddb
210
01,
d
�
o
CO
�
a
c
U)
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
N
�a
STANLY
l t
I ANSON
Qa
e`er
0
1. Vicinity Map
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 0.5 1 2
Miles

Legend
Cross - section Location Wickers Branch Property Boundary
- •• -••- Overhead Power Line Wickers Branch Easement Boundary
® Pebble Count Location
_____= Unimproved Road
Existing Streams
Existing Jurisdictional Wetlands
Contour at 2 feet
Existing Building
2. Existing Conditions
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 310 620 1,240
Feet

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
are double- cropped Typical chemical applications include fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides
Fertilizers for wheat include 60 -80 units Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P) and Potassium (K)
Soybeans require 60 -80 units P and K Pesticides for wheat include 2 -4 -D herbicides and
pesticides to manage Hessian fly Soy bean insecticides vary depending on the year
Erosion from the surrounding terrain and farm practices creates high levels of sediment within
the channels, and the channels are unstable as they attempt to respond to this increased
- sediment regime The channels show signs of manipulation and incision
Some portion of the site has been in agricultural use since at least 1961 when our aerial
photography dataset begins The site began to resemble its current cleared state in 1993 Prior
to that, each stream had a minimal amount of forested riparian buffer that was removed by
1993 These historic photographs provide visual evidence that at least one stream had been
_ straightened during the past 50 years At some point between 1961 and 1993, Tributary 3 was
straightened It displayed numerous meanders in photography from 1961 and first appeared
straightened in 1993 (Figure 3) The riparian buffer was lost in this tributary between 1983 and
1993 as well Part of Tributaries 1 and 4 and all of Tributary 2 lost riparian buffer between 1983
and 1993 to arrive at the current state
Tributaries 1A, 3, and 4 exhibit unstable bedform, eroding banks, little to no sinuosity and
possess almost no instream habitat for aquatic organisms Observable indicators of unstable
bedform include 1) toe erosion, 2) bank erosion, 3) mid- channel bar formation, 4) and headcuts
(on Tributary 1A) These processes were documented with photographs, subpavement
samples, measurements and model simulations, which are presented in more detail further in
the report The channels are generally incised with areas of deposition or scour At several
locations the channel definition is lost completely Tributary 113 flows for its length through a
- wooded area before leaving the project site The channel here is in a much more stable form
and possess a mature overstory of hardwoods, but the shrub layer is dominated by the exotic
invasive Chinese privet (Ligustrum smense) There are also spoil piles along the valley through
` this wooded area indicating the stream was modified or graded at some time in the past
- The proposed mitigation work on this site is to restore the upper portion of one channel
(Tributary 1A), enhance the lower portion of the same channel (Tributary 1 B), and enhance two
of the other channels (Tributaries 3 and 4) (Figure 4) A fourth tributary (Tributary 2) which was
considered for enhancement during the initial submittal of the proposal was eliminated from
consideration during a site visit conducted by AECOM, EEP and US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) in August, 2011 Enhancement is necessary to gain ecological uplift on the Tributary
1 B, 3 and 4, as the surrounding land use has impacted and modified their dimension and profile
A stable dimension and profile will be restored based on reference reach channel morphology
Restoration is necessary on the upper half of Tributary 1 (Tributary 1A), where the bed is highly
unstable, incised, and a series of headcuts have developed The impacts of farm equipment
crossing over Tributary 1 has caused a portion of the channel to lose definition entirely At the
lower end of Tributary 1 (Tributary 113), where the stream flows through a corridor of privet,
removal of exotic vegetation will be performed to uplift the ecological function of this reach
10

dt
�i• N
�o
ItIII
n
to
m
hll 3
II �
u
411
II x
II
II 3
Begin Tributary 3
Enhancement Level 1
600 n
u
u
n
Begin Tributary 1A coo
Priority 1 Restoration
n
Begin Tributary 4
Enhancement Level II moo
/I soo
u
II
I I
I I
II 600
II �
58� End Tributary 1A
eo End Tributary 4
Priority 1 Restoration o 600 '
End Tributa 3 Enhancement Level II
ry
Begin Tributary 1 B Enhancement Level I
Enhancement Level II
n
Il
_= Existing Unimproved R ad
60 G
GL
600 soo
° W
End Tributary 1 B
Enhancement Level II
h
Legend 4. Proposed Conditions Plan View
Proposed_ Channel Wickers Tributaries of Wicker Branch Branch Property Boundary = ______= Unimproved Road Contour at 2 feet Stream Restoration Site
......- Overhead Power Line Union County, NC
Wickers, Branch Easement Boundary Existing Streams Existing Building o 310 620 1,240
Existing Jurisdictional Wetlands i-- ~�' Feet' '—' '

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Overall, the potential for ecological uplift of this headwater system is very high Enhancement
and restoration activities will improve in- channel habitat for aquatic organisms where very little
currently exists Replacement of the row crops with a 50 foot wide native riparian buffer will
i remove the impacts of farm equipment in the stream, and mitigate the direct input of fertilizers,
pesticides and sediment into the channel The exotic invasive Chinese privet will be removed
from the wooded corridor along Tributary 1 B As a mature oversto of hardwoods (primarily
I 9 rY rY (P Y
?_ hickory and oak) already exists in this corridor, no additional planting will be required following
removal of the privet The project has the potential to improve water quality downstream in
Wicker Branch and Lanes Creek Lanes Creek is listed as impaired due to turbidity on the most
recent 303(d) list Lanes Creek Aquatic Habitat is also designated as a State Significant Natural
Heritage Area This area is located near US Highway 601 and contains several occurrences of
j aquatic Federal Species of Concern including the Carolina darter (Etheostoma collis), Carolina
I_ creekshell mussel (Villosa vaugharnana), and savannah lilliput mussel (Toxolasma pullis) Thus,
the project will help reduce the quantity of sediment and pollutants entering Lanes Creek and
4' benefit the habitat of these rare species Finally, by restoring forested riparian corridors along
t the four project tributaries, this project will connect the wooded natural habitat corridor of Wicker
Branch with wooded natural habitats that exist just upstream of the project site
Table 1 shows the proposed mitigation credits and how they were derived
Table 1. Summary of Proposed Mitigation Credits
1
'Possible candidate for Enhancement Level II but with a reduced 3 1 Mitigation Credit Ratio
2Tributary 2 can be used to offset reduced credits elsewhere throughout the project depending on the
results of project closeout
13
Drainage
Existing
Restored
Mitigation
Ratio
Mitigation
Area
Length
Length
Type
Credits
(acres)
(Feet)
(Feet)
(MCUs)
Tributary 1A
71 5
1293
1,390
R
1 1
1,390
Tributary 1 B
945
1095
1,095
P
311
365
Tributary 2
176
330
330
None
N /A2
0
Tributary 3
327
1184
1,184
El
1 51
789
Tributary 4
298
631
631
Ell
2 5 1
252
Total
4,533
4,630
2,796
Total
330
330
0
Intermittent
Total
3,970
4,300
2,796
Perennial
1
'Possible candidate for Enhancement Level II but with a reduced 3 1 Mitigation Credit Ratio
2Tributary 2 can be used to offset reduced credits elsewhere throughout the project depending on the
results of project closeout
13

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
2.3 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photo 1: Headcut on upper portion of Photo 2: Bankfull feature (small bench) on
Tributary 1A: January 2013
Photo 3: Tributary 2 looking upstream from Photo 4: Upstream end of Tributary 2 facing
confluence with Tributary 1A: February 2010 downstream: December 2011
Photo 5: Deposition on Tributary 1A where it Photo 6: Bed material in Tributary 1A: January
loses channel definition: February 2010 2013
14

DRAFT
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Photo 7: Downstream view of Tributary 1A Photo 8: View of damaged culvert separating
Photo 9: Downstream end of Tributary 1 B:
Photo 10: Reference section on Tributary 113:
Photo 11: Rill erosion on Tributary 3:
February 2010
Photo 12: Wetlands on upper end of Tributary
3: February 2010
15

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Photo 13: Downstream end of Tributary 3 Photo 14: Bankfull feature on lower end of
Photo 15: Typical substrate in Tributary 3: Photo 16: Tributary 4 substrate: February 2010
February 2010
Photo 17: Tributary 4 looking downstream: Photo 18: Reference section upstream of
February 2010 Tributary 4: January 2013
16

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project
includes portions of land owned by Richard Simpson Figure 5 depicts the easement area
obtained from Mr Simpson A copy of the land protection instrument(s) is included in Appendix
A
3.1 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT SUMMARY INFORMATION
Table 2. Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
Easement
Landowner
PIN
County
Site
Deed Book
Acreage
Areas
Protection
and Page
Protected
Instrument
Number
Richard
Conservation
Book 05780
1,2, and 3
Lamar
04009001
Union
1549
Simpson
Easement
Page 0199
The site protection instruments require a 60 -day advance notification to the Corps and the State
prior to any action to void, amend, or modify the document No such action shall take place
unless approved by the State
3 2 EASEMENT MARKING
The corners of the easement boundary will be marked with T -posts and T -posts will be placed at
periodic intervals along the boundary Signs stating that a Conservation Easement has been
placed on the project site will be placed on some of the T -posts and posted on trees in the
wooded areas
17

DRAFT
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auoust 2013
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
r Baseline information was collected for all project reaches and the project site in general in order
to document existing conditions, provide a baseline for which to compare future improvements,
and to provide the information necessary to provide a basis of design The following tables and
narratives summarize the baseline condition for the project site and each protect reach
!_J Table 3. Project Information
f
I
I
�_!
I�
Project Information
Project Name
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
County
Union
Project Area acres
1549
Project Coordinates (latitude
and longitude)
34 8946849, -80 4472082
4.1 WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION
The watershed of each project reach was analyzed using Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) in order to document the size, runoff characteristics and existing land uses of each
watershed Data depicting 2010 aerial photography, CGIA land use data and elevation data was
obtained from the NC ONE Map GIS database (NC One Map, 2013) Existing buildings and
roads were delineated in the ArcGIS software program in order to estimate percent
imperviousness of each watershed The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 4 The
watershed and drainage area of each of the four tributaries in shown on Figure 6
All watersheds have a mixed land use of farmsteads, agricultural row crops and woods (located
primarily along some stream channels), with the predominant land use being agricultural row
crops Two impoundments are located within the project watersheds, one immediately upstream
of Tributary 3, and one immediately upstream of Tributary 4 It should be noted that due to the
impoundment of Tributary 3, the watershed of Tributary 3 is smaller than is indicated by the
natural topography This is because both the primarily outlet and overflow spillway of the
impoundment discharge into Tributary 1 Visual observations of the dam showed that there is
some seepage entering into Tributary 3 from the pond, which contributes to the baseflow of the
stream, but no storm flow reaches Tributary 3 from the impoundment Tributary 4 is also
impounded immediately upstream of the project site, with an overflow spillway located
approximately 175' upstream of the project site
The percent impervious surfaces in each watershed is low (ranging from 1 8% to 3 2 %) and
primarily consists of rooftops of residential homes, sheds and barns, portions of paved public
roads (SR 1941 and SR 1945), and several unpaved, gravel roads
i
�I
19

IL
Ar
10 00 1`
• . . .'
Op
TR1B 2;
17.17+ TRIB'3 ib •
CACRESTRIB 1A z f; Si
32.7 •
•! ACRES %TRIB 4
•�• 129.7�A`CRES •
94.5 ACRE'S • °k
TRIB,1 B
IL
Restoration Site Property Boundary
Existing Streams
1 Drainage Areas -..
Existing Jurisdictional Wetlands C Y
a�
6. Project Site Watershed Map
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 375 750 1,500
Feet

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
'- Table 4. Baseline Information
Physiographic
Carolina Slate Belt - Piedmont
Province
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS
Hydrologic
03040105
Unit 8 -digit
USGS
Hydrologic
03040105081010
Unit 14-digit
DWQ Sub-
basin
3/7/2014
Tributary 1
Tributary 2
Tributary 3
Tributary 4
Project
Drainage Area
945
176
327
298
(acres)
Project
Drainage Area
20%
32%
32%
18%
Percentage
Impervious
Cultivated /Managed
CGIA Land
Herbaceous Cover
(Reach 1A)
Cultivated /Managed
Cultivated /Managed
Cultivated /Managed
Use
Herbaceous Cover
Herbaceous Cover
Herbaceous Cover
Classification
Mixed Upland
Hardwoods (Reach
113)
4.2 REACH SUMMARY INFORMATION
Baseline conditions were documented on all project reaches of the Wicker Branch Stream
Mitigation project during two field data collection visits, which occurred on February 26, 2010,
and January 10, 2013 During each field visit, data and observations were collected of existing
geomorphology, sediment characteristics, underlying soils (Figure 7), geology and vegetative
community (Figure 8) of each project reach Ten cross - sections were surveyed (4 on Tributary
1A, 2 on Tributary 113, 2 on Tributary 3, and 2 on Tributary 4) Representative longitudinal
profiles were surveyed on Tributaries 1A, 1B, 3 and 4 Pebble counts were obtained at all cross-
- sections to evaluate particle size distributions Subpavment samples were obtained at two
locations on Tributary 1A, but were not obtained on Tributaries 3 and 4 due to the lack of coarse
material in the bed Observations were also made on valley morphology, including extent of
floodplains on each reach, the presence of bedrock outcrops throughout all reaches and basic
information concerning density of invasive species along Tributary 113 In addition, visuals
observations and test pits were dug to understand some idea of in- stream sediment Data
21

BaB
BaB - Badin channery silt loam
BaC - Badin channery silt loam
ChA - Chewacla silt loam
CmB - Cid channery silt loam
GsB - Goldston -Badin complex
GsC - Goldston -Badin complex
MhA - Misenheimer -Cid complex
TaB - Tatum gravelly silt loam
BaB
CmB
BaB
BaC
I / � BaB
i
,
Ta B
CmB
MhA
w
GsB
BaB
1"
STANLY (
UNION i ANSON
BaB
CmB
BaB
TbB2
W
BaB
BaBI
Easement Boundary a6
Site Boundary
Soils
BaG
7. NRCS Soil Survey Map
Tributaries of Wicker Branch
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 250 500 1,000
Feet

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
collection methods and an evaluation of this data to document baseline conditions are described
in more detail below
Field Data Collection Methods
Data on existing channel shape and bed slope was collected following field procedures outlined
in Harrelson et al (1994), with a combination of RTK GPS survey equipment and differential
leveling Representative longitudinal profiles we surveyed on each reach at a minimum length of
20 times the bankfull width Pebble counts followed the Wolman method ( Wolman, 1954), while
subpavement samples were collected following the procedures outlined in Rosgen (2006)
The presence of bedrock outcrops and other geological features were analyzed using a 2 5' soil
auger and a spade shovel to conduct a series of test pits
Soils data was obtained from the NRCS soils data mart (NRCS, 2013), while information about
the NCDWQ surface waters classification was obtained from the 1 24,000 -scale Hydrography
with Water Quality Classifications ESRI shapefde published by NCDWQ
The cross - section and pebble count locations are depicted on Figure 2 The baseline data
obtained from these surveys is presented in the Channel Morphology table in Appendix C
Valley Morphology
As previously described, the four project streams are headwater systems, with valleys that are
relatively narrow with gently sloping side- slopes Each of the four valleys were classified
according to the Rosgen classification system (Rosgen, 1996) Tributary 1A begins with a
relatively narrow valley floor width (approximately 30' to 40') and small floodplain then widens
out towards the downstream end of the reach with a much wider, well - developed floodplain
Valley slopes begin at 1 6 % then gradually flatten to 1 2 % prior to the beginning of Tributary
1 B Based on the valley width and shape, the valley could be best described under the Rosgen
classification systems as a Valley Type II
The valley of Tributary 3 is similar to the upper 500 feet of Tributary 1, in that the widths vary
from 30' to 50', with a more continual slope of 14 % before reaching the culvert that marks the
end of Tributary 3 Based on this data, the valley most closely resembles a Valley Type II under
the Rosgen Classification system
Finally, the valley of Tributary 4 is also relatively narrow, like Tributary 3 and the upper part of
Tributary 1A but with slightly steeper side slopes and overall valley slope As with these
tributaries, this overall shape is similar to a Valley Type II
Baseline Channel Form and Channel Evolution
In addition to documenting the baseline condition of channel shape and characteristics, an idea
of channel evolution was obtained through a combination of visual observations and sediment
data analysis Understanding channel evolution is important because the succession relations
assist in determining the potential stable form of the channel type (Rosgen, 2006) While a
number of channel evolution models exist, the evolutionary models depicted in Rosgen (2006)
are used here to describe the evolutionary trend of the project streams
24

- Y
{
rr 1j�
_ _..
,tv r i Legend
,
Easement Boundary
Site Boundary
BEHI' b -
'y T Very Low
��•� r - a
f vim•.. I I_ ?. 4 _ -./ '„ _
Moderate
High
�4—
el
STANLY J
UNION j ANSON
-- Not Applicable
9. Bank Erosion Hazard Index
Evaluation
Wicker's Branch Tributaries
Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC
0 250 500 1,000
Feet

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
On Tributary 1A, headcuts, toe erosion and bank erosion were observed (see Bank Erosion
Hazard Index (BEHI) evaluation on Figure 9) The headcuts in particular are indicative of a
degrading channel form (Simon and Rinaldi, 2000) As will be described in more detail later in
this document, several sections of the channel can be best classified as "G" channels according
to the Rosgen channel classification system (Rosgen, 1996), while other parts of the channel
classify as "Bc" due to moderate entrenchment and low sinuosity "G" channels are typically
incising systems that are evolving towards a less entrenched system (Rosgen 1996) An
analysis of existing channel competence for Tributary 1 indicated a significant excess of
competence relative to the caliber of the sediment supply, which is another indication of
instability (see Appendix C) Thus, multiple lines of evidence indicate that Tributary 1A is an
incising and widening system, perhaps progressing from a "G" and "Bc" to an "F" An indication
of what Tributary 1A may have looked like in the past and what it may headed for as an
equilibrium state is provided by a portion of the channel immediately upstream of the beginning
of the proposed restoration This section is located immediately upstream of a headcut, and
unlike the channel downstream has little to no incision and no bank erosion This channel
classifies as an "E" Immediately downstream the channel classifies as a "G" Based on this, the
channel has incised significantly and may eventually evolve back to a "C" over time, at a lower
elevation and with a lowered floodplain Thus the channel evolution scheme this most
resembles is G F —> C
Tributary 1 B is visually in a more stable state than Tributary 1 A, with significant portions of the
reach with less incision and bank erosion (see Photo 9) However, portions of the channel area
still relatively incised and some bank erosion persists A single channel evolution scheme is - l
therefore not applicable to this entire reach, but in general the majority of the reach appears to
be at a relatively stable "C" channel, albeit incised, while other portions resemble more of a "G"
or "F" evolving into a "C" One short section of the channel is braided and thus can be classified _
as a "D" channel, perhaps evolving into a "C" over time
Tributary 3, like Tributary 1, is also relatively incised and entrenched, and classifies as a "F" to a
"Bc" channel according to the Rosgen classification scheme As with Tributary 1, there is a
significant excess of competence in the channel relative to the caliber of the sediment supply
(described in more detail in Appendix C) Also, sediment capacity is large relative to a stable
channel form Similar to Tributary 1A, this channel was most likely an "E" or "C" at some point in
the past, has incised into a °G" or "F" and will continue to widen and deposit into a "E" or "C" at a "
lower elevation For the purposes of baseline documentation, this reach has been assigned an
evolutionary trend of G � F C
Tributary 4 shows signs of modification and straightening, but classifies as a straight "E"
channel with a predominantly silt bed However, due to the apparent manipulation, a
classification scheme based on natural channels is not really applicable A sediment —
competence analysis (see Appendix C) indicates that the channel has excess competence
relative to the caliber of its sediment supply A section immediately upstream of the beginning of
this reach appears to be stable, with a well - developed and stable bankfull "flat" adjacent to the -
channel and no signs of excess deposition or erosion on the channel bed This section classifies !
as a "C" possessing a higher width /depth ratio than the impaired reach, and serves as a good
reference for what the channel may once have looked like and may be headed towards as an
evolutionary endpoint (see Photo 18) A sediment capacity analysis using this section as a
26

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
reference (see details in Appendix C) indicated that Tributary 4 possesses excess sediment
capacity
In- Channel Sediment and Sediment Dynamics of Catchment
Documentation of channel sediment supply and sediment dynamics of the catchment was
accomplished through a combination of visual observation, analysis of particle size distribution
(through pebble count and subpavement sample data), analysis of hillslope processes, and
sediment transport analysis The revised universal soil loss equation ( RUSLE) (ARS USDA,
2010) was used to conduct a basic analysis of sediment transport from hillslope erosion The
baseline data was also used to evaluate sediment transport characteristics of the existing
channel, which is described in more detail in Appendix C
Based on visual observations made during three field visits to the project site, in- channel
' sediment varies from reach to reach, with Tributary 1A exhibiting a bed composed primarily of
gravel with some amount of fines, while Tributaries 3 and 4 exhibit an almost homogenous bed
composition of silt and very-fine to medium sand Soil augers placed in Tributary 3 revealed an
average of 0 75 feet of silt in the bottom of the channel Tributary 4 had an average depth of silt
of 0 3 feet to a consolidated clay layer Tributary 1A, while containing some silt from visual
observations, had a bed primarily composed of fine gravel, with some mixture of larger particles
(large gravel to cobble) and fines Similarly, Tributary 1B possesses a mixture of gravel and
cobble, with particle sizes trending towards larger sizes that Tributary 1A Thus, although the
Tributaries 1A and 3 are similar in appearance and have many of the same issues, Tributary 1A
appears to be receiving much less supply of silt and fines then Tributary 3 or 4, despite the
similar surrounding land use (small -grain row crops) The results of pebble counts
demonstrating the bed composition of the project reaches is shown in Appendix C
To evaluate potential sources of sediment in the project channels and to further document
baseline conditions, a RUSLE analysis was conducted on the watersheds of Tributaries 1A, 3
and 4 to determine sediment contribution from hillslope erosion Data regarding land use, soil
properties, slope, and rainfall conditions were input into the RUSLE2 program (ARS USDA,
2010) to derive an estimate of soil loss on an annual basis Based on this analysis 6 to 9 tons
per acre per year of soil is being lost from the site due to hillslope erosion
A complete summary of reach information, including valley classification and channel evolution
is provided in Table 5
27

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Table 5. Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Tributary 1A
Tributary 1B
Tributary 2
Tributary 3
Tributary 4
Length of
reach (linear
1293
1095
330
1184
631
feet)
Valley
classification
Type II
Type II
Type II
Type II
Type II
(Rosgen,
1996)
Drainage area
715
945
176
327
298
(acres)
NCDWQ
stream
385
385
27
43
31 5
identification
score
NCDWQ
Water Quality
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
Classification
Morphological
Description
64c, G4c, F4
C4 /F4
N/A
F /B6c /F6
N /A'
(Rosgen
stream type)
Evolutionary
trend (based
G4F4C
N/A
N/A
G41F4C
N/A
on Rosgen,
2006)
Underlying
Cid channery
Chewacla silt
Cid channery silt
Cid channery silt
Cid channery silt
mapped soils
silt loam
loam
loam, Badin
loam
loam, Goldston-
channery silt loam
Badin complex
Moderately
Moderately well
Moderately well
Somewhat poorly
Drainage
well drained/
Somewhat poorly
drained/
somewhat poorly
drained/
drained to
class
somewhat
drained
drained, well
somewhat poorly
excessively
poorly drained
drained
drained
drained
Sod Hydnc
No
Yes
No
No
No
status
Avg Water
13%
10%
17%
14%
10%
Surface Slope
FEMA
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
classification
Native
Mesic Mixed
vegetation
None
Hardwoods
None
None
None
community
Percent
composition
Understo ry
of exotic
0
0
0
0
invasive
50%
vegetation
" Channel has been modified and cannot be classified under Rosgen system of classification
28

I
DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auqust 2013
The channel cross - sections, profiles, and pebble counts from which the above data was derived
can be found in Appendix C
4.3 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Table 6. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States —
Yes
To be
Section 404
permitted
Waters of the United States —
Yes
To be
Section 401
permitted
Endangered Species Act
No
Yes
CE Form
Historic Preservation Act
No
Yes
Letter dated 7/19/2011 from
SHPO
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area
No
N/A
N/A
Management Act CAMA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
Yes
Review of floodplain mapping
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Mitigation credits presented in these tables are projections based upon site design Upon
completion of site construction the project components and credits data will be revised to be
consistent with the as -built condition
29

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Table 7. Determination of Credits
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream and Wetland Restoration Protect, Union County
EEP Project Number 95022
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non - riparian
Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Totals
1390
1260
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Protect Components
Protect
Component -or-
Reach ID
Stationing /Location
Existing
Footage
Approach
(PI, PII etc)
Restoration -or-
Restoration
Equivalent
Restoration
Footage
Mitigation
Ratio
Tributary 1A
10 +00 to 23 +95
1293
P1
Restoration
1390
1 1
Tributary 1B
From end of Reach 1A to Wicker
Branch
1095
NA
Enhancement II
1095
311
Tributary 2
1
330
1 NA
I N/A
0
N /AZ
Tributary 3
10 +00 to 21 +84
1184
NA
Enhancement 1
1184
1 51
Tributary 4
10 +00 to 16 +31
631
NA
Enhancement I I
631
2 5 1
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream
linear feet
Riparian Wetland
acres )
Non - riparian Wetland
(acres
Buffer
(square feet
Upland
acres
Rivenne
Non- Rivenne
Restoration
1390
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Enhancement
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Enhancement 1
1184
Enhancement 11
2056
Creation
NA
NA
NA
Preservation
1095
NA
NA
NA
NA
High Quality
Preservation
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
BMP Elements
Element
Location
Purpose /Function
Notes
BMP Elements
BR = Bioretention Cell, SF = Sand Filter, SW = Stormwater Wetland, WDP = Wet Detention Pond, DDP = Dry Detention Pond, FS = Filter Strip, S =
Grassed Swale, LS = Level Spreader, NI = Natural Infiltration Area, FB = Forested Buffer
'Possible candidate for Enhancement Level II but with a reduced 3 1 Mitigation Credit Ratio
2Tributary 2 can be used to offset reduced credits elsewhere throughout the project depending on the
results of project closeout
30

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
6.0 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey
of the mitigation site Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the
necessary DA authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE)
has otherwise provided written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is
required for construction of the mitigation project The DE, in consultation with the Interagency
Review Team (IRT), will determine if performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to
meet the requirements of the release schedules below In cases where some performance
standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the
case Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which
the site fails to meet the specified performance standard The release of project credits will be
subject to the criteria described as follows
Table 8. Credit Release Schedule
Monitoring
Credit Release Activity
Interim
Total
Year
Release
Released
0
Initial Allocation - see requirements below
30%
30%
1
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
40%
standards are being met
2
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
50%
standards are being met
o
(60 /o)
3
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
60%
standards are being met
(70 %)
4
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
70%
standards are being met
o
(85 /o)
5
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
15%
90%
standards are being met and project has received closeout
(100 %)
approval
Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by
the NCEEP without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following
activities
a) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
b) Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the
` USACE covering the property
31

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
c) Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to
the mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan, Per the NCEEP Instrument,
construction means that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include
planting, and an as -built report has been produced As -built reports must be sealed by
an engineer prior to project closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of
released credits
d) Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where
DA permit issuance is not required
Subsequent Credit Releases
1
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based
on a determination that required performance standards have been achieved For stream
projects a reserve of 15% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after two bank -full
events have occurred, in separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other
performance standards are met In the event that less than two bank -full events occur during the
monitoring period, release of these reserve credits shall be at the discretion of the IRT As
projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the NCEEP will submit a request
for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of criteria
required for release to occur This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring
report
7.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 TARGET STREAM TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES
7. 1.1 Target Stream Type
As described in Section 4, Tributaries 1A, 3 and 4 flow through relatively narrow valleys, with
small floodplains which are characteristic of smaller, headwater streams within the Slate Belt of
North Carolina On Tributary 1A and 3, the valleys and floodplains widen further downstream
and the valley and channel slopes decrease (from approximately 1 6 % to 1 2 %), while
Tributary 4 maintains a fairly constant valley and channel slope and valley width for its length
across the project site Relatively stable "reference" sections were found immediately upstream
of Tributary 1A, Tributary 2 and in the wooded reaches of Tributary 1B Each of these sections
was evaluated with a Pfankuch stability analysis coupled with visual observations, had well- '
developed bankfull indicators, little incision and no sign of bed or bank erosion or excessive
deposition, and thus were deemed to be geomorphically stable sections Since these sections
are subject to the same sediment supply as the project reaches, they were considered to be
reliable indicators of the stable stream type In the case of Tributary 1A, the reference section
immediately upstream classified as an "E" while the section in Tributary 1 B classified as a °C"
The section upstream of Tributary 4 classified as a "C" No stable, reference section could be -
found upstream or downstream of Tributary 3, but the Tributary 4 reference section was
deemed suitable for use on Tributary 3 because it has a similar drainage area to Tributary 3,
have a similar valley type and both reaches are located immediately downstream of -
impoundments, thus sediment supply is likely similar These sections indicate that the stable
stream type suitable for the project reaches is a "C" or an "E" stream type These stream types
32

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
are considered to be stable channel forms (Rosgen, 1996) Furthermore, the stable reference
reaches used for this project, all of which are similarly sized streams with similar valley types
located within the Slate Belt of North Carolina are classified as either "E" or a "C" channels
For this stream design, all restored channels will be classified a "C" channels The "C" channels,
will adequately transport sediment, and most closely emulates the reference conditions
observed upstream and downstream of the impaired reaches
7.1.2 Target Plant Communities
Revegetation efforts will emulate natural vegetation communities found along relatively
undisturbed stream corridors in the Slate Belt region The dominant natural community type
within this region along riparian corridors of smaller streams, closely matches the Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest, as described in Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina
(Schafale et al , 1990) This forest community is characterized by a canopy of mesic
hardwoods, occasional flooding, and a lack of tree species indicative of high pH soils
7.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS
The approach to channel work for Tributaries 1A, 3 and 4 follows the principles of the Rosgen
method of Natural Channel Design (as described in NRCS, 2007) with validation of stability
provided by analysis of sediment transport The Rosgen Natural Channel Design method is an
analog method, whereby the geomorphic variables from stable channels within a similar hydro-
physiographic region are used to define the design criteria for a proposed channel (NRCS,
2007) The Rosgen methodology is appropriate in alluvial systems where the bankfull channel
is formed by the deposits and reworking of alluvial sediments (NRCS, 2007) As discuss below,
bankfull indicators found on the site were primarily formed from alluvium deposits The
reference reaches are evaluated for stability and subjected to a survey of their plan, profile and
cross- section in order to derive morphological variables and ratios which can be used to design
a stable channel
7.2.1 Reference Reaches
Two streams were used as reference reaches for this project The search for suitable reference
reaches involved finding a stream with a similar morphology, valley type, drainage area, and
within a similar hydro- physiographic province as the project stream One stream, Spencer
Creek, was chosen from the Uwharne National Forest because of its good bankfull indicators
and because it represents a typical headwater stream found within the Slate Belt region A
second reference reach UT4 -Upper of the Rockwell Pastures site is located in Stanly County
and is similar in size, drainage area, and geological setting as the proposed channels
Dimensionless ratios were developed from these two reference reaches and used to calculate
pattern, profile and dimension for the proposed restored Tributaries The morphological
parameters from these two reaches are summarized in the Morphological Table shown in
Appendix C A description of the hydrology, stability and geomorphology of these reference
channels is described in further detail below
Spencer Creek is located within the Uwharne National Forest in Montgomery County, North
Carolina off of Tower Road (State Road 1134), and is within the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
(Figure 10) The drainage area of Spencer Creek is approximately 0 5 square miles The
33

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
watershed consists of mature hardwood forest with some planted pine areas in the upper parts
of the watershed Tower Road passes through a portion of the watershed, but the surveyed
reference reach is upstream of this crossing Similar to the watersheds of the reaches of the
Wicker Branch project, the watershed of Spencer Creek is within the unique geology of the
Slate Belt region, and although the drainage area is larger (300 acres compared with 30 to 90
acres), the stream has a similar valley type and underlying geology
Geomorphology and Bankfull Discharge Determination
A geomorphic survey was originally completed for Spencer Creek in 2008 The survey consisted
of two cross - sections (1 riffle and 1 pool) and a 268 -foot long longitudinal profile comprising 8
riffle /pool sequences The geomorphic data from this survey was confirmed through a site visit
for the purposes of this report Based on the survey, the stream channel can be classified as a
Rosgen "C4" channel, with a portion of the reach exhibiting the slope of a "134" channel The
stream is only slightly sinuous and possesses relatively small radius of curvature and pool to
pool spacing
Discharge was calculated for the Spencer Creek using the continuity equation for discharge and
Manning's equation for resistance Manning's "n ", a required input of the Mannings equation,
was calculated using the D84 obtained from the pebble count data and the Limennos data
showing a relationship between the relative roughness of a stream and the 84th percentile
particle diameter (NRCS, 2007) Velocity was also verified using the Darcy- Weisbach resistance
equation, and the U /U" method
Hydrology
The watershed of Spencer Creek is entirely forested, (see Figure 11) Several two -lane public
'- roads pass through the watershed but otherwise impervious surfaces are absent Hillslopes in
the watershed are relatively steep for the piedmont but typical of the Uwharne Mountain region
Runoff and mean annual rainfall is similar to other parts of the piedmont and to the Wicker
- Branch streams
Channel Stability
_ Several indices may be used to determine the stability of a stream, including incision, degree of
lateral confinement, bank erosion hazard index (BEHI), near bank stress, sediment competence
and sediment capacity All streams naturally undergo a certain amount of channel adjustment
and erosion, but when the indices indicate an increase in magnitude and frequency of
adjustment processes when compared to a stable condition, a stream may be considered
unstable ( Rosgen, 2006) In evaluating the overall stability of the reference reaches for this
project, the best available data was used to calculate as many stability indices as possible for
each reach While a comprehensive stability analysis would necessarily require quantitative
determinations of sediment capacity, the collection of data required in such an analysis beyond
the scope of this analysis RiverMorph software was used to quickly calculate these indices, for
Spencer Creek, and the results follow
Table 9 displays a summary of several stability indices used in evaluating Spencer Creek as a
reference reach The indices were chosen based on the availability of data for this particular
reference reach BEHI data was not collected and therefore does not factor into the stability
analysis Taken as a whole, the indices indicate that Spencer Creek is a stable stream
35

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Table 9. Stability Indices for Spencer Creek
Stability
Meander
Sediment Competence
Sediment Competence
Bank Height
Index
Width
(Degradation)
( Aegradation)
Ratio (avg )
Ratio
Largest movable particle is
100 8 mm
Min Depth needed is 0 33 ft
Rating
8 0
11
Largest measured particle
is 90 mm
Actual stream depth is T3 ft
Comment
Does not indicate excess
Sufficient depth to transport
Not incised
competence
largest size available
The lateral stability index of meander width ratio falls within the typical values of a type "C"
stream, thereby indicating lateral stability (Rosgen, 2006)
Sediment competence indicates if a stream has the ability to move the largest particle in the
stream (the D,00) by possessing sufficient slope and /or depth Insufficient slope or depth can
indicate that a stream is aggrading In addition, a dimensional shear stress calculation can be
used to determine if a stream can move a larger particle than what was measured, which
indicates that a stream has excess energy, and is therefore degrading Bank Height ratio, which
is the ratio of low bank height to bankfull maximum depth, is another measure of vertical
stability
On this reach, the largest measured particle is very close to the calculated moveable largest
particle which indicates that there is very little excess energy in the stream Furthermore, the
stream has sufficient depth to transport the largest size available These two results indicate
that stream is neither aggrading nor degrading The bank height ratio value of 1 1 also indicates
that the stream is not incised, and is therefore vertically stable
Visual observations of the stream also indicated that it was stable No areas of severe bank
erosion or undercutting were observed, nor were there any recent signs of channel avulsion, or
excess sediment deposition
Vegetative Communities
The riparian area of Spencer Creek is composed primarily of a mesic mixed hardwood forest
with mixed areas of pine Common species in this community type include tulip poplar
(Linodendron tulipifera), red maple (Acer rubrum), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and sugar
maple (Acer saccharum) The understory is dominated by flowering dogwood (Corpus flonda),
hop- hornbeam (Ostrya virgmiana), and American holly (Ilex opaca) (Schafale et al, 1990)
Other species that were observed at Spencer Creek include mountain laurel (Kalmla latifoha)
and a dense mixture of various species of ferns
37

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Tributary 4 of Rockwell Pastures Site
Tributary 4 of the Rockwell Pastures (aka UT -4 Upper) site is located approximately 6 miles
southeast of Albemarle in Stanly County, North Carolina off of Alpine Road in the Yadkin River
Basin (Figure 12) The drainage area for UT4 -Upper of the Rockwell Pastures Site is
approximately 0 11 square miles
Geomorphology and Bankfull Discharge Determination
A geomorphic survey was completed for UT4 -Upper of the Rockwell Pastures in 2008
Approximately 67 linear feet of the channel was surveyed covering 3 riffle /pool sequences
Cross - sections of 1 riffle and 1 pool were also surveyed Based on the survey, the stream
channel is classified as a Rosgen "C4" channel The stream is only slightly sinuous and
possesses relatively small radius of curvature and pool to pool spacing
Appendix C presents the Morphology Table with additional geomorphic data for the stream
Bankfull indicators on -site such as benches, point bars, sediment deposits, and rack lines were
observed Discharge was calculated for UT4 -Upper of the Rockwell Pastures using the
continuity equation for discharge and Manning's equation for resistance A bankfull discharge of
23 6 cfs was calculated
Hydrology
The watershed of UT4 -Upper of the Rockwell Pastures is primarily forested with a small portion
containing a residence, (see Figure 13) The upper portion of the stream is impounded with
three small ponds that are spring fed The stable reference section is below the ponds
A two -lane public road borders the watershed on the north, and a small house is present, but
otherwise impervious surfaces are absent Hillslopes in the watershed are relatively steep for
the piedmont but typical of the Uwharne Mountain region Runoff and mean annual rainfall is
similar to other parts of the piedmont and to the Wicker Branch streams
Channel Stability
Based on the Rockwell Pastures report the reference reach streams appeared stable with
morphological measurements indicating stable dimension, pattern, and profile These reaches
were stable due to a combination of vegetation along the banks, proper dimension, pattern, and
profile, and access to an active floodplain No areas of severe bank erosion or undercutting
were observed
Vegetative Community
The vegetation along this reference reach was described as containing a number of invasive
species and is therefore not suitable as a reference for the Wicker Branch site
7.2.2 Channel Design Approach
The design of the three reaches on which channel work is to be done (Tributaries 1A, 3 and 4)
followed the analog process of the Rosgen Natural Channel Design method coupled with an
analysis of sediment transport Through this process, the geomorphic parameters of each
reference reach described above were applied to the project channel to determine certain
38

G
�y
GO
Rockwell Pasturesohn�s Rq
V
it
V
O
t
`a
r -.
Lake Tillery
n
din
f !,� ;t•
Morrow Moun4in State Park
I
24
Jac!o �s Creek
STAINLY
24J
,r e M TGOMERY ! J
J
—
JIJ 73 ' L
J'
Ij Stahl iSchoo Rd
_. }Lake Tillery -
' od
.l
t G'
•731 -V`
;+ L
52
1 ,
J Ni
ARSON' �_�. _ _ti ✓" 1f
12. Rockwell Pastures
Reference Reach Vicinity Map
+ CABq►4RUS ` Tributaries of Wicker Branch
ST LY ! Stream Restoration Site
LU—WI NT GOMERY Union County, NC
ON I ANSONt,`F�1 MOND 0 1.25 2.5 5
Miles

f Y Vof�•
i
^� r, 4
t` -
,..
Reference Reach
9 f-.
. �J '
! R CK ELL• PASTURES UT
' DA
Ir
I
� • '� � .7�� -*r' .yam ,
Legend - 1 ? .• °
C) r .
Watershed Boundary
Reference Reach of Rockwell -
Pastures
J _ 13. Rockwell Pastures
ROWAND VIDS6N_ RANDOL H __
-?'¢� — — Reference Reach Watersheds
CAEVRRUS RE Tributaries of Wicker Branch
M b
STANL MON OMER Stream Restoration Site
1
Union County, NC
0 750 1,500 3,000
UNIONS ANSON F' RICHMOND
Feet

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
aspects of the planform and longitudinal profile Other aspects of the channel design were
determined through analytical means the dimension for each channel was determined
considering bankfull discharge, sediment competence and capacity, planform was influenced by
the need to create a slope sufficient to transport sediment size and volume over time and also
constraints of the valley and floodplain A detailed description of the design methods and
assumptions is provided for each reach below
Bankful/ Determination
The initial task for each reach was to determine bankfull discharge Bankfull indicators were
absent from many parts of Tributaries 1A and 3 due to the incision of the channel, but several
sections did manifest bankfull features in the form of bar deposits and scour Tines (see site
photographs in Section 2 8) Bankfull indicators were almost absent from the whole length of
Tributary 4, presumably due to past manipulation as part of the farming practices
The elevation of bankfull indicators were measured down the length of the channels and
showed a consistent height above baseflow Cross - sections were surveyed within the impaired
reaches at locations with strong bankfull indicators and at stable sections upstream of the
project site and the data were entered into Rivermorph Hydraulic resistance equations were
used along with estimates of particle size distribution from pebble counts and average water
surface slope from a longitudinal profile survey to provide estimates of bankfull velocity and
discharge The results of the bankfull discharge determination using various hydraulic
resistance equations have been recorded in standard forms which are contained in Appendix
C A summary of the average discharge of these methods is included in Table 10
Table 10 Summary of Bankfull Discharge and Storm Flows
Tributary 1A
Proposed Channel Characteristics
_ Tributary 1A is designed to be a Priority I stream restoration As discussed in Section 2, this
reach possesses the greatest amount of incision and bed instability, as well as the highest BEHI
(Rosgen, 2006) ratings on the project site (BEHI Mapping is provided in Figure 9) The
channelized nature of the stream, and particularly the unstable bedform with several noticeable
j headcuts, support the need for full restoration The need for restoration on this reach was
discussed and agreed by all parties during a visit to the site by the USACE, EEP and AECOM in
August, 2011
Design parameters for this reach are based on the reference reach dimensionless
morphological criteria discussed above, existing boundary conditions of the site and sediment
transport analysis The valley of the proposed channel is somewhat steeper (1 6 %) and
41
Tributary 1
Tributary 3
Tributary 4
Avg. Bankfull discharge (cfs)
45
23
20
Tributary 1A
Proposed Channel Characteristics
_ Tributary 1A is designed to be a Priority I stream restoration As discussed in Section 2, this
reach possesses the greatest amount of incision and bed instability, as well as the highest BEHI
(Rosgen, 2006) ratings on the project site (BEHI Mapping is provided in Figure 9) The
channelized nature of the stream, and particularly the unstable bedform with several noticeable
j headcuts, support the need for full restoration The need for restoration on this reach was
discussed and agreed by all parties during a visit to the site by the USACE, EEP and AECOM in
August, 2011
Design parameters for this reach are based on the reference reach dimensionless
morphological criteria discussed above, existing boundary conditions of the site and sediment
transport analysis The valley of the proposed channel is somewhat steeper (1 6 %) and
41

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC _
August 2013
narrower for the first 500 feet, and then flattens (1 0 % -1 2 %) and widens for the last 700 feet `
Thus, although using the same range of morphological criteria from the reference reaches, the
channel parameters for planform change slightly from the steeper to the flatter section In the
steeper section, the valley width and floodplain is much narrower, and thus a high belt width and
sinuosity is not appropriate Instead, longer meander wavelengths are used and grade will be
controlled with series of notched log sills The channel will have a slope of approximately 1 5% }
and a sinuosity of 1 05
An "E" stream type is proposed for this reach with a width /depth ratio of 10 7 As the channel will
be reconnected with the relict floodplain, it will be considered only "slightly entrenched" While
not as sinuous as a typical "E" channel, because of the continuum of natural variables within
stream reaches, the Rosgen classification allows for a variance in ± 0 2 for entrenchment and
sinuosity and ± 2 0 for width /depth ratios ( Rosgen, 1996) The proposed channel also mimics
the stable reference reaches which also have a lower sinuosity than is typical for an "E"
channel Finally, the design focuses on and allows for sediment competence and capacity to
insure stability
Where the valley flattens, the floodplain widens out significantly In this reach the proposed
channel will have higher belt width values than upstream and a somewhat greater sinuosity, as
is appropriate for a flatter valley type with a higher belt width The slope of the channel will be
approximately 1 2% and the sinuosity will be approximately 1 2 Through visual observations T'
and soil borings Tributary 1A was investigated for the presence of bedrock both in the channel
and floodplain No bedrock was observed
A minimum amount of in- stream structures will be used on Tributary 1A, and will be primarily
located along the steeper upper section of the reach This will help to stabilize the grade and
establish pools Due to the small size of the channel, notched log sills will be used as grade
control, as these will be of an appropriate size to define pools throughout the profile Details of
this structure can be found in Appendix D Pools are appropriate for the channel as they exist
both in reaches above the project site and in tributary 113 indicating that the channel is not a
plane -bed channel Pool to pool spacing, riffle lengths, and pool lengths are all similar to
reference conditions
The cross - section of Tributary 1A is designed based on estimates of existing bankfull flow in the
channel, sediment transport analysis, target stream type and comparison with reference reach
data The proposed channel is designed to have the capacity at bankfull stage to carry the i
estimated bankfull flow of approximately 4 5 cfs Moreover, the channel width and depth are
based on sediment transport analysis, which is used to assess a channel's ability to carry the
volume and size of sediment being delivered from upstream without aggrading or degrading
(see Sediment Transport Analysis in Appendix C)
In addition to establishing a new channel for the restored alignment of Tributary 1A, several _}
other areas of work will be accomplished along this reach First, Tributary 1A ends downstream ;
at a broken 36 inch RCP culvert The culvert will be removed to allow connection of the restored -
segment to the natural, preservation segment downstream Also at the upstream end of
Tributary 1A, a stabilized ford will be installed to allow for crossing of farm equipment The
42

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
restoration of Tributary 1A will begin dust below this crossing Finally, level spreaders will be
installed at the edge of the easement in several areas where rill erosion enters the existing
i channel The level spreader will consist of a wood sill or earthen berm stabilized with coir
matting and live stakes to remain compatible with a natural landscape These are necessary to
prevent rill erosion and concentrated flow from occurring through the proposed buffer The need
for these features was suggested by the USACE
Floodplain Characteristics
The presence of an alluvial floodplain along Tributary 1A was confirmed through the
examination of soil borings in the flat terraces features adjacent to the stream by a Licensed Soil
Scientist Areas showing hydric soil characteristics were found along Tributary 1A, and met the
field indicators for Piedmont Floodplain soils as described in Field Indicators of Hydric Soils
(NRCS, 2006), which states
F19 Piedmont Floodplain Soils On active floodplains, a layer that has a depleted
matrix with 60 percent or more chroma less than 4 and 20 percent or more distinct or
prominent redox concentrations occurring as soft masses or pore linings and has a
minimum thickness of a) 6 inches starting within 10 inches of the soil surface
Topographically, while any sharp demarcations of the floodplain and upland area has been
disturbed by past plowing and cultivation of the adjacent fields, flat floodplain areas can be
observed The presence of floodplains can be seen in Photos 2, 3, 7, and 13 As previously
described, floodplain width varies from an average of 30 feet in the uppermost 500 feet of the
existing channel to 100+ feet downstream The channel has cut down over the years thus
lowering bankfull elevation from the original floodplain The proposed alignment of Tributary 1
was based on considerations of floodplain width and access along the entire reach The
proposed alignment will restore the elevation of the bankfull to relict floodplain, except in the
final 75 to 100 feet where the channel needs to tie into the beginning of reach 1 B, thus requiring
lowering the bankfull elevation below the relict floodplain
Sediment Transport
Based on a sediment competence analysis, the proposed channel design is estimated to move
a 47 mm particle at bankfull stage which is within the range of the largest particle sizes in the
subpavement samples (40 -48mm) To add further assurance of bed stability, the shear stress of
a 10 -year storm was examined in HEC -RAS, and showed a shear stress of approximately 0 37
Ib /ftz This is estimated to move a particle size of approximately 73 mm based on the Revised
Shields Relationship (Rosgen, 2006) Because the channel of Tributary 1 will be realigned, it is
unlikely that there will be enough of the existing bed material to harvest and place into the
proposed channel Also, it is likely that the caliber and quantity of sediment in Tributary 1 will
change over time due to varying crop rotations, no till farming practices or possible future
removal from agricultural production Therefore, we will place a bed material with a size greater
than 73 mm into the proposed riffle section, so that will the bed material will not mobilize out of
the channel even in higher events Sediment capacity was also evaluated using POWERSED
method and the proposed channel produces similar unit stream power over a range of flows as
43
(,

DRAFT Tnbutanes of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
an upstream reference section indicating the ability to transport the volume of sediment over
time without aggrading or degrading
Tributary 1B
Tributary 1B will have a level of work consistent with Enhancement Level II mitigation
Generally there is little bankerosion present on this channel, and the channel form is not incised
for much of its length, however there are areas of intermittent erosion and incision, which
suggests some areas of instability Because of this the proposed work here is to conduct spot
stabilization on areas that exhibit bank erosion and incision Areas with incision and headcuts
will have "rock ramps" installed at a 3 1 or a 4 1 slope to repair the headcuts Areas with bank
erosion will have the banks sloped back slightly to reduce bank angle A minimum 50 foot buffer
which will be protected by a conservation easement will be established on both sides of the
stream Exotic invasive plants (primarily Chinese privet) will be removed from the easement
area to allow for the natural establishment of native vegetation Because of the existing mature,
hardwood, overstory, no additional planting along Tributary 1B is planned However due to the
low level of work Enhancement Level II, a reduced credit ratio of 3 1 was deemed fitting for the
channel, and was discussed during a field visit between EEP and AECOM on May 3rd, 2013
Tributary 2
Originally proposed for enhancement, this reach was determined to be unsuitable for mitigation
credits during a site visit with the USACE in August, 2011 Upon further investigation, it was
noted on a return field visit in May, 2013 with AECOM and EEP that Tributary 2 could be used
to offset reduced mitigation credits should other reaches of the project receive less credits at the
project closeout It was requested by the USACE that a 30 foot buffer and conservation
easement be acquired to provide riparian habitat connectivity between the restored segments of
Tributary 1A and upstream wooded areas
Tributary 3
Proposed Channel Characteristics
The restoration work conducted on Tributary 3 will be consistent with Enhancement Level I
mitigation, and will restore two of the three morphological parameters (profile and cross -
section) The channel will remain in its current alignment This level of intervention is justified by
the fact that the channel is not as incised as Tributary 1A, but still has areas of bed instability
and bank erosion that should be addressed As discussed in Appendix C, competence and
capacity estimates for this channel show that the channel has excess competence and capacity
relative to the volume and caliber of sediment supply being delivered to it, thus indicating a likely
source of bed instability and a trend of degradation These calculations were also supported by
visual observations of erosion in the bed and headcuts throughout the channel Examinations
of sediment supply in the watershed and in the channel suggest that adjusting channel
dimension such that the bankfull channel is competent only to mobilize the small caliber of
sediment particles entering the channel would not be feasible As discussed earlier, the lack of
larger particles in the channel, as found in the adjacent channel of Tributary 1, is likely due to
the impoundment of the reach immediately upstream of the project site Thus, the dimension of
44

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
the channel will be adjusted to the higher width /depth of a "C" channel with the capacity to carry
bankfull flow A bed material will then be placed on the bed of a size large enough to ensure that
it does not mobilize out of the channel A bankfull bench will be established along both sides of
the channel that will allow for reduction of the energy of flows during above - bankfull events and
allow for floodwaters to collect within the restored floodplain, thereby increasing the treatment of
the water, and will provide overall stability to the channel itself Log sills will be installed to help
control grade and provide instream pool habitat
Through a combination of visual observation and soil borings in the bed of the channel Tributary
l 3 was investigated for the presence of bedrock, No bedrock was found
As with Tributary 1A, the design parameters for the restored profile, and pool cross - section are
based on morphological parameters derived from reference reach surveys shown in the
geomorphology table in Appendix C
Two wetlands are present in the existing stream channel of Tributary 3, and are separated by
approximately 260 feet of stream channel The mitigation of Tributary 3 will begin just
downstream of the most upstream wetland During a site visit with the USACE in August, 2011,
it was suggested that the stream reach between the two wetlands could remain as -is with no
modifications, however, to promote enhancement of habitat on this reach, some pools will be
created in the otherwise uniform streambed between the two wetlands The restoration of profile
and cross - section will begin just downstream of the second wetland The length of actual stream
modifications will therefore be approximately 640 feet No work (beyond planting) will occur in
the wetlands along Tributary 3
At the very downstream end of Tributary 3, a 35 foot wide corridor will remain out of the
conservation easement to allow for farm equipment to cross the stream This portion of the
channel will be stabilized with a permanent stream crossing /ford to prevent any downcutting of
the channel Immediately downstream of the ford, the existing culvert will remain in place The
culvert and current unimproved road are not sufficient to accommodate the passage of heavy
farm equipment, thus a stabilized ford is needed adjacent to the culvert Adjacent rill erosion
occurring along Tributary 3 will be controlled with wood sill level spreaders to ensure that only
diffuse flow occurs through the easement
Sediment Transport
The proposed channel is estimated to move a 45 mm particle at bankfull stage As discussed
above, bed material will be added of a size that ensures a non - mobile bed To determine this
size, the shear stress produced in the channel during a 10 -year storm event has been estimated
using HEC -RAS and hydrologic modeling software The calculated 10 -year shear stress is 0 26
Ib /ftz which can move a particle size of approximately 56 mm based on the Revised Shields
Relationship (Rosgen, 2006) , Thus, bed material with D100 greater than 56 mm will be placed
into riffle sections of the channel
Sediment capacity of the proposed channel was evaluated using POWERSED model and the
proposed channel produces similar unit stream power over a range of flows as an upstream
45

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
_ August 2013
stable reference section indicating the ability to transport the volume of sediment being
delivered to the channel over time without aggrading or degrading
The methods and results of both the competence and capacity analysis are described in more
detail in Appendix C
Tributary 4
Proposed Channel Characteristics
'J
Tributary 4 will have a level of work consistent with Enhancement Level II mitigation Analysis of
sediment competency and capacity (Appendix C) indicated that, of the three impaired reaches,
this reach has the least vertical and lateral instability There is virtually no bank erosion present
on this channel, and the channel form is not incised Evaluation of a stable reference section
found immediately upstream of the reach, in a wooded area below the dam of an upstream
impoundment, shows that the area, width depth and other hydraulic parameters of the impaired
reach don't vary greatly from the reference section Thus, Enhancement Level II was considered
an appropriate approach The channel form will be modified to match the parameters of the -
upstream stable section, which as described earlier is a "C" stream, and also to carry the
bankfull discharge In addition, several log notched sills will be placed in the channel to help
establish pool habitat in an otherwise uniform bedform Upstream and downstream of the
project site, Tributary 4 is sinuous and possesses a pool -riffle sequence, thus indicating that a
plane -bed channel would not be appropriate for this reach
As with Tributaries 1 and 3, adjacent rill erosion and concentrated flow into the buffer will be
controlled with wood sill level spreaders placed at the edge of the easement
Sediment Transport
The proposed channel will move a 35mm particle The D100 calculated from the pebble count
is 40 mm However this may not represent true maximum size of particle moving through at
bankfull stage because the subpavement is almost entirely silt, based on investigations of the
bed of the channel Based on a HEC -RAS analysis, shear stress of a 10 -year storm is _
approximately 0 30 Ib /ftz, which is calculated to move approximately 63 mm particle size based
on the Revised Shields Relationship (Rosgen, 2006) Bed material larger than this size will be
added to Tributary 4 to ensure a non - mobile bed Sediment capacity was also evaluated using
POWERSED method and the proposed channel produces similar unit stream power over a
range of flows as the upstream reference section, indicating the ability to transport the volume of
sediment over time without aggrading or degrading
7.2.3 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Revegetation efforts will emulate natural vegetation communities found along relatively
undisturbed stream corridors in the Slate Belt region The dominant natural community type
within this region along riparian corridors of smaller streams closely matches the Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest, as described in Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina
►,.

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
(Schafale and Weakly, 1990) This forest community is characterized by a canopy of mesic
hardwoods, occasional flooding, and a lack of tree species indicating high pH soils
To quickly establish dense root mass along the channel bank live stakes will be installed on the
tops of the channel banks Trees and shrubs will be planted within the riparian buffer In the
areas where invasive and exotic species are found during construction and monitoring, control
by mechanical removal or appropriate herbicides will be implemented to prevent competition
with the revegetation efforts Reforestation plans are provided in Design Sheets 15 -17 and will
focus on two separate zones having different hydrologic regimes and will include streambank
vegetation, and riparian buffer Along the streambank, vegetation will be subjected to fluctuating
stream flows and stresses The riparian buffer on the well - drained portions of floodplain will be
subjected to occasional flooding, but because of the well - drained nature will be drier much of
the year
Streambank Vegetation
All banks excluding point bars will be reinforced with live stakes Species to be planted in these
areas include
• Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
• Black willow (Salix nigra)
• Silky willow (Salix sencia)
• Silky dogwood (Corpus amomum)
Woody vegetation will be planted between November and March Care will be taken to make
sure that planting occurs in temperatures above freezing to insure maximum seedling survival
Riparian Buffer - Well- drained Floodplain
The target community to be planted in the riparian buffer and well - drained floodplain zone most
closely resembles a Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest as described in Schafale and Weakley
(1990) While this forest community is the desired endpoint of succession for the riparian buffer,
the current site conditions do not permit the establishment of some of the species common in
this community, which require partial sun to full shade in order to thrive The majority of the site
is south - facing with complete exposure to the sun Therefore, it would be impractical to plant
species which require shade or partial shade Species in this community which are fairly hardy,
and can tolerate sunny conditions have been chosen, such as red oak ( Quercus rubra)
Bare root material will be used Planting a mixture of the species listed below will best reflect the
character of riparian buffer vegetation typically found along small piedmont streams Actual
species used will be based on availability at time of planting, but will come from the following
list
Common Name
Scientific Name
Red maple
Acer rubrum
Redbud
Cercis canadensis
Tulip poplar
Linodendron tulipifera
White oak
Quercus alba
Persimmon
Diospora virginia
American beautyberry
Calicarpa Amencana
47
F _'

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
In addition to the species listed above, the riparian buffer zone will also be planted with a
Riparian Buffer mix that includes a mixture of herbaceous perennials and warm - season grasses
including black -eyed Susan (Rudbeckia hirta), Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans), big bluestem
(Andropogon gerardn), little bluestem (Schizachynum scopanum), and switchgrass (Panicum
virgatum)
Areas outside the proposed buffer that are currently vegetated with native trees or shrubs will
remain undisturbed where possible and succession allowed to proceed naturally It is not
anticipated that any tree removal will be required for this project
Woody vegetation will be planted between November and March to allow plants to stabilize
during the dormant period and set roots during the spring season A minimum of 680 stems per
acre will be planted in the buffer that is currently agricultural field and devoid of trees
The primary invasive species found on the project site in great numbers is Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinese) This species is growing in the riparian area of Tributary 1 B, which comprises
the downstream thousand feet of Tributary 1 This species will be removed to enhance the
forested riparian corridor along Tributary 1 and to prevent the invasion of the restored riparian
area following construction
7.3 DATA ANALYSIS
7.3.1 Sediment Transport Analysis
A stable stream has the capacity to move its sediment load without aggradmg or degrading, and
the competence to move the largest size particle produced by the watershed Stream
competence and capacity was evaluated on existing channels to document baseline conditions,
and on proposed channels to evaluate stability of proposed design Details of this analysis can
be found in Appendix C
Competence
The ability of the tributaries to move the size of particle delivered from their watersheds was
evaluated using critical shear stress equations The resultant estimate of shear stress was then
used with the Shields relation, modified by Rosgen (2006), to estimate the largest particle that
could be moved by the channel at bankfull stage Based on this, each of the design reaches
possesses sufficient competence to move the largest measured particle The dimension of
Tributary 1A cross - section has been adjusted to match sediment transport competence so that
the channel neither aggrades nor degrades As discussed earlier, Tributaries 3 and 4 are
supply - limited due to upstream impoundments, thus bed material will be placed into the
channels with a size range that exceeds the moveable particle size at bankfull and the 10 -year
peak flows, to protect the bed of the channel A copy of the analysis is included in Appendix C
Capacity
Sediment transport capacity of the three impaired reaches was evaluated using the
POWERSED model For the use of the POWERSED model in this analysis, the goal was
twofold 1) compare existing cross - sections of the impaired reach with stable sections thus
indicating any trends of aggradation or degradation and 2) mimic the relationship between unit
stream power vs stage at the stable reference sections to design the proposed channel
dimension Details of this analysis can be found in Appendix C
48

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
It should be noted that the POWERSED model was used in this design to compare the relative
sediment transport capacity of an impaired reach with a stable section An absolute estimate of
mass of sediment transported was beyond the scope of this effort, as this would require
intensive collection of suspended and bedload sediment at various flows, including bankfull
Results of the POWERSED analysis show that the existing channels possess excess channel
' capacity which suggests that the channels will have a tendency to degrade over time The
proposed sections, particularly for Tributary 1A have been designed to mimic the relationship of
unit stream power to discharge experienced in the reference stable sections upstream of the
project channels and should transport the volume of sediment without aggradmg or degrading
Details of this analysis can be found in Appendix C
7.3.2 FEMA Floodplain Issues and Hydrological Trespass
A HEC -RAS analysis was performed on the three project tributaries after completion of an initial
design of stream plan, profile and cross - section The analysis was performed to answer two key
questions
1) Will the restored channel cause any increase or decrease in flooding on the property
outside the easement boundary, or neighboring properties, thereby causing hydrological
trespass, and
2) Will the restored channel affect a FEMA - regulated Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)
through an increase in water surface elevations during the 100 year flood event?
None of the project reaches where channel modifications are being performed are within a
designated FEMA- mapped flood zone The last 320 feet of Tributary 1B lies within the Class A
SFHA of Wicker Branch, but no channel modifications will be conducted nor will fill be placed
within that reach Thus, FEMA regulatory requirements are not applicable to this project and no
analysis of increases to the FEMA Base Flood Elevation is required The EEP FEMA checklist is
included in Appendix B
A HEC -RAS analysis was performed to ensure that the project would not increase flooding to
neighboring properties, particularly since the channel bed on one reach (Tributary 1A) is being
raised to conduct a Priority I Restoration Existing and proposed HEC -RAS models were
created to analyze changes in water surface elevations for the 5 -, 10 -, 50 -, and 100 -year
recurrence intervals calculated from a Rural Discharges curve (USGS, 2002) and Mannings "n"
values appropriate for the boundary conditions of the existing channel and floodplain The
proposed model used a modified cross section showing the proposed channel and floodplain as
it would appear after final grading
The proposed model shows that the proposed channel of Tributary 1A will increase flooding by
a maximum of 1' due to raising of the channel to conduct Priority I Restoration, but maintains
flooding within the area of the conservation easement during the 5, 10, 50 and 100 year events,
thereby helping to restore a natural hydrologic regime within the new floodplain The proposed
model for Tributary 3 shows that our proposed channel alignment and geometry will result in a
maximum increase of water surface elevation 0 6', but also maintains the 5, 10, 50, and 100
year events within the conservation easement Only minor channel alterations will be performed
on Tributary 4 As a result, the proposed HEC -RAS model for Tributary 4 results in no change in
water surface elevations occur at the 5, 10, 50, or 100 year events when compared to the
existing conditions
49

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
As a result of the HEC -RAS analysis of the existing versus proposed channels, no hydrologic
trespass is expected from the restoration conducted as part of the project A summary of the
HEC -RAS analysis is included in Appendix C
8.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
NCEEP shall monitor the site on a regular basis and shall conduct a physical inspection of the i
site a minimum of once per year throughout the post - construction monitoring period until -
performance standards are met These site inspections may identify site components and
features that require routine maintenance Routine maintenance should be expected most often
in the first two years following site construction and may include the following
Table 11. Maintenance Requirements
Component/
Maintenance through project close -out
Feature
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in- stream
structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and supplemental installations
Stream
of live stakes and other target vegetation along the channel Areas where stormwater and
floodplain flows intercept the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank
failures and head - cutting
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental
planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing Exotic invasive plant species shall be controlled
Vegetation
by mechanical and /or chemical methods Any vegetation control requiring herbicide
application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA)
rules and regulations
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site Boundary
bollard, post, tree- blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and /or
conservation easement Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and /or replaced on an as needed basis
Utility Right -of-
Utility rights -of -way within the site may be maintained only as allowed by Conservation
Way
Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements
Ford crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by Conservation
Ford Crossing
Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements
Road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by Conservation
Road Crossing
Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements
Stormwater
Storm water management devices will be monitored and maintained per the protocols and
Management
procedures defined by the NC Division of Water Quality Storm Water Best Management
Device
Practices Manual
it
I�
§ I
li
r j
9.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The following section outlines the performance standards for the proposed mitigation The
performance standards are consistent with the requirements described in Federal rule for
t,
50
F

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 Navigation
and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332 5 paragraphs (a) and (b)
9.1 STREAMS
The dimension, pattern, and profile of the stream should show no radical change during the 5-
year monitoring period To determine the presence, magnitude and extent of any changes, the
longitudinal profile and cross - sections will be re- surveyed annually Cross - sections of
successive monitoring years will be overlaid to verify no significant change in the dimension
` from year to year Similarly, the longitudinal profiles will be overlaid to confirm a stable bed
` profile, i e riffle -pool spacing should remain fairly constant and there should be a general lack of
aggradation and degradation
The criteria for hydrological success will be as follows:
• The restored stream is able to access its floodplain on a regular basis
• Stream dimension and longitudinal profile will remain relatively stable with only minor
adjustment or changes between annual measurements
• The restored stream does not deviate from the ranges of dimensionless ratios acquired
from a reference reach and used to design the restored stream
9.2 VEGETATION
Success will be determined by survival of target species within the sample plots A minimum of
260 planted stems /acre must survive for at least five years after initial planting At least six
different representative tree and shrub species should be present on the entire site If the
vegetative success criteria are not met, the cause of failure will be determined and an
appropriate corrective action will be taken
The criteria for vegetative success will be as follows:
• A minimum survival rate of 320 planted trees per acre in the riparian buffer at the end of
3 years
• A minimum survival rate of 260 planted trees per acre in the conservation easement at
the end of 5 years
• The species composition in the riparian buffer meets the diversity criteria established at
the beginning of the project
10.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The monitoring report will follow the most recent EEP guidelines at the time monitoring is
initiated The report will discuss the current years' results and will include a discussion of any
changes that have occurred on the mitigation site The relative significance of these changes
will be discussed in detail and a maintenance plan will be recommended if applicable The
monitoring report will include the current monitoring year's data overlain on the previous
monitoring years and design data for the plan, profile and cross - section In addition, a photo log
showing successive conditions at established photo points will also be included
51

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auaust 2013
10.1 STREAMS
Monitoring of the stability of the channel will occur after the first growing season and will
continue annually for a period of 5 years or until two bankfull events have been documented
Bankfull events must be documented during separate monitoring years
10.2 VEGETATION
Monitoring of vegetation will follow protocols established in the most recent version of the
Carolina Vegetative Survey -EEP Protocol Sample plot distribution will be correlated with the
hydrological monitoring locations to help correlate data between vegetation and hydrology
parameters
Table 12. Monitoring Requirements
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
/
V
As per April 2003 USACE
Pattern
Wilmington District
biennial
Stream Mitigation
Guidelines
✓
As per April 2003 USACE
Dimension
Wilmington District Stream
annual
Mitigation Guidelines
✓
As per April 2003 USACE
Profile
Wilmington District
annual
Stream Mitigation
Guidelines
✓
As per April 2003 USACE
Substrate
Wilmington District
annual
Stream Mitigation
Guidelines
✓
A Crest Gauge will be
As per April 2003 USACE
installed on site, the device
Surface Water
Wilmington District Stream
annual
will be inspected on a semi -
Hydrology
Mitigation Guidelines
annual basis to document
the occurrence of bankfull
events on the project
✓
Quantity and location of
Vegetation will be monitored
Vegetation
vegetation plots will be
annual
using the Carolina
determined in consultation
Vegetation Survey (CVS)
with EEP
protocols
✓
Exotic and nuisance
Locations of exotic and
vegetation
annual
nuisance vegetation will be
mapped
✓
Locations of fence damage,
Project boundary
Semi-
vegetation damage,
annual
boundary encroachments,
etc will be mapped
52

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
i Auqust 2013
11.0 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for close -out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT) the site will be transferred to
the NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation Stewardship Program
This party shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions
required in the conservation easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld
Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior
to site transfer to the responsible party
The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program
currently houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non - reverting, interest - bearing
Conservation Lands Stewardship Endowment Account The use of funds from the Endowment
Account is governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A- 232(d)(3) Interest gained by
i the endowment fund may be used only for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship
administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable The NCDENR Stewardship Program
intends to manage the account as a non - wasting endowment Only interest generated from the
endowment funds will be used to steward the compensatory mitigation sites Interest funds not
used for those purposes will be re- invested in the Endowment Account to offset losses due to
inflation
12.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
i Upon completion of site construction EEP will implement the post - construction monitoring
protocols previously defined in this document Project maintenance will be performed as
described previously in this document If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined
the site's ability to achieve site performance standards are jeopardized, EEP will notify the
USACE of the need to develop a Plan of Corrective Action The Plan of Corrective Action may
be prepared using in -house technical staff or may require engineering and consulting services
Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized EEP will
1 Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions
2 Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
1 necessary and /or required by the USACE
3 Obtain other permits as necessary
4 Implement the Corrective Action Plan
5 Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions This document shall depict the
extent and nature of the work performed
13.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In -Lieu
Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources has provided the U S Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal
commitment to fund projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP This
commitment provides financial assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the
program
53

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auqust 2013
14.0 OTHER INFORMATION
14.1 DEFINITIONS
Morphological description — the stream type; stream type is determined by quantifying
channel entrenchment, dimension, pattern, profile, and boundary materials; as described in
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition.
Native vegetation community — a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of
plants, animals, bacteria and fungi naturally associated with each other and their population; as
described in Schafale, M.P. and Weakley, A. S. (1990), Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
Project Area - includes all protected lands associated with the mitigation project.
14.2 REFERENCES
Agricultural Research Service (ARS), United States Department of Agriculture. 2010. Revised
Universal Soil Loss Equation 2. Available online at
hftp: / /www.ars.usda.gov /Research /docs.htm ?docid =5971. Accessed 8/13/12.
Bell, H., Butler, R., Howell, D. and Wheele, W. 1974. Geology of the Piedmont and Coastal
Plain Near Pageland, South Carolina and Wadesboro, North Carolina. Guidebook for 1974
Annual Meeting. Carolina Gegoical Scoiety
Dunne, T., and Leopold (1987). Water in environmental planning. Freeman and Company. San
Francisco, CA
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Shafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. (2 sided
color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, VA. Scale 1:1,500,000.
Harrelson, C.C., Rawlins, C.L. & Potyondy, J.P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Technique USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM -245.
Hinton, D.D. (2012) Complexity of Bedload Transport in Gravel Bed Streams: Data Collection,
Prediction, and Analysis. A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University.
NC One Map, 2013. Geospatial Portal. hftp : / /data.nconemap.com /geoportal/
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2009. Lower Yadkin Pee -
Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities. http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /eep /rbrps /vadkin.
Pfankuch, D.J. (1975) Stream Reach Inventory and Channel Stability Evaluation (USDAFS No.
R1 -75 -002, GPO No. 696- 260/200). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa
Springs, CO
54

DRAFT Tnbutanes of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
Rosgen, D (2006) Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply Wildland
Hydrology, Fort Collins, Co
Schafale, M P and Weakley, A S (1990), Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC
Simon, A and Rinaldi ,M (2000), Channel Instability m the Loess Area of the Midwestern
United States Journal of the American Water Resources Association V 35, p 133 -150
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture
2006 Field Indicators of Hydnc Soils in the United States, Version 6 0 G W Hurt and L M
Vasdas (eds ) USDA,NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydnc
Soils
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture
2007 National Engineering Handbook Part 654, Stream Restoration Design
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture
` 2013 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for [Union County, NC] Available online
at http Hsoildatamart nres usda gov Accessed [2/13/2013]
United States Geological Survey (USGS) 2002 Fact Sheet 007 -00 "The National Flood -
Frequency Program- Methods for Estimating Flood Magnitude and Frequency in Rural and
Urban Areas in North Carolina, 2001"
Wolman, G 1954 A Method of Sampling Coarse River -bed Material Transactions, American
Geophysical Union v 35, p 951 -956 U S
55

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
APPENDIX A: SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
Recorded Conservation Easement/Deed Restriction
i'
r

' n s�hAr C&RELL HELDER HELMS & ROBISON, P.A. te,a
R. �o�
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
t
T,6st lw� I59-M
FILED
UNION COUNTY, NC
CRYSTAL CRUMP
REGISTER OF DEEDS
FILED Jul 20, 2012
AT 1147 am
BOOK
START PAG 0199
END PAGE 0208
INSTRUMENT # 21725
EXCISE TAX $189 00
MKH
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
UNION COUNTY
SPO File Number 090 -AM
EEP Number 95022
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Enhancement Project
Prepared by Office of the Attorney General
Pioperty Control Section
Return to NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this 13th day of July, 2012, by
Richard L Simpson and wife, Bonita Mullis Simpson, ( "Grantor "), whose mailing address is
3308 Old Pageland Monroe Rd, Monroe, NC 28112, to the State of North Carolina, ( "Grantee "),
whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of Administration, State Property
Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321 The designations of Grantor and
Grantee as used hememn shall include said parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall
include singular, plural, masculmtme, femmnme, or neuter as required by context
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143 -214.8 et seq., the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly laiown as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Envuonment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the pmotectton and mmprovemnent of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between AECOM Technical
Services of North Carolina, Inc and the North Carolina Department of Envuonment and Natural
i Resoutces, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina
Page 1 of 10

Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and Services Contract Number
003982
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N C Gen. Stat § 121 -35, and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument, and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Buford Township, Union County, North Carolina (the "Property "), and being more
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 102.59 acres as
recorded in Deed Book 1987 at Page 010 of the Union County Registry, North Carolina, and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein
described areas of the Property, thereby restnetmg and limiting the use of the included areas of
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement. This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of several unnamed tributaries of Wrckers Branch
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access
The Easement Area consists of the following-
Easement Areas 1, 2 and 3 containing a total of 15.49 acres as shown on the plats of survey
entitled "Conservation Easement Survey for the State of North Carolina, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, Sheet One of One, Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Enhancement,
SPO 090 -AM" dated October 19, 2011 by T Andrew Sherard, PLS Number L -3344 and
ecor d in the Union County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book_ Pages
Page 2 of 10

i
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes, and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall nun with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees
t
II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
( The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use, of, the Easement Aiea by the Grantor is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, including, but
` not linuted to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived from each site within
�w the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee Without
lumiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
reserved as indicated-
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hikmg, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
educational activities such as site visits and observations Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site
D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited.
Page 3 of 10

E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area,
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area
I. Signs. No signs shall be pennitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
diiectxons, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. Thew shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area No altering or tampering
with crater control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Pioperty owned by the Grantor in fee simple (`fee ")
that is subject to this Easement is allowed Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
property Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement
Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of mAnmited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein
N. Development Rights. All development rights aie permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable
Page 4 of 10

O. Disturbance of Natural Features Any change, disturbance, alteration or impainnent of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and /or animal species by Grantor is prohibited
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, piovzded that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.0 Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Easement Area over the
Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to restore, construct, manage, maintain,
enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other riparian resources in the Easement Area,
in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term management plan Unless otherwise
specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or
establish for the public any access rights
D. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following• desciibe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use Upon any breach of the terns
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach if the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
Page 5 of 10

authority (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
or in violation of this Conservation Easement, (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary
restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief, if the breach is of would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this
Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injuiy or change
in the Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life, or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terns of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any terin set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the -
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any land related to the f
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
Page 6of10

C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest to the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
- signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement The owner of the
Property- shall notify the U S Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
j initiation of any transfer of all of any part of the Property Such notification shall be addressed
to: Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
` the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder -under N C Gen Stat § 121 -34 et seq and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
-� perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document
VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in of pei mit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted, that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever
Page 7 of 10
}

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day i
and year first above written
(SEAL)
Richard L. Sampson
liz
Bonita Mullis Sinipson---[-
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF UNION
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify
that RICHARD L. SITO'IPSON and wife, BONITA MULLIS SIMPSON, Grantors, personally
appeared before ire this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 13th day of
July, 2012
�O a °`oya�esarcwp�p�•.
Emily S. Thonihs, Notary Public '•
My commission expires- 1/26/2014 °•aA�B1 1G •°/�� a
'� •� n'O 4J sa
�iq �� • °moo «lu° �' ° + °a
�•••• �`.'
A•/ 4} M M AA F646Dp
Page 8 of 10
I
I -�
1
I
� I
_ l
9

Exhibit A
All that certain piece, parcel or tract of land situate, lying and being in Union County, State of
North Carolina, and being three new Conservation Easements (variable in width) over, under and
across the lands of Richard Lamar Simpson (Tax Parcel No.04009001) as shown on a plat of
survey entitled "Conservation Easement Survey for the State of North Carolina, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, Sheet One of One, Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Enhancement ",
Dated October 19, 2011 by Site Design, Inc. and according to said plat, having the following
metes and bounds to wit
Easement Area #1
Beginning at an old 5/8" rebar iron pin at a concrete monument located at the Southeastern
corner of said subject property and also at the Joint corner of Larry E. and Lynda Smith Property,
Now or Formerly and Kay M Spittle Property, Now or Fonnerly; thence running with the
common line of Kay M Spittle Property S 86 -02 -44 W 149.29 feet to a point; thence turning and
leaving said Spittle Property and running the following courses and distances. N 00 -43 -10 E
328 24 feet to a point, thence N 04 -50 -08 E 229.71 feet to a point, thence N 0749 -15 E 317 02
feet to a point on the common line of said Smith Property, thence turning and running with the
common line of said Smith property S 17 -49 -37 E 361 10 feet to an old concrete monument;
thence S 02 -49 -13 W 518.11 feet to the point of beginning. The Conservation Easement #1
contains 107,827 Square Feet (2 48 Acres)
Easement Area #2
Commencing at an old 1" open top (bent with nail) located at the eastern corner of said subject
property and at the Joint corner with Judy P Rodgers Property Now or Formerly; thence running
with the common line of said Rodgers Property N 05 -51 -13 E 389 59 feet to a point also being
the point of beginning; thence continuing with the common line of said Rodgers Property N 05-
51-13 E 141 58 feet to a point, thence turning and leaving said Rodgers Property running the
following courses and distances S 55 -07 -45 E 457 85 feet to a point, thence S 29 -02 -29 E
338 21 feet to a point, thence S 12 -11 -42 E 655 14 feet to a point, thence S 86 -02 -44 W 144.81
feet to a point; thence N 11 -47 -41 W 602 10 feet to a point, thence N 27 -42 -57 W 314 39 feet to
a point, thence N 54 -27 -30 W 342 76 feet to the point of beginning The Conservation Easement
#2 contains 184,393 Square Feet (4 23 Acres)
Easement Area #3
Commencing at an old 5/8" rebai beside a concrete monument located at the southern corner of
said subject property and at the Joint corner of Kay M Spittle Pioperty, Now or Formerly, thence
running with the common line of said Spittle property S 50 -44 -07 W 10.08 feet to a point in
Wicker Branch Creek and at the joint corner of Maude Genoa Plyler Parker Property, Now or
Formerly, thence turning and running with the common line of said Parker property N 31 -10 -29
W 65 25 feet to a point and also being the point of beginning Thence continuing with the
Page 9 of 10

r
common line of said Parker Property and also with the common line of Faye Parker & William
Nick Jr. Gusler Property, Now or Formerly N 31 -10 -29 W 121.20 feet to a point; thence turning
and leaving said Gusler property the following courses and distances- N 56 -30 -58 E 287 01 feet
to a point, thence N 27 -39 -32 E 281.69 feet to a point, thence N 16 -37 -25 E 208 88 feet to a
point; thence N 16 -37 -25 E 343 78 feet to a point, thence N 35 -07 -09 E 399 21 feet to a point,
thence N 31 -15 -16 E 247 62 feet to a point; thence N 14 -36 -22 W 190.72 feet to a point, thence
N 37 -12 -33 E 94 36 feet to a point; thence S 13 -44 -11 E 239 13 feet to a point, thence N 46 -14- j
18 E 238.99 feet to a point; thence N 37 -00 -53 E 203 10 feet to a point, thence N 81 -39 -20 E
193 13 feet to a point; thence S 32 -18 -33 W 316.43 feet to a point; thence S 46 -33 -37 W 217 26
feet to a point, thence S 45 -09 -44 W 149.36 feet to a point; thence S 33 -22 -05 W 615 59 feet to a
point; thence S 20 -09 -20 W 567 25 feet to a point; thence S 17 -19 -14 W 143 31 feet to a point,
thence S 44 -26 -21 W 129 96 feet to a point; thence S 59 -11 -42 W 320.00 feet to the point of —
beginning The Conservation Easement #3 contains 382,455 Square Feet (8 78 Acres)
Page 10 of 10
I
l�
i'
_J
�I
� I
"7
I
� J

FILED
UNION COUNTY, NC
CRYSTAL CRUMP
` REGISTER OF DEEDS
FILED Sep 17, 2012
+ AT 09-23 am
BOOK 05825
START PAGE 0617
END PAGE 0618
INSTRUMENT # 29097
EXCISE TAX {None}
AH
CORRECTIVE OR SCRIVENER'S AFFIDAVIT FOR
+ i NOTICE OF TYPOGRAPHICAL OR OTHER MINOR ERROR
PURSUANT TO NCGS 47 -36.1
Prepared by and return to. James Allen Lee
' Caldwell Helder Helms & Robison, PA
The undersigned Affiant, being first duly sworn, hereby swears or affirms that the original
Conservation Easement deed recorded in Deed Book 5780, Page 199, on July 20, 2012 in the
Union County Registry, by Richard L. Simpson and wife, Bonita Mullis Simpson, Grantors, to
State of North Carolina, Grantee, contained the following typographical or other minor errors
I WI]EREAS, the original conservation easement deed describes the conservation easement
area as follows
Easement Areas 1, 2 and 3 containing a total of 15.49 acres as shown on the plats of survey
entitled "Conservation Easement Survey for the State of North Carolina, Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, Sheet One of One, Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Enhancement, SPO 090 -AM"
dated October 19, 2011 by T Andrew Sherard, PLS Number L -3344 and recorded in the Union
i County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book L, Page 704.
WHEREAS, the original conservation easement deed should have described the
i conservation easement area as
Easement Areas 1. 2 and 3 containing a total of 15.49 acres as shown on the plats of survey
entitled "Conservation Easement Survey for the State of North Carolina, Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, Sheet One of One, Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Enhancement, SPO 090 -AM"
dated October 19, 2011, last revised on May 22, 2012 by T Andrew Sherard, PLS Number L-
3344 and recorded in the Union County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book L, Page
704.
Through mistake or inadvertence, this conservation easement deed erroneously left out the
revision date of the survey
Affiant makes this Affidavit for the purpose of correcting the above - described errors in the
conservation easement deed as referenced in the first paragraph above

Affrant is knowledgeable of the agreement and the intention of the parties in this regard.
Affiant is (check one)
Drafter of the original instrument being corrected
X Closing attorney for transaction involving instrument being corrected.
Attorney for Grantor/Mortgagor named above in instrument being corrected
Attorney for the Owner of the property described in instrument being corrected
Other (Explain )
A copy of the first page of the original instrument is attached
Ja es Allen Lee, Closing Attorney
aldwell Helder Helms & Robison, PA
Union County
North Carolina
I certify that JAMES ALLEN LEE personally appeared before me this day,
acknowledging to me that he originally prepared the foregoing SCRIVENEWS AFFIDAVIT
document-
Date Z
(Official Seal)
e�'4b�y49A8A � Tf y,tat9
eee p900Y9Q
b
O b
� rw
&-Yt� �- A(11(�
Emily S Th nnas, Notary Public
My commission expires 1/26/2014

r
1
DRAFT
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
APPENDIX B: BASELINE INFORMATION DATA
- USACE Routine Wetland Determination Forms
NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form
FEMA Compliance - EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
ProtecuSite Wicker's Branch Tributaries EEPcity /County Union Sampling Date 8 -16 -11
Applicant/Owner AECOM —NCEEP State NC Sampling Point KB -7 wet
Investigator(s) AECOM-K Lapp, J Cassada Section, Township, Range
Landfonn (hillslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Let 34 896386 Long —80 446044 Datum wrS —R4
Soil Map Unit Name CmB — Cid channery silt loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation , Sod x or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No x
Are Vegetation , Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes x No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks
Area is an active soybean field.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
x Saturation (A3)
x Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations*
Surface Water Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches) surface
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point KB -7 wet
= Total Cover
or on a separate
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 1
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant 1
2
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100 (y8)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of MultlplV by
OBL species x 1 =
8
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x4=
UPL species X5=
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2
3
4
5
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
—
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
g
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
—
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporhng
= Total Cover
— data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Typha latifolia
15% OBL
—
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2 Leersia oryzoides 70% x OBL
3 Carex sp 15 o
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb – All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
11
12
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size
)
height
1
Hydrophytic
2
3
4
5
Vegetation
6
Present? Yes x No
= Total Cover
or on a separate
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point KB -7 wet
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0 -5 2 5Y 5/3 loam
5 -12+ 2.5Y 6/2 5YR 5/8 20% c PL clay
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
x Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed).
TVDe
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No
Area is in small floodplain of stream that gets frequent sediment input from
surrounding agricultural fields.
i
- I
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Wicker's Branch Tributaries EEP City/County Union Sampling Date 8-16 -11
ApplicanttOwner AECOM —NCEEP State NC Sampling Point KB -7 up
Investigator(s) AECOM -K Lapp, J Cassada Section, Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Let 34 896386 Long —80 446044 Datum WGS -84
Sod Map UmtName CmB — Cid channery silt loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation Soil x Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No x
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
x
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes No x
within a Wetland? Yes No x
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
Remarks
Area is an active soybean field.
HYDROLOGY
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version
I
I
1
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aqwtard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (05)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version
I
I
1

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point KB-7 up
= Total Cover
or on a separate
Data point is completely within a soybean field.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet-
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x 1 =
8
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x4=
UPL species X5=
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2
3
4
5
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
g
_
3 - Prevalence Index is s3 0'
10
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
1 Soybeans CIlZrine max
100% X NI
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
2
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
11
12
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size
)
height
1
Hydrophytic
2
3
4
5
Vegetation x
6
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
or on a separate
Data point is completely within a soybean field.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point KB -7 up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type, Loc
Texture Remarks
0 -4 10YR 4/3
gravelly loam
4 -5 2 5Y 7/4
2 5Y 6/6 20% C PL
clay loam
5+
rock
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM=
Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
ZLocation PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydnc Sod Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Sods'
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MIR4136, 122)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type rock
„
Depth (inches) 5
"
Hydric Sod Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Wicker's Branch Tributaries EEPCity/County Union SamplmgDate 8 -16 -11
Applicant/Owner AECOM —NCEEP State NC Sampling Point KA -14 wet
Investigator(s) AECOM -K Lapp, J Cassada Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Let 34.895569 Long —80 4496 Datum WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name CmB — Cid channery silt loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation Soil x_, or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes _x No within a Wetland? Yes No x
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks
Area is an active soybean field
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aqudard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAG- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Descnbe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitonng well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point KA -14 wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 1
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant 1
2
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
10 0
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x 1 =
8
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACW species x2=
o
1
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x4=
UPL species x5=
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2
3
4
5
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is s3 0'
10
—
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Juncus effusus 10% FACW +
—
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
2 Leersia oryzoides 85% x OBL
3 Cyperus sp 5 0
,
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb – All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
height
1
Hydrophytic
2
3
4
5
Vegetation
5
Present? Yes X No
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point KA -14 wet
Profile Description
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
(inches) Color (moist)
% Color (moist) % Tyne Loc
Texture Remarks
0 -6 2.5Y
5/3
7.5YR 4/4 10% C PL
clay loam
6 -12+ 2 5Y
7/6
2.5Y 5/6 40% C PL
clay
Hydric Sod Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (At)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_,x Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Sod Present? Yes x No
Area is in small floodplain of stream that gets frequent sediment input from
surrounding ag fields an disturbance from tractor crossings
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
i
i
I
i
I

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Wicker's Branch Tributaries EEP City/County Union SamplmgDate 8-16 -11
Applicant/Owner AECOM –NCEEP State NC Sampling Point KA -14 up
Investigator(s) AECOM -K Lapp, J Cassada Section, Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Let 34.895569 Long –80.4496 Datum WGS 84
Sod Map Unit Name CmB – Ci.d channery silt loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain In Remarks )
Are Vegetation Sod, or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No x
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
x
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes No x within a Wetland? Yes No x
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
Remarks
Area is an active soybean field
HYDROLOGY
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version
I
i
,I
1
i
t
li
F�
i
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
—. FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aenal photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version
I
i
,I
1
i
t
li
F�
i

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point KA -14 up
Data point is completely within a soybean field
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet,
-
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
2
--
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
5
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x 1 =
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACW species x2=
—
1
FAC species x3=
2
FACU species x4=
3
UPL species X5=
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
f
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
7
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
i
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_ .
— 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3 0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
9
10
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
1 Soybeans G1 VcinP max 100% X NI
2
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
3
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
6
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
_
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
g
10
_
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
11
12
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
1
2
3
i '
4
'
'
Hydrophytic
Vegetation x
5
6
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
- -
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Data point is completely within a soybean field
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point KA -14 up
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0 -5 2.5Y 5/4 clay loam
5+ rock
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (1`19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (177)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophybc vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type rock
Depth (inches) 5
x
Hydric Sod Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
I
I
a
I
I
i
1
I
I
I
J
i
4

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date. :2 /11 f 0 Project y� j i C Ke r �3 R„n ch Latitude.
Evaluator 6 D R _ Site �; 6 afia.r 3 .V Ct— Longitude
Total Points: other
Stream is at least intermittent '� County i
If a 19 or perennial if 2 30 e g Quad Name
A Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1e Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
C
2 Sinuosity
0
1
2
3
3 In- channel structure riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
0
1
2
3
5 Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
15
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
3
7 Braided channel
0
2
3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
3
98 Natural levees
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 SAV = 2 0, ther = 0
1
2
3
10 Headcuts
0
1
<-jD
3
11 Grade controls
0
0 5
1
1 5
12 Natural valley or drainageway
0
05
1
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
No = 0
Yes = 3
- Man -made ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
R Hvdrolnav (Suhtntal = 1
14 Groundwater flow /discharge
0
1
1
3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0
1
2
0
16 Leafhtter
1 5
1
05
0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
0
05
1
15
19 Hydnc sods (redoximorphic features) present?
No = 0
es = 1 5
r Rinloav (Suhtntal = 1
20 Fibrous roots in channel
2
1
0
21 Rooted plants in channel
3
2
1
0
22 Crayfish
0
_
1
15
23 Bivalves
0
1
2
3
24 Fish
0
05
1
15
25 Amphibians
rljp
05
1
15
26 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
05
1
15
27 Filamentous algae, penphyton
0
2
3
28 Iron oxidizing bacteria /fungus
05
1
15
29 Wetland plants in streambed
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 SAV = 2 0, ther = 0
- Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Sketch
Notes (use back side of this form for additional notes )

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form; Version 3 1
Date 2 %1 .067
Evaluator. r3rr Pi 2
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 2 7
if 2 19 or perennial if 2 30
Project
Site 7-r16arar
County ifh /Oil.
ch Latitude
Longitude
Other
e g Quad Name.
A Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity
0
2
3
3 In- channel structure nffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4 Sod texture or stream substrate sorting
0
1
2
1 1 5
5 Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7 Braided channel
0
1
2
3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
0
05
2
3
9 B Natural levees
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 SAV = 2 0, O er = 0
1
2
3
10 Headcuts
0
2
3
11 Grade controls
0
0 5
1
15
12 Natural valley or drainageway
0
05
1
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
No = 0
Yes = 3
`Man -made ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 1
14 Groundwater flow /discharge
0
2
2
3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0
1
2
V.J
16 Leafhtter
15
05
0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
0
0 5
1
1 1 5
19 Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present?
No = 0
C<Yes = 1 5
C Bioloav (Subtotal = 1
20 Fibrous roots in channel
2
1
0
21 Rooted plants in channel
1
0
22 Crayfish
1
1 5
23 Bivalves
0
1
2
3
24 Fish
0
05
1
1 5
25 Amphibians
05
1
15
26 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
05
1
15
27 Filamentous algae, penphyton
0
<20
2
3
28 Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus
0
05
1
29 F Wetland plants in streambed
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 SAV = 2 0, O er = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Sketch
Notes (use back side of this form for additional notes )

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date Z / 9 C) Project Wicko-r Rran61, Latitude
Evaluator (JMD Cr Slte. T-rihit-toril 3 Longitude.
Total Points: I Other
Stream is at feast intermittent LJ Q ( County. / r '
if? 19 or perennial if 2 30 I J o /L, e g Quad Name
A Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
V Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity
0
1
2
3
3 In- channel structure riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
1 5
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
0
1
2
3
5 Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
1 5
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7 Braided channel
0
1
2
3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
98 Natural levees
0
1
2
3
10 Headcuts
0
1
2
11 Grade controls
0
05
0 5
1
1
1 5
KnD
12 Natural valley or drainageway
0
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
No = 0
Yes = 3
- Man -made ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 1
14 Groundwater flow /discharge
0
1
2
0
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
0
1
2
0
16 Leaflitter
C1
1
05
0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
0
1
1
1 5
18 Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
0
05
1
15
19 Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present9
No = 0
e& —es--- 1
C Bioloav (Subtotal = )
20 Fibrous roots in channel
3
2
1
0
21 Rooted plants in channel
3
2
1
0
22 Crayfish
0
05
1
1 5
23 Bivalves
0
1
2
3
24 Fish
05
1
1 5
25 Amphibians
05
1
1 5
26 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
05
1
1 5
27 Filamentous algae, periphyton
0
1
2
3
28 Iron oxidizing bacteria /fungus
0
05
1
29 Wetland plants in streambed
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 SAV = 2 0, er = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Sketch
Notes (use backside of this form for additional notes)

North Carolina Division of Water Quality — Stream Identification Form; Version 31
Date. Z! Q !0 Project K Ker. R/^ Latitude:
Evaluator 8MD J' Site. 7-rt6vtar Longitude
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent , County. v 1.7 v� e y Quad Name
Il a 19 or perennial it a 30 /
A Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
0
2 Sinuosity
0
1
2
3
3 In- channel structure riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
0
1
1
3
5 Active /relic floodplain
0
es = 1 5
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
05
2
3
7 Braided channel
0
1
2
3
8 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
<D
3
98 Natural levees
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 15 SAV = 2 0, her = 0
1
2
3
10 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
11 Grade controls
05
1
15
12 Natural valley or drainageway
0
0 5
1
13 Second or greater order channel on existinq
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence
(10 = 0
Yes = 3
"Man -made ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
R Hvdrnlnnv tSuhtntal = 1
14 Groundwater flow /discharge
0
1
CD
3
15 Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- dry or growng season
0
1
2
0
16 Leaflitter
1 5
1
05
0
17 Sediment on plants or debris
05
1
15
18 Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines)
0
05
1
5
1
19 Hydnc soils (redoximorphic features) presents
No = 0
es = 1 5
C Rinlnnv (Siihtntal = 1
20 Fibrous roots in channel
3
2
1
0
21 b Rooted plants in channel
3
2
1
0
22 Crayfish
05
1
15
23 Bivalves
1
2
3
24 Fish
co
05
1
15
25 Amphibians
05
1
15
26 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
CD
05
1
15
27 Filamentous algae, penphyton
0
1
<=2
3
28 Iron oxidizing bacteria /fungus
0
05
1
29 Wetland plants in streambed
FAC = 0 5, FACW = 0 75, OBL = 15 SAV = 2 0, her = 0
" Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Sketch
Notes (use back side of this form for additional notes )

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
•
art
1: General Project Information
Project Name:
The Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration Project
County Name:
Union
EEP Number:
95022
Project Sponsor:
AECOM
Project Contact Name:
Bryan Dick
Project Contact Address:
701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475, Raleigh, NC 27607
Project Contact E -mail:
bryan.dick @aecom.com
EEP Project Mana er: Guy Pearce, PG
Project Description
The Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration Project, located in Union County, NC involves the restoration of three perennial
unnamed tributaries to Wicker Branch ( -4,370 In. H.), the enhancement of one intermittent tributary to Wicker Branch (330 In. ft.), and the
restoration of 1 acre of riparian wetland. The project is located in the Yadkin River Basin, USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040105, and 14 digit HUC
03040105061010, which is an EEP Targeted Watershed. The project is also located within the watershed of a 303d- listed stream, Lanes
Creek, as Wicker Branch flows into Lanes Creek approximately three miles downstream of the project site. This watershed is also classified as
a Water Supply Watershed.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
5- ) - I Z
Date t5p Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date r Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8/18/05
J

Part 2: All Projects
Response
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
❑� No
2. Does the project involve ground- disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
❑ N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
✓❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning /land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑✓ No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
0 No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
SHPO concurs that the project does not affect historic properties- see attached letter.
✓❑ No
❑ N/A
3. if iiru of euis are adverse, have ihey been resuiveci %
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Z] N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
✓❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
El Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
❑✓ Yes
• prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
• what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question ..
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians? ❑✓ No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Z] N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
❑ Yes
0 No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
0 N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑ Yes
0 No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Z] N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and /or Designated Critical Habitat
❑✓ Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
❑✓
Yes
❑
No
❑
N/A
3. Are T &E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑
Yes
Habitat?
0
No
❑
N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect' the species and /or "likely to adversely modify"
❑
Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
❑
No
❑✓
N/A
5. Does the USFWS /NOAA- Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
❑
Yes
❑
No
0
N/A
6. Has the USFWS /NOAA- Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination?
❑
Yes
❑
No
N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
❑ Yes
by the EBCI?
❑ No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
✓ N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired?
Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
❑✓ Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD -1006 been submitted to NRCS?
❑✓ Yes
See attached response from NRCS.
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control /modify any
❑✓ Yes
water body?
❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
❑✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
✓ No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓ N/A
Ma nuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH- protected species?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓ N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA- Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
❑ Yes
[Z] No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Z] N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
❑ Yes
[Z] No
2. Has a special use permit and /or easement been obtained from the maintaining
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

rN_
,F�cos -X5 tem
L,II zal �elnent
PROGRAM
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the Foodplain requirements during the design phase
of the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator
with three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping
Unit (attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project:
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Restoration
Name of stream or feature:
Wickers Branch
County:
Union County
Name of river basin:
Yadkin River
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality /county:
Union County, North Carolina
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
3710546000J
Consultant name:
AECOM
Phone number:
919 - 854 -6200
Address:
701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475
Raleigh, NC 27607
04 FEMA_ Floodplain _Checklist6- 4- 2012.docx Pagel of 4

Design Information
The project site consists of four stream channels that currently flow through agricultural
land and are devoid of riparian vegetation Past and present agricultural use of the land
has severely impacted and degraded the channels Farm equipment driven through the
channels has created instability in bedform and loss of channel definition in several
locations The proposed work on this site is to restore and/or enhance three of the four
channels Tributary 1 will undergo Restoration in its upper portion by returning it to a
stable pattern, dimension, and profile based upon reference reach criteria The lower
portion of Tributary 1 will be preserved and will undergo removal of exotic and invasive
vegetation Enhancement Level I activities on Tributary 3 will returned the channel to a
proper dimension and profile Tributary 4 will undergo Enhancement Level II activities
including the establishment of grade control Riparian buffers will be added to all
reaches to assist with uplift to the ecological functions Tributary 2, an intermittent
channel will be preserved with a buffer but no mitigation credit is currently being
proposed
Reach
Length
Priority
Tributary 1
1393ft
1 Restoration
Tributary 1B
1095ft
2 Preservation
Tributary 2*
330ft
No miti anon
01,
Tributary 3
1184ft
3 Enhancement Level
Tributary 4
631 ft
3 Enhancement Level
*Per comments received during a site visit with USACE in August, 2011, this tributary is not suitable for
mitigation, but will still be protected with a vegetated buffer of a reduced width (30 ft) in order to protect
the integrity of channel restoration efforts on Tributary 1
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
C Yes E No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined
r— Redelmeation
r Detailed Study
t— Limited Detail Study
r— Approximate Study
r— Don't know
List flood zone designation
04 FEMA_Floodplam_Checklist6 -4 -2012 docx Page 2 of 4

i
ii
ii
,
,
Check if applies
F AE Zone
Floodway
Non - Encroachment
E None
r A Zone
Local Setbacks Required
No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway /non-
encroachment/setbacks9
C Yes E No
Land Acquisition (Check)
F State owned (fee suple)
F Conservation easment (Design Bid Bind)
P Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note if the project property is state - owned, then all requirements should be addressed to
the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn Herbert Neily,
(919) 807 -4101)
Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
E Yes E No
Note if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP (attn State NFIP Engineer, (919) 715 -8000)
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator Mr. Lee Jenson
Phone Number 704 - 283 -3605
it
04 FEMA Floodplam_Checklist6 -4 -2012 docx Page 3 of 4
J

Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer /applicant following verification with the LFPA
1e No Action
r' No Rise
r Letter of Map Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
F Other Requirements
List other requirements
Comments-
No areas of construction are located in FEMA SFHA
Name ak-YA& Tai.e-k
Title P/l AMA 4469,
Signature /v, /x/. 064�v�
Date- x/'271/2
FEMA_Floodplam_Checklist6 -4 -2012 docx Page 4 of 4

DRAFT Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
August 2013
APPENDIX C: MITIGATION WORK PLAN DATA AND ANALYSES
Channel Morphology Data
Morphology Table
Cross - Sections
I
Longitudinal Profiles
Pebble Counts
Cross- Section Summaries
Bankfull Velocity Discharge Estimates
HEC -RAS Analysis
Sediment Transport Analysis

Parameter
Existing Tnb IA to
Wrckers Branch
Existing Tnb 3 to Wickers
Branch
Existing Tnb 4 to Wrckers
Branch
Reference Reach- Spencer
Creek
Reference Reach UT4
Rockwell Pastures
Proposed Trrb 1 to Wrckers
Branch
Proposed Trrb 3 & 4 to Wrckers
Branch*
Stream Type
Drama a Area (s mi)
G4l134c
B6c
E6 **
C4
C4
E4
C4
0 14
0 OS
0 05
05
011
01
005
Dimension
Min
Max
Avg
Min
Max
Avg
Min
Max
Avg
Min
Max
Avg
Min
Max
Avg
Min
Max
Avg
Mtn
Max
Av
BF Width (ft)
327
390
358
255
266
261
290
366
328
1230
7.30
400
360
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft')
1 52
1 99
174
040
063
052
083
1 13
098
1080
420
150
108
BF Mean Depth (ft)
043
061
050
0 15
025
020
023
039
031
088
060
038
030
BF Max Depth (ft)
054
1 10
076
038
045
042
038
065
052
180
1 10
050
060
Width/Depth Ratio
116
141
737
1021
1773
1 1397
744
1 1591
1168
1398
1 1260
1052
1
1200
Entrenchment Ratio
154
188
170
1 36
1 88
162
246
484
365
>2 20
270
>2 20
>2 20
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
394
431
417
283
284
284
326
377
352
1413
577
476
420
Hydraulic radius (ft)
039
047
043
014
022
018
022
015
029
076
076
0.32
026
Bank Height Ratio
221
241
232
224
332
278
1 00
160
1.30
1 10
100
100
100
Pool Area/Riffle Area
N/A
N/A
N/A
117
100
5 7 * **
8 0 * **
Max riffle depth/mean riffle depth
108
1 22
152
1 9
225
208
168
205
190
132
200
Max pool depth/mean riffle depth
1 22
23
176
2 15
1 34
278
1 1 13
1 1 97
1 155
238
1
25
6 5 * **
8 3 * **
Pattern
5
9
7
N/A
24
52
38
120
570
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
7
10
9
440
7
18
13
N /A*
Radius of Curvature (ft)
6
8
7
2
8
5
N/A
5
22
13
5
13
9
5
30
18
N /A*
Meander Wavelength
27
497
181
109
312
189
N/A
54
196
125
1000
1700
1360
18
64
41
N /A*
Meander Width ratio
198
279
239
200
331
265
N/A
1 95
423
309
040
080
060
1 80
450
3 15
N /A*
Meander Length ratio
764
13878
5053
41 68
11938
7224
N/A
439
1593
1016
140
230
190
439
1593
1016
N /A*
Radius of Curvature /Riffle Width (ft)
168
223
196
069
307
188
N/A
1 044
423
1 105
070
1 1 70
120
1 100
1 420
260
1
1 N /A*
Pool Length/Riffle Width
391
7 65
5 53
679
1439
913
360
1009
622
076
194
145
N/A
1 05
375
240
1 11
167
N /A*
ool to Pool Spacing/ Riffle Width
5 50
26 26
l3 08
14 80
3466
2486
546
1570
991
1 06
378
197
240
330
290
350
1475
913
556
16 11
1083
Riffle Length/Riffle Width
190
2075
813
272
858
540
546
11 16
845
030
184
107
N/A
245
11 00
673
444
1444
944
Profile
140
274
198
93
239
178
177
376
238
11 8
33 1
204
Pool length (ft)
N/A
42
150
98
40
60
50
Poolspacing (ft)
197
940
468
386
905
649
179
51 5
325
130
465
242
176
241
208
140
590
1 265
200
1 580
45.3
Riffle length (ft)
68
743
291
7 1
224
141
179
3662
277
37
226
1 131
N/A
98
1 440
269
160
1 520
340
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
0 014
0 027
002
0 011
0 027
0 019
0 008
0 014
00095
0 020
0 036
0 026
0 006
0 049
0 028
0 018
0 029
002
0 018
0 029
002
Pool slope (ft/ft)
0 006
0 017
0 012
0 012
0 013
0 011
0 008
0 009
00085
0 000
0 005
0 003
0 008
0 014
0 010
0 018
0 029
0 024
0 018
0 029
0 024
Run slope (ft/ft)
0 009
0 025
0 018
0 013
0 034
0 023
0 008
0 030
00125
0 028
0 059
0 041
N/A
N/A
N/A
Glide sloe (ft/ft)
000
0 016
0 Oi
0 008
0 020
0 012
00050
1 00460
0 015
0 000
0 012
0 003
N/A
N/A
N/A
Riffle Slope/Avg Water Surface Slope
109
2 11
156
079
1 93
136
089
1 56
106
152
273
197
040
320
180
1 29
209
169
1 29
209
169
Run slope/Avg Water Surface Slope
073
195
141
093
2 43
164
087
333
139
2 12
1 447
311
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pool Slope/Avg Water Surface Slope
047
1 33
094
086
09
079
089
097
094
000
038
023
050
090
060
1 29
1 209
169
1 29
209
169
Glide Slope/Avg Water Surface Slope
050
125
078
—T5 7
1 43
0.86
056
5 11
167
000
091
023
N/A
N/A
N/A
Substrate
25
1 2332
1 1009
004
004
—
_--
86
®_
1270
-5
-
-�-
50 (mm)
84 (mm)
1038
1 443
1 257
006
616
7700
3800
123
108
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft)
1285
1184
629
235
1 N/A
1284
1284
Channel Length (ft)
1293
1184
631
266
N/A
1395
1395
[Valley Slope ( ft/ft)
00113
00138
00132
00116
00164
00135
00087
00122
00095
00139
00173
00132
00132
ate, Surface SIo ( ft/ft)
00080
00177
00128
00100
00176
00140
00090
00090
00090
00132
00156
00139
00119
Smuosity
1
1
1
11
105
11
1 1
i noutary j anti v - i ne rauern to ute cnannet wat not oe anereu i nuurary % umy tmmmat worts consisting or anenng atmension wni De perrormea
** Tributary modifted/channelized in past so application of classification of natural channels may not be applicable
* ** Large, deep pools are proposed for refuse habitat during drought periods to promote ecosystem resiliance

ft
C
O
f0
d)
W
O Ground Points
Wbkf = 3 51
XS 1 (STABLE) TRIB 1A
♦ Bankfull Indicators
Dbkf = 38
♦ Water Surface Points
Abkf = 1 35
Horizontal Distance (ft)
200
180

Z
C
O
f0
d)
W
XS 2 TRIB 1A
O Ground Points ♦ Bankfull Indicators ♦ Water Surface Points
., Wbkf = 3 27 Dbkf = 61 Abkf - 1 99
Horizontal Distance (ft)

C
O
fit
N
W
198
185
XS 3 TRIB 1A
O Ground Points Bankfull Indicators Water Surface Points
Wbkf = 3 56 Dbkf = 43 Abkf = 1 52
Horizontal Distance (ft)
22

Z
C
O
(C
d
W
XS 4 TRIB 1A
O Ground Points ♦ Bankfull Indicators ♦ Water Surface Points
Wbkf - 3 9 Dbkf = 96 Abkf = 1 79
Horizontal Distance (ft)
-- - -- - - I I - - - - � - -
—_j (_ _ -- -- -j

z
C
O
c6
0)
W
O Ground Points
wbkf = 4 22
XS 5 TRIB 1B
♦ Bankfull Indicators
Dbkf = 28
Water Surface Points
Abkf = 1 17
Horizontal Distance (ft)
200
190

C
O
(0
N
W
XS 6 (STABLE) TRIB 1 B
O Ground Points ♦ Bankfull Indicators V Water Surface Points
Wbk£ = 4 93 Dbkf = 35 kbk£ = 1 74
Horizontal Distance (ft)
200
190

Z
C
O
N
N
W
194
188
O Ground Points
Wbkf = 2 66
XS7TRIB3
Bankfull Indicators
Dbkf = 15
V Water Surface Points
Abkf = 4
Horizontal Distance (ft)
9

C
0
m
a�
w
O Ground Points
Wbkf = 2 55
XS8TRIB3
Bankfull Indicators
Dbkf = 25
♦ Water Surface Points
Abkf - 63
Horizontal Distance (ft) .

Z
C
O
f6
O
W
XS 9 (STABLE) TRIB 4
O Ground Points Bankfull Indicators V Water Surface Points
WbYf = 3 66 Dbkf = 23 AbYf = 83
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Z
C
O
f6
N
ni
XS 10 TRIB 4
O Ground Points ♦ Bankfull Indicators ♦ Water Surface Points
Wbhf = 2 9 Dbkf = 39 Abkf = 1 13
Horizontal Distance (ft)
_ Y

W
n
r
L
J
n .-.
O
n },
i Cu
O
W
583
573
1541
TRIBUTARY 1A REPRESENTATIVE LONGITUDINAL
PROFILE
Distance along stream (ft)
• CH
* WS
• BKF
• TOB
0
h
5334

O
Cu
N
W
TRIBUTARY 1B REPRESENTATIVE LONGITUDINAL
PROFILE
m
0 50 100 150
Distance along stream (ft)
• CH
WS
• BKF
• P1
P2
P3
x P4

TRIBUTARY 3 REPRESENTATIVE LONGITUDINAL
PROFILE
5730-- - Co
Co
5725- ' f
C 5720-- °O
571 5 X.
Cu I f
571 0
W
5705--
5700— 00
80
900 950 1000 1050 1100
Distance along stream (ft)
• CH
• WS
• BKF
• TOB
0
X

N
TRIBUTARY 4 REPRESENTATIVE LONGITUDINAL
PROFILE
575 d.
m_
CH
574 ° .
•��_ • U) o WS
C 57
O
co
O 57
W
57
57
200
250 300 350 400
Distance along stream (ft)
• BKF
• TOB
0
X
1

Pebble Count XS 1 (STABLE)
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Sample Name: Pebble Count XS 1 (STABLE)
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
Size (mm)
TOT #
ITEM %
CUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0 - 0.062
18
36.73
36.73
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
36.73
0.125 - 0.25
0
0.00
36.73
0.25 - 0.50
0
0.00
36.73
0.50 - 1.0
5
10.20
46.94
1.0 - 2.0
1
2.04
48.98
2.0 - 4.0
2
4.08
53.06
4.0 - 5.7
10
20.41
73.47
5.7 - 8.0
3
6.12
79.59
8.0 - 11.3
3
6.12
85.71
11.3 - 16.0
3
6.12
91.84
16.0 - 22.6
2
4.08
95.92
22.6 - 32.0
2
4.08
100.00
32 - 45
0
0.00
100.00
45 - 64
0
0.00
100.00
64 - 90,
0
0.00
100.00
90 - 128
0
0.00
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
0.03
D35 (mm)
0.06
D50 (mm)
2.5
D84 (mm)
10.38
D95 (mm)
21.11
D100 (mm)
32
Silt /Clay (%)
36.73
sand (%)
12.25
Gravel ( %)
51.02
Cobble ( %)
0
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0

Pebble Count XS 3
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Sample Name: Pebble Count xS 3
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
Size (mm)
TOT #
ITEM %
CUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0 - 0.062
7
13.21
13.21
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
13.21
0.125 - 0.25
0
0.00
13.21
0.25 - 0.50
1
1.89
15.09
0.50 - 1.0
1
1.89
16.98
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
16.98
2.0 - 4.0
10
18.87
35.85
4.0 - 5.7
3
5.66
41.51
5.7 - 8.0
6
11.32
52.83
8.0 - 11.3
7
13.21
66.04
11.3 - 16.0
5
9.43
75.47
16.0 - 22.6
3
5.66
81.13
22.6 - 32.0
5
9.43
90.57
32 - 45
4
7.55
98.11
45 - 64
1
1.89
100.00
64 - 90
0
0.00
100.00
90 - 128
0
0.00
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
0.74
D35 (mm)
3.91
D50 (mm)
7.42
D84 (mm)
25.46
D95 (mm)
39.64
D100 (mm)
64
Silt /Clay (%)
13.21
Sand ( %)
3.77
Gravel (%)
83.02
Cobble (%)
0
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0

Pebble Count XS 4 (STABLE)
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Sample Name: Pebble Count XS 4 (STABLE)
survey Date: 02/01/2013
Size (mm)
TOT #
ITEM %
CUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0 - 0.062
9
16.07
16.07
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
16.07
0.125 - 0.25
1
1.79
17.86
0.25 - 0.50
0
0.00
17.86
0.50 - 1.0
6
10.71
28.57
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
28.57
2.0 - 4.0
4
7.14
35.71
4.0 - 5.7
4
7.14
42.86
5.7 - 8.0
7
12.50
55.36
8.0 - 11.3
6
10.71
66.07
11.3 - 16.0
6
10.71
76.79
16.0 - 22.6
4
7.14
83.93
22.6 - 32.0
6
10.71
94.64
32 - 45
1
1.79
96.43
45 - 64
2
3.57
100.00
64 - 90
0
0.00
100.00
90 - 128
0
0.00
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
0.06
D35 (mm)
3.8
D50 (mm)
7.01
D84 (mm)
22.66
D95 (mm)
34.61
D100 (mm)
64
Silt /Clay ( %)
16.07
Sand ( %)
12.5
Gravel (%)
71.43
cobble (%)
0
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0

Pebble Count XS 5
00
ao
zo
0
0.01 0.1 1 io ioo 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Sample Name: Pebble Count xS 5
survey Date: 02/01/2013
Size (mm)
TOT #
ITEM %
CUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0 - 0.062
1
1.92
1.92
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
1.92
0.125 - 0.25
0
0.00
1.92
0.25 - 0.50
0
0.00
1.92
0.50 - 1.0
0•
0.00
1.92
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
1.92
2.0 - 4.0
1
1.92
3.85
4.0 - 5.7
3
5.77
9.62
5.7 - 8.0
3
5.77
15.38
8.0 - 11.3
3
5.77
21.15
11.3 - 16.0
4
7.69
28.85
16.0 - 22.6
10
19.23
48.08
22.6 - 32.0
13
25.00
73.08
32 - 45
6
11.54
84.62
45 - 64
6
11.54
96.15
64 - 90
2
3.85
100.00
90 - 128
0
0.00
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
8.35
D35 (mm)
18.11
D50 (mm)
23.32
D84 (mm)
44.3
D95 (mm)
62.1
D100 (mm)
90
silt /clay (%)
1.92
sand (%)
0
Gravel (%)
94.23
Cobble ( %)
3.85
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0

Surface at XS 3
Partide Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name:
Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name:
TRIB 1
Sample Name:
Surface Sample xS 3
Survey Date:
02/11/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SIEVE (mm)
NET WT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
19
27.2
12.5
32.4
9.5
54.3
4.75
104.1
2.36
27.1
1.18
2.2
0.85
0.4
0.425
0.1
PAN
0.6
D16 (mm)
5.37
D35 (mm)
7.76
D50 (mm)
9.68
D84 (mm)
19
D95 (mm)
19
D100 (mm)
19
silt /Clay (%)
0
Sand ( %)
1.01
Gravel ( %)
98.99
Cobble (%)
0
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0
Total weight =
275.4000.
Largest surface
Particles:
Size(mm)
weight
Particle 1:
19 27
Particle 2:

Subpavement at XS 3
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Sample Name: Subpavement xS 3
survey Date: 0211112013
SIEVE (mm) NET WT
25
114.4
19
52.8
12.5
113.2
9.5
150.7
4.75
617.4
2.36
432
1.18
114.5
0.85
18.7
0.6
9.2
0.425
5
PAN
10.3
D16 (mm)
3.01
D35 (mm)
4.86
D50 (mm)
6.85
D84 (mm)
17.73
D95 (mm)
35.28
D100 (mm)
48
Silt /Clay ( %)
0
Sand ( %)
7.56
Gravel M
92.44
Cobble ( %)
0
Boulder ( %)
0
Bedrock M
0
Total weight =
1724.8000.
Largest Surface
Particles:
Size(mm)
weight
Particle 1:
43 54.4
Particle 2:
48 32.2

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
' Reach Name: TRIB 1
Cross section Name: XS 1 (STABLE) TRIB lA
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
i BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
�i
TAPE
----------- FS------------- ELEV NOTE
---- - - - - -- -
----------------------
L 0 5.5 194.5
10 6.36 193.64
20 6.88 193.12
22.6 6.95 193.05
23.4 7.08 192.92 bkf
24 7.28 192.72
i 24.3 7.52 192.48
25 7.7 192.3
25.5 7.66 192.34
25.9 7.62 192.38
26.4 7.4 192.6
27 7.02 192.98
28.4 6.74 193.26
30 6.54 193.46
40 5.82 194.18
48 5.18 194.82
Cross Sectional Geometry
------------------ - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
i
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
slope 0.012 0 0
Shear Stress (lb /sq ft) 0.27
Movable Particle (mm) 58.0
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
193.54
193.54
193.54
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
192.92
192.92
192.92
Floodprone width (ft)
19.19
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
3.51
1.75
1.76
Entrenchment Ratio
5.47
- - - --
- - - --
- Mean Depth (ft)
0.38
0.35
0.41
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.62
0.62
0.61
i width /Depth Ratio
9.24
5
4.29
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.35
0.62
0.73
wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.79
2.5
2.51
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.36
0.25
0.29
Begin BKF Station
23.4
23.4
25.15
- End BKF Station
26.91
25.15
26.91
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
i
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
slope 0.012 0 0
Shear Stress (lb /sq ft) 0.27
Movable Particle (mm) 58.0

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
a
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Cross Section Name: XS 2 TRIB lA
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.68
195.32
10
4.8
195.2
20
4.98
195.02
30
5.28
194.72
40
5.5
194.5
50
5.6
194.4
60
5.74
194.26
67
5.9
194.1
73
6.1
193.9
80.7
6.3
193.7 Not able to identify bankfull
82
6.94
193.06
82.7
7.78
192.22 bkf
83.5
8.12
191.88
83.8
8.88
191.12
84.7
8.62
191.38
85.4
8.52
191.48
86.5
7.1
192.9
88
5.78
194.22
90
5.4
194.6
100
4.64
195.36
110
3.78
196.22
115
3.38
196.62
----------------------------------------------------------------------
cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
193.32
193.32
193.32
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
192.22
192.22
192.22
Floodprone width (ft)
5.51
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
3.27
1.69
1.58
Entrenchment Ratio
1.68
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.61
0.56
0.66
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.1
1.1
0.93
width /Depth Ratio
5.36
3.02
2.39
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.99
0.95
1.04
wetted Perimeter (ft)
4.27
3.23
2.89
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.47
0.29
0.36
Begin BKF Station
82.7
82.7
84.39
End BKF Station
85.97
84.39
85.97
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve

channel
slope 0.013
shear stress (lb /sq ft) 0.38
Movable Particle (mm) 74.8
Left side Right side
0 0

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Cross Section Name: XS 3 TRIB lA
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3.59
196.41
10
4.48
195.52
20
4.99
195.01
30
5.56
194.44
40
6.08
193.92
50
6.59
193.41
60
7.1
192.9
63
7.38
192.62
65.6
7.7
192.3
66.6
8.98
191.02
67.1
9.55
190.45
68.3
9.56
190.44
69.4
9.5
190.5
70.2
9.02
190.98 BKF
72
8.92
191.08
73
8.44
191.56
74.1
8.22
191.78
78
7.95
192.05
84
7.34
192.66
90
6.7
193.3
100
5.72
194.28
110
4.94
195.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
191.52
191.52
191.52
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
190.98
190.98
190.98
Floodprone width (ft)
6.71
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
3.56
2.64
0.92
Entrenchment Ratio
1.88
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.43
0.48
0.27
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.54
0.54
0.49
width /Depth Ratio
8.28
5.5
3.41
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.52
1.27
0.25
wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.94
3.37
1.54
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.39
0.38
0.16
Begin BKF Station
66.64
66.64
69.28
End BKF Station
70.2
69.28
70.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
L Cross Section Name: XS 4 TRIB lA
Survey Date: 03/01/2010
t----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
0
571.337
_ 14.736
0
570.93
' 17.983
0
570.759
_ 19.158
0
570 bkf
19.634
0
569.56
20.493
0
569.472
20.866
0
569.369
21.529
0
569.428
22.562
0
569.504
' 22.825
0
569.849
23.799
0
570.488
24.837
0
570.874
25.259
0
571.001
26.495
0
571.171
33.627
0
571.716
42.444
0
572.19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
570.63
570.63
570.63
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
570
570
570
Floodprone width (ft)
6
- - - --
- - - --
- Bankfull width (ft)
3.9
2.09
1.81
Entrenchment Ratio
1.54
-
Mean Depth (ft)
0.46
0.46
0.45
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.63
0.63
0.6
width /Depth Ratio
8.48
4.54
4.02
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.79
0.97
0.82
wetted Perimeter (ft)
4.31
2.88
2.62
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.42
0.34
0.31
Begin BKF Station
19.16
19.16
21.25
End BKF Station
23.06
21.25
23.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Cross Section Name: XS 5 TRIB 1B
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
6.02
193.98
2
6.42
193.58
3.6
6.36
193.64
4
6.82
193.18 bkf
4.4
7.08
192.92
6
7.12
192.88
7.6
7.16
192.84
8
7.1
192.9
8.6
6.33
193.67
9.4
6.4
193.6
12.4
6.04
193.96
14
5.9
194.1
18
5.99
194.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------7-----------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left Side Right Side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
193.52
193.52
193.52
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
193.18
193.18
193.18
Floodprone width (ft)
4.78
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
4.22
2.11
2.11
Entrenchment Ratio
1.13
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.28
0.25
0.3
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.34
0.3
0.34
width /Depth Ratio
15.07
8.44
7.03
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.17
0.53
0.63
wetted Perimeter (ft)
4.44
2.49
2.55
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.26
0.21
0.25
Begin BKF Station
4
4
6.11
End BKF Station
8.22
6.11
8.22
----------------------7-----------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left Side Right Side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 1
Cross Section Name: xs 6 (STABLE) TRIB 1B
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.84
194.16
4
5.74
194.26
8
5.55
194.45
9.5
5.62
194.38
10.5
6.02
193.98
11
6.18
193.82
12.4
6.35
193.65
13.6
6.46
193.54
14.4
6.5
193.5
14.8
5.92
194.08 bkf
15.6
5.64
194.36
17
5.5
194.5
20
5.53
194.47
24
5.68
194.32
29
5.94
194.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
channel Left side Right Side
slope 0 0 0
Shear stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
194.66
194.66
194.66
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
194.08
194.08
194.08
Floodprone width (ft)
29
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
4.93
2.47
16.28
Entrenchment Ratio
5.88
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.35
0.29
0.41
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.58
0.46
0.58
width /Depth Ratio
14.09
8.52
39.71
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.74
0.73
1.01
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.32
2.99
3.25
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.33
0.24
0.31
Begin BKF Station
10.25
10.25
12.72
End BKF Station
29
12.72
29
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
channel Left side Right Side
slope 0 0 0
Shear stress (lb /sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 3
Cross Section Name: 2013 xs -6
Survey Date: 02/01/2013
------------------ - - - - --
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation:
Channel
100 ft
Backsight Rod
Reading:
100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
7.13
192.87 '
5
7.55
192.45
10
7.82
192.18
15
7.98
192.02 _
20
8.54
191.46
21
8.72
191.28
22
9.4
190.6
22.3
9.6
190.4 BKF
23.3
9.65
190.35 TOS
23.9
9.98
190.02
24.8
9.74
190.26
25.2
9.38
190.62 TOB
25.5
9.06
190.94 -,
26
8.82
191.18
28
8.28
191.72
30
8.22
191.78 _
35
7.9
192.1
40
7.58
192.42
45
7.26
192.74
50
6.76
193.24
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
190.78
190.78
190.78
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
190.4
190.4
190.4
Floodprone width (ft)
3.61
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
2.66
1.39
1.27
Entrenchment Ratio
1.36
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.15
0.06
0.25
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.38
0.26
0.38
width /Depth Ratio
17.73
23.17
5.08
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.4
0.09
0.31 J
wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.83
1.71
1.64 _
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.14
0.05
0.19
Begin BKF Station
22.3
22.3
23.69
End BKF Station
24.96
23.69
24.96
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen
Modified
Shields Curve
Channel
Left Side
Right Side
Slope
0
0
0

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 3
Cross Section Name: xs 8 TRIB 3
Survey Date: 02/04/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.23
194.77
8.3
5.61
194.39
12
6.23
193.77
14
6.71
193.29
14.5
7.38
192.62
15
7.49
192.51
15.3
7.71
192.29
15.7
7.78
192.22
16.2
7.84
192.16 tw
16.5
7.79
192.21
16.7
7.46
192.54
17.1
7.39
192.61 bkf
18.3
7.39
192.61
18.5
7.34
192.66
19.1
6.83
193.17
20
6.63
193.37
25
5.99
194.01
30
5.52
194.48
36
5.34
194.66
39
5.35
194.65
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
193.06
193.06
193.06
' Bankfull Elevation (ft)
192.61
192.61
192.61
Floodprone width (ft)
4.8
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
2.55
1.27
1.28
Entrenchment Ratio
1.88
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.25
0.22
0.27
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.45
0.4
0.45
width /Depth Ratio
10.2
5.77
4.74
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.63
0.28
0.35
wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.84
1.77
1.88
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.22
0.16
0.19
_ Begin BKF Station
14.55
14.55
15.82
End BKF Station
17.1
15.82
17.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Tributaries to wickers
Branch
Reach Name:
TRIB 4
194.26
Cross Section
Name: XS 9 (STABLE) TRIB 4
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
Survey Date:
02/11/2013
193.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section
Data Entry
- - - --
BM Elevation:
100 ft
3.66
Backsight Rod
Reading: 100 ft
Entrenchment Ratio
TAPE
FS ELEV
NOTE -�
I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.36 195.64
0.22
4
5.23 194.77
0.38
7
5.81 194.19
j
8
6.09 193.91
7.63
10
6.1 193.9
0.4
10.6
6.12 193.88
BKF
11.1
6.22 193.78
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
11.4
6.34 193.66
0.19
12.2
6.5 193.5
Tw
13.5
6.4 193.6
14.26
13.9
6.21 193.79
----------------------------------------------------------------------
14.5
6.06 193.94
15
5.9 194.1
16
5.65 194.35
Shields Curve
17
5.62 194.38
Channel
18.5
5.36 194.64
Slope
Cross sectional Geometry
------------------ - - - - --
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
194.26
194.26
194.26
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
193.88
193.88
193.88
Floodprone width (ft)
9
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
3.66
1.83
1.83
Entrenchment Ratio
2.46
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.23
0.22
0.24
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.38
0.38
0.36 _
width /Depth Ratio
15.91
8.32
7.63
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.83
0.4
0.43
wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.77
2.24
2.25
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.22
0.18
0.19
Begin BKF Station
10.6
10.6
12.43
End BKF Station
14.26
12.43
14.26 J
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified
Shields Curve
Channel
Left Side
Right side
Slope
0.011
0
0
Shear Stress (lb /sq ft)
0.15
Movable Particle (mm)
37.8

r RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: Tributaries to wickers Branch
Reach Name: TRIB 4
Cross Section Name: XS 10 TRIB 4
survey Date: 02/01/2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
` BM Elevation:
Channel
100 ft
Right
Backsight Rod
Reading:
100 ft
193.38
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
` 0
5.62
194.38
- - - --
10
6.33
193.67
1.47
15
6.63
193.37
- - - --
18
6.81
193.19
0.35
19
6.78
193.22
0.64
20
6.82
193.18
4.2
21
7.04
192.96
0.51
21.5
7.07
192.93
TOB
22
7.22
192.78
0.23
22.3
7.27
192.73
bkf
22.5
7.58
192.42
TOS
23.7
7.92
192.08
Tw
24.7
7.54
192.46
TOS
25.1
7.32
192.68
TOB
26
6.88
193.12
30
6.52
193.48
35
6.22
193.78
40
5.8
194.2
45
0
200
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left Side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
1 Shear stress (lb /sq-ft)
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
193.38
193.38
193.38
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
192.73
192.73
192.73
- Floodprone width (ft)
14.06
- - - --
- - - --
Bankfull width (ft)
2.9
1.43
1.47
Entrenchment Ratio
4.84
- - - --
- - - --
Mean Depth (ft)
0.39
0.44
0.35
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.65
0.65
0.64
width /Depth Ratio
7.44
3.25
4.2
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.13
0.63
0.51
wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.26
2.29
2.25
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.35
0.27
0.23
Begin BKF Station
22.3
22.3
23.73
End BKF Station
25.2
23.73
25.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left Side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
1 Shear stress (lb /sq-ft)

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
Site
Trib1 XS1
Location
Date
2/11/13
1 Stream Type I
Valley Type
Observers
I
HUC
INPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Cross - sectional 1.35 Abkf
OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Mean DEPTH o 38 7 Db ) f
Bankfull WIDTH
3.51
kf
W>
Wetted PERIMETER
d V
bkf bkf
4.27
Wp (ft)
D84@ Riffle
10.84
Diaj
D84 mm / 304.8 =
0.04
U
Bankfull SLOPE
0.0172
`Sbkf
(ft / ft)
Hydraulic RADIUS
Abkf / W
0.3162
�R
(ft)
Gravitational Acceleration
32,2
9 2
(ft /sec)
Relative Roughness
R (ft) / D84 (ft)
8 89
Drainage AREA
nA _j
Sh ecity
L
0.4185
(ft / sec)
ESTIMATION METHODS
7
BanYYkfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Lo JR / D u*
FactRoughness 9t }
3.43
ft /sec
4.6
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ r
roughness (Figs. 2 -18, 19) u = 1.4865 *R2f3 *S112 /n n = 0.030
3.02
ft /sec
4.1
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S112 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett ( USGS ): n = 0.39S 38R-16 n =1 o.lo
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder- dominated stream systems; i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, 81, B2, B3, C2 and E3.
0.90
ft /sec
1,2
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S112/n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = 0.0325
2.78
ft /sec
3.76
cfs
3. Other Methods H r -W ' h , Chozy C. e
4.04
ft /sec
5,4
cfs
Darcy- Weisbach
h r h H D r - h h
4.2
ft /sec
5.7
cfs
Hey
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = Yr.
ft / S2C
CfS
ft / sec
cfs
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A
Options for using the D.4 term in the relative roughness relation (R/D .4), when using estimation method 1.
Option 1. For sand -bed channels: Measure the "protrusion height" (h6d) of sand dunes above channel bed elevations.
Substitute an average sand dune protrusion height (hsd in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 2. For boulder- dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbo) of boulders above channel bed
elevations. Substitute an ave. boulder protrusion height (hbo in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 3. For bedrock - dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbr) of rock separations /steps /joints/
uplifted surfaces above channel bed elevations. Substitute an average bedrock protrusion height (hbr in feet) for th
D84 term in estimation method 1.
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2 -41

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
I Site ITrib1 XS3 I Location I I
Date 2/11/13 1 Stream Type I Valley Type
Bankfull WIDTH 5.45 )kf Wett2eddPERIMETER 6.17 Wp (ft)
bkf bkf
D84 @ Riffle 25.46 Ulm) D84 mm / 304.8 = 0.08 D>
Bankfull SLOPE 0.0172 `Sbkf Hydraulic RADIUS 0.3193 '-
(ft Abkf / W (ft)
Gravitational Acceleration 32,2 9 2 Relative Roughness 3 82
(ft /sec) R (ft) / D84 (ft)
Drainage AREA _DA] Shearer 4ecity 0.4205 (ft U*
ESTIMATION METHODS
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Log{ R / D. } ]u*
FactoRoughness
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R213 *S1 /2/n in = L0.217
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *Sv2 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett( USGS ): n = 0.39S 38R-'6 n = 0.10 1
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder-dominated stream systems, i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, B1, B2, B3, C2 and E3.
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S1/2/n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = IDM
hrM Darcy-Weisbach, Chezy
Darcy- Weisbach
3. Other Methods h
111-ley
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = I Yr.
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A
Bankfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
2.58
ft / sec
5.1
cfs
2.46
ft �ec
4.8
cfs
0.91
ft / sec
1.8
cfs
2.80
ft /sec
2,92
ft / sec
3.1
ft / sec
ft / sec
ft / sec
5.52 cfs
5.7 cfs
6.1 cfs
cfs
cfs
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 241

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods (Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ D-ISCHARGE Estimates
Site Trib1 B XS6 I Location
Date 2/11/13 1 Stream Type I Valley Type
Observers HUC
INPUT VARIABLES OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Cross - sectional 1.74 Abkf Bankfull Mean DEPTH 0 �b f
Bankfull WIDTH 4.93 W�kf Wet2ed�PERIMETER F5.63 Wp (ft)
bkf bkf
D84 @ Riffle 22.66 Uim) D84 mm / 304.8
Bankfull SLOPE 0.0100 `Sbkf Hydraulic RADIUS 0.3091 RR
(ft / ft) Abkf / w (ft)
Gravitational Acceleration 32.2 g Relative Roughness 4.16
(ft / sec2 ) R (ft ) I D84 (ft)
Drainage AREA � �A ShearTelecity 0.3155 (ftus�)
ESTIMATION METHODS BanYYkfu11 VELOCITY Bankfull
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Lo ff R / D ll u*
� 91 e4 J ] 2.00 ft /sec 3,5 cfs
Factor
Roughness
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor / relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R2/3 *S712 /n n = 0.037 1.84 ft / sec 3.2 cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S1 /2 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett( USGS ): n = 0.39S 38R-.16 n = 0.08 0.83 1 ft / seC 1 1.4 cfs
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder- dominated stream systems, i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, Bt, B2, B3, C2 and E3.
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S1t2 /n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = 0_0325 2.09 ft /sec 3.64 cfs
3. Other Methods He Darcy-Weisbach. Chezy
2.27 ft /sec 3,9 cfs
Darcy- Weisbach
Other M ethods (Hey, Darcy-Weisbach. Chezy C
2.4 ft /sec 4.2
Hey cfs
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A ft / sec cfs
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = = Yr.
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A ft / sec cfs
Options for using the D84 term in the relative roughness relation (R/D84), when using estimation method 1.
Option 1. For sand -bed channels: Measure the "protrusion height" (h,d) of sand dunes above channel bed elevations.
Substitute an average sand dune protrusion height (h,d in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 2. For boulder- dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbo) of boulders above channel bed
elevations. Substitute an ave. boulder protrusion height (hbo in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 3. For bedrock - dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbr) of rock separations /steps /joints/
uplifted surfaces above channel bed elevations. Substitute an average bedrock protrusion height (hbr in feet) for th
D84 term in estimation method 1.
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2 -41

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
Site
T00 XS7
I Location
Date
2/11/13
1 Stream Type I
Valley Type
Observers
HUC
INPUT VARIABLES
OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Cross - sectional
0.63
Abkf
Bankfull Mean DEPTH
0.25
�bk
Bankfull WIDTH
2.55
Wbkf
(ft)
Wetted PERIMETER
2 * dbkf+ Wbkf
3.05
W (ft)
p
D84@ Riffle
0.06
Dial. )
Da4 mm / 304.8 =
0.0002
4
Bankfull SLOPE
0.0120
`Sbkf
Hydraulic RADIUS
Abkf / Wp
0.2066
(ft)
Gravitational Acceleration
32.2
9 2
(ft
Relative Roughness
R (ft) / D64 (ft)
1049.31
Drainage AREA
�A
F77Sh4elecity
0.2825
ESTIMATION METHODS
Bankfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Lo ff R � D u*
� 9l 8a } � 5.63 ft /sec
Roughness
3,5
c
1.7
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R213 *S112 /n n = 2.o205 2.78 ft /sec
0.4
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S112 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett ( USGS ): n = 0.39S 3BR-16 n = 0.09 0.61 ft / sec
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder- dominated stream systems. i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, 131, B2, B3, C2 and E3. j
1.10
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S112 /n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = FO .0325 1.75 ft /sec
4.1
cfs
3. Other Methods Darcy-Weisbach, Chezy
Darcy- Weisbach 6.44 ft /sec
4,1
cfs
3. Other Methods (Hey. Darcy-Weisbach, Chezy .1
Hey 6.6 ft /sec
cfs
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = Yr. ft / sec
cfs
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A ft I sec
Options for using the D84 term in the relative roughness relation (R/D84), when using estimation method 1.
Option 1. For sand -bed channels: Measure the "protrusion height" (hsd) of sand dunes above channel bed elevations.
Substitute an average sand dune protrusion height (hsd in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 2. For boulder- dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (h,) of boulders above channel bed
elevations. Substitute an ave. boulder protrusion height (hbo in ft) for the DB4 term in est. method 1.
Option 3. For bedrock - dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbr) of rock separations /steps /joints/
uplifted surfaces above channel bed elevations. Substitute an average bedrock protrusion height (hbr in feet) for the
D84 term in estimation method 1.
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2 -41

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
Site
Trib3 XS8
Location
Date
2/11/13
1 Stream Type
I
Valley Type
Observers
HUC
INPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Cross - sectional 0.40 plbkf
OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Mean DEPTH 0.15 O(ft) f
Bankfull WIDTH
2.66
bkf
W)
ed PERIMETER
Wetted
bkf bkf
2,96
�
1w::i
D84 @ Riffle
0.06
Ula)
D84 mm / 304.8 =
Fo-oo
Bankfull SLOPE
0.0120
`Sbkf
Hydraulic RADIUS
Abkf / W
0.1351
R
(ft)
Gravitational Acceleration
32,2
( 9 2
ft /sec)
Relative Roughness
R(ft) /D84(ft)
686.49
Drainage AREA
UA
Shear- �ecity
0.2285
(ft ue)
ESTIMATION METHODS
Banrrkfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Lo R / D u*
g{ }
FactRoughness
4.32
ft /sec
1.7
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R2t3 *S1 /2 /n n = O.OZl
2.04
ft /sec
Q,$
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *St /2 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett ( USGS ): n = 0.39S 38R•.16 n = alo
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder-dominated stream systems, i.e., for stream types At, A2,
A3, 131, 82, B3, C2 and E3.
0.43
ft / Sec
p,2
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R213 *S112 /n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = 0.0325
1.32
ft / sec
0.53
cfs
3. hrMethods H r -Wi h h
4.68
ft / sec
1,9
cfs
Darcy - Weisbach
1 3. Other Methods Darcy-Weisbach, Ch
4.8
ft /sec
1,9
cfs
Hey
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = Yr.
ft / sec
cfs
I
ft / sec
cfs
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A �:]
Options for using the D84 term in the relative roughness relation (R/D ,4), when using estimation method 1.
Option 1. For sand -bed channels: Measure the "protrusion height" (hsd) of sand dunes above channel bed elevations.
Substitute an average sand dune protrusion height (hsd in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 2. For boulder- dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbo) of boulders above channel bed
elevations. Substitute an ave. boulder protrusion height (hbo in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 3. For bedrock - dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hb,) of rock separations /steps /joints/
uplifted surfaces above channel bed elevations. Substitute an average bedrock protrusion height (hb, in feet) for th
D84 term in estimation method 1.
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2 -41

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
Site
Trib4 XS9
Location
Date
2/11/13
1 Stream Type
Valley Type
Observers
HUC
INPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Cross - sectional 0.83 ^bkf
OUTPUT VARIABLES
Bankfull Mean DEPTH 0.23 D(ft) f
Bankfull WIDTH
3.66 I
Wbk f
Wet2eddPERIMETER ]
bkf bkf
4.12
Wp(ft)
D84@ Riffle
6.16
�la�
D84 mm / 304.8 =
0.0202
U
Bankfull SLOPE
0.0080
Sbkf
Hydraulic RADIUS
Abkf / WP
0.2015
R
(ft)
Gravitational Acceleration
32.2
(ft / sec2)
Relative Roughness
R (ft) / D84 (ft)
9.97
Drainage AREA
DA
Shear�Y ecity
�
0.2278
u*
ESTIMATION METHODS
Bankfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Lo J R D ll u*
FactRoughness g{ ea I
1.93
ft /sec
1,6
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R2 /3 *S1 /2 /n n = 0.03
1.52
ft / sec
1.3
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R2/3 *S112/n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett ( USGS ): n = 0.39S 36R-.16 n =1 o.o8
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder-dominated stream systems; i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, Bt, B2, 83, C2 and E3.
0.57
ft / sec
0.5
cfs
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R2 /3 *S112/n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = la0325
1.41
ft / sec
1.17
cfs
3. Other Methods Darcy-Weisbach, Chezy
2.18
ft /sec
1,8
cfs
Darcy- Weisbach
3. Other Methods r -W i h h
2.3
ft /sec
71-9
cfs
Hey
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = Yr. 1
F
ft / sec
cfs
ft / sec
cfs
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A
Options for using the D.4 term in the relative roughness relation (R/Dg4), when using estimation method 1.
Option 1. For sand -bed channels: Measure the "protrusion height" (hsd) of sand dunes above channel bed elevations.
Substitute an average sand dune protrusion height (hsd in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 2. For boulder- dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbo) of boulders above channel bed
elevations. Substitute an ave. boulder protrusion height (ht, in ft) for the D84 term in est. method 1.
Option 3. For bedrock - dominated channels: Measure several "protrusion heights" (hbr) of rock separations /steps /joints/
uplifted surfaces above channel bed elevations. Substitute an average bedrock protrusion height (hbr in feet) for th
D84 term in estimation method 1.
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2-41

Worksheet 2 -2. Computations of velocity and bankfull discharge using various methods ( Rosgen, 2006b;
Rosgen and Silvey, 2007).
Bankfull VELOCITY/ DISCHARGE Estimates
I Site ITrib4 XS10 I Location I I
Date 2/11/13 1 Stream Type Valley Type
Bankfull WIDTH 2.90 ) d
kf Wetted PERIMETER 3.68 Wp (ft)
bkf bkf
D84@ Riffle 6.16 Ula) D84 mm / 304.8 = F0,0202 D
Bankfull SLOPE 0.0080 Sbkf Hydraulic RADIUS 0.3071
(ft ! ft) ^bkf / W (ft)
Gravitational Acceleration 32.2 9 z Relative Roughness 15.19
(ft /sec) R(ft) /D86(ft)
Drainage AREA LDA]F Shearriecity 0.2812 (ftusec)
ESTIMATION METHODS
1. Friction Relative u = 2.83 + 5.66Log{ R / D84 } ]u*
Factor Roughness
2. Roughness Coefficient: a) Manning's 'n' from friction factor/ relative
roughness (Figs. 2-18,19) u = 1.4865 *R213 *S1n /n n = 0.028
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R2/3 *St /2 /n
b) Manning's 'n' from Jarrett( USGS ): n = 0.39S ;6R-1fi in = 0.08
Note: This equation is for applications involving steep, step -pool, high boundary
roughness, cobble -and boulder- dominated stream systems, i.e., for stream types Al, A2,
A3, 131, B2, B3, C2 and E3.
2. Roughness Coefficient: u = 1.4865* R2/3 *S112 /n
c) Manning's 'n' from Stream Type n = 0.0325
3. Other h ods (Hey, Darcy-Weisbach, hz
Darcy - Weisbach
hr h s (Hey, Darcy-Weisbach, hz
Hey
4. Continuity Equations: a) Regional Curves u = Q / A
Return Period for Bankfull Discharge Q = 7 Yr.
4. Continuity Equations: b) USGS Gage Data u = Q / A
Bankfull VELOCITY
Bankfull
F2,68 I
ft / sec
3,0
cfs
2.16
ft / sec
2.4
cfs
0.80
ft /sec
0.9
cfs
1.86
ft / sec
3.26
ft I sec
3.4
ft / sec
ft / sec
ft / sec
2.10 cfs
3.7 cfs
3,8 cfs
cfs
cfs
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 2 -41

HFC -RAS Plan Fxiatinn
River
Reach
River Sta
Profile
Q Total
Min Ch El
W S Elev
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
5 YR
6600
57700
57882
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
10 YR
9400
57700
57897
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
50 YR
17800
57700
57930
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
100 YR
22400
57700
57946
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
5 YR
6600
57450
57661
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
10 YR
9400
57450
57680
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
50 YR
17800
57450
57721
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
100 YR
22400
57450
57738
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
5 YR
6600
57300
57493
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
10 YR
9400
57300
57510
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
50 YR
17800
57300
57547
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
100 YR
22400
57300
57563
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
5 YR
6600
58349
58570
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
10 YR
9400
58349
58596
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
50 YR
17800
58349
58649
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
100 YR
22400
58349
58663
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
5 YR
6600
58033
58209
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
10 YR
9400
58033
58234
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
50 YR
17800
58033
58283
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
100 YR
22400
58033
58308
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
5 YR
6600
57328
57516
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
10 YR
9400
57328
57533
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
50 YR
17800
57328
57566
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
100 YR
22400
57328
57579
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
5 YR
51 00
57894
58054
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
10 YR
7300
57894
58064
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
50 YR
13900
57894
58088
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
100 YR
17600
57894
58100
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
5 YR
5100
57657
57855
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
10 YR
7300
57657
57873
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
50 YR
13900
57657
57912
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
100 YR
17600
57657
57929
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
5 YR
51 00
57330
57517
Tnb IA
Existing
1460
10 YR
7300
57330
57537
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
50 YR
13900
57330
57580
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
100 YR
17600
57330
57599
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
5 YR
5100
56736
56862
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
10 YR
7300
56736
56874
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
50 YR
13900
56736
56901
Tnb 1A
Exi sting g
11000
100 YR
17600
56736
56913

HEC -RAS Plan Proposed
River
Reach
River Sta
Profile
Q Total
Min Ch El
W S Elev
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
5 YR
6600
57700
57820
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
10 YR
9400
57700
57829
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
50 YR
17800
57700
57845
Tnb 4
Existing
1327
100 YR
22400
57700
57851
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
5 YR
6600
57450
57601
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
10 YR
9400
57450
57618
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
50 YR
17800
57450
57658
Tnb 4
Existing
1092
100 YR
22400
57450
57675
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
5 YR
6600
57300
57434
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
10 YR
9400
57300
57450
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
50 YR
17800
57300
57485
Tnb 4
Existing
1000
100 YR
22400
57300
57500
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
5 YR
6600
58349
58529
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
10 YR
9400
58349
58548
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
50 YR
17800
58349
58587
Tnb 3
Existing
1616
100 YR
22400
58349
58604
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
5 YR
6600
58322
58439
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
10 YR
9400
58322
58446
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
50 YR
17800
58322
58465
Tnb 3
Existing
1425
100 YR
22400
58322
58472
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
5 YR
6600
57400
57529
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
10 YR
9400
57400
57542
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
50 YR
17800
57400
57570
Tnb 3
Existing
1000
100 YR
22400
57400
57582
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
5 YR
51 00
58036
58151
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
10 YR
7300
58036
581 63
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
50 YR
13900
58036
581 85
Tnb 1A
Existing
1949
100 YR
17600
58036
581 96
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
5 YR
51 00
57700
57827
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
10 YR
7300
57700
57841
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
50 YR
13900
57700
57872
Tnb 1A
Existing
1807
100 YR
17600
57700
57886
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
5 YR
51 00
57310
57431
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
10 YR
7300
57310
57443
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
50 YR
13900
57310
57470
Tnb 1A
Existing
1460
100 YR
17600
57310
57482
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
5 YR
5100
56736
56862
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
10 YR
7300
56736
56874
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
50 YR
13900
56736
56901
Tnb 1A
Existing
1000
100 YR
17600
56736
56913

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1949
.035 .035
605
0
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
Bank Sta
600
595
c
590
CO
w
585
580
------- - -
575
4700
4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1807
.035 .035
600
4 Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
Bank Sta
595
590
C
0
m
w
585
580
, 61—F2
575 T- —
4700 4800 4900 5000 5100 5200 5300
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1460
035
.� 035
595
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
•
Ground
•
Bank Sta
590
585
c
0
i'o
w
580
575
r�
i
570
—
4700
4800 4900
5000 5100 5200 5300 5400
5500
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Tdb 1 A Reach = Existing RS = 1000
.035 .035
595
0
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
t
Ground
•
Bank Sta
590
585
c
m
580
CD
w
575
570
565
4700 4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1616
.035
035
610
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
■
Ground
•
Bank Sta
605
600
iK
C
595
'm
w
590
585
580
-
4850
4900 4950
5000 5050 5100 5150
5200 5250
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1425
035 .04 �� .035
590
Legend
WS 100 YR
■
Ground
•
Bank Sta
588
586
c
0
a�
W
584
\�
582
i
580
T-
4900
4950 5000 5050 5100
5150 5200
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1000
.035 .04� .035
590
Legend
WS 100 YR
588
■
Ground
•
Bank Sta
586
584
582
c
0
.m
w
580
578
576
574
572
4800
4850 4900 4950 5000 5050 5100
5150 5200
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1327
.035
�. - .035
�
605-
OF
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
Bank Sta
600
595
x
c
590
w
585
580
575
T
4800 4900
5000 5100
5200
Station (ft)

Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1092
590-
035 .035
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
588
•
Bank Sta
586
584
c
m
582
w
580
578
576
574
4800
4850 4900 4950 5000 5050 5100
5150 5200
Station (ft)

on
Existing 6/21/2012
Geom: Existing Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1000
035 . � - - .035
586
OF
4
WS 100 YR
t
Ground
•
584
Bank Sta
582
580
x
c
0
�v
w
578
576
574
572
4850
4900
4950 5000 5050 5100 5150 5200
5250
Station (ft)
on

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1949
605
035 — I* 035
0
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
Bank Sta
600
595
c
0
w
590
585
580
4700
4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1807
.035 .035
600-
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
a
Ground
•
Bank Sta
595
590
x
c
0
.@
a'>
w
585
580
575
-- T T
4700
4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1460
.035 .035
595
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
■
Ground
•
Bank Sta
590
585
C
a
d
W
580
575
570
4700
4800 4900 5000 5100 5200 5300 5400
5500
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 1A Reach = Existing RS = 1000
.035 — .035
595
0
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
t
Ground
•
Bank Sta
590
585
c
m
580
w
575
570
565
4700 4800 4900 5000 5100 5200
5300
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21 /2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1616
.035 .035
610
O
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
■
Ground
•
Bank Sta
605
600
c
595
w
590
585
580
4850
4900 4950 5000 5050 5100 5150 5200
5250
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1425
.035 .035
590
0
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
■
Ground
•
589
Bank Sta
588
587
C
0
(D
w
586
585
584
583
4900
4950 5000 5050 5100 5150
5200
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 3 Reach = Existing RS = 1000
1, .035 .035
590
0
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
588
•
Bank Sta
586
584
x
c
582
(D
w
580
578
576
574
T— -
4800
4850 4900 4950 5000 5050 5100
5150 5200
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1327
.035 .035
605-
0
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
Bank Sta
600
595
r
C
590 -
w
585
580
575
-,
4800
4900 5000 5100
5200
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Exsting Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1092
590
L .035 .035
0
4
Legend
WS 100 YR
Ground
588
•
Bank Sta
586
584
x
c
m
582
a)
w
580
578
576
574
4800
4850 4900 4950 5000 5050 5100 5150
5200
Station (ft)

Proposed 6/21/2012
Geom: Proposed Conditions Flow: Existing Flow
River = Trib 4 Reach = Existing RS = 1000
- .035 .035----
586
0
Legend
4
WS 100 YR
Ground
•
584
Bank Sta
582
580
c
0
CU
m
w
578-
576
574
572
-
4850 4900
4950 5000 5050 5100 5150
5200 5250
Station (ft)

Sediment Transport Analysis
Sediment Competence
Methods
A stable stream has the capacity to move its sediment load without aggrading or degrading, and
the competence to move the largest size particle produced by the watershed Stream
competence was evaluated on existing channels to document baseline conditions, and on
proposed channels to evaluate stability of proposed design To evaluate competence, data
regarding particle size distribution of each channel was obtained through field efforts An effort
was made to obtain subpavement samples on each tributary to estimate the particle size
distribution of bedload Subpavement samples were obtained on Tributary 1A, since the bed
- and subpavement are relatively coarse, consisting primarily of small gravel Subpavement
samples were not obtained on Tributaries 3 and 4 because the channel bed consists almost
entirely of silt, thus pebble counts were used as an estimate of the existing competence of the
channel
Competence in existing and proposed channels was evaluated using dimensional shear stress
calculations using the Shields relationship (Shields, 1936) The equation for critical shear stress
is given by
z =yRs
where, r=shear stress (lb /ftz)
- y= specific gravity of water (62 4 Ib /ft)
R= hydraulic radius (ft)
s= average bankfull slope (ft/ft)
Hydraulic radius is calculated by
1
f,
R_A
P
- where, R= hydraulic radius
A= cross - sectional area (ft)
P= wetted perimeter (ft)
Hydraulic parameters necessary for the shear stress calculation were obtained by analyzing
existing and proposed cross - sectional geometry and longitudinal profile data in Rivermorph
software
Once the shear stress was calculated, the Shields relationship with revised data collected by
Rosgen (2006) that incorporated larger grain particles was used to estimate the largest particle
y size for a given shear stress The Shields relation generally underestimates particle sizes of
1

heterogeneous bed material in the shear stress range of 0 05 Ibs /ft2 to 1 5 Ibs /ft2 (Rosgen,
2006) As all calculated shear stresses fell within this range, the Revised Shields Relationship
was used to evaluate competence
Results
Existing Channel Competence
The results of the competence evaluation for the existing Wickers Branch channels are shown
in the following Table Included in the table is a rating of vertical stability based on the
difference between the largest moveable particle and the largest measured particle, taken from
the book Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (Rosgen, 2006) As
shown in the table, Tributaries 1A, and 3 have excess competence relative to the caliber of
particle size being delivered to the channel This supports visual observations of degradation
and vertical instability in these Tributaries, which was manifested by visual bed erosion and
headcuts
Location
Largest Moveable
Particle (mm)
Measured
Dmax
mm
Channel Vertical Stability
Rating (Rosgen, 2006)
Trib 1A — X4
7717
2477
Degradation
TriblA - XS1
7563
1800
Degradation
Trib 1 B — XS5
4965
6400
Stable /Moderate Deposition
Trib 1 B — XS6
4214
9000
Moderate Deposition
Trib 3 — XS7
3044
1600
Moderate Degradation
Trib 4 — XS10
3094
4500
Stable /Moderate Deposition
Proposed Channel Competence
Tributary 1A
Based on the competence analysis, the proposed channel design moves an approximately 47
mm particle at bankfull discharge which fits within the range of the measured largest particle
sizes in the subpavement samples (40 -48mm) However, based on visual observations there
does not appear to be a sufficient volume of that size material in the existing channel for
practical harvest and replacement in the restored channel Additionally, there is uncertainty in
the bedload supply from potential changes in watershed management It is possible that the
caliber and quantity of sediment will change over time due to varying crop rotations, no till
farming practices or possible future removal of adjacent fields from agricultural production
Therefore, additional bed material will be incorporated into the riffles of a sufficient size that will
not mobdze at the bankfull discharge
F

i
The shear stress at 10 -year storm was examined in HEC -RAS, and showed a shear stress of
approximately 0 37 Ib /ft2 This is estimated to move a particle size of approximately 73 mm To
ensure non - mobile bed even in higher events, bed material greater than 73 mm will be placed in
-- the channel
Tributary 3
Based on the competence analysis, the proposed channel will move a 45 mm particle However
the existing D,00 is only 16 mm Therefore, bed material of a size that ensures non - mobile bed
L will be added during the restoration effort
The calculated 10 -year storm shear stress is 0 26 Ib /ft2 This is estimated to move a particle size
of approximately 56 mm Therefore, bed material greater than this size will be placed in the
channel riffles during construction
Tributary 4
Based on the competence analysis, the proposed channel will move a 35 mm particle The
- existing D,00 measured in the pebble count is 40 mm However, this may not represent the true
size of particles moving through the system because the subpavement is almost entirely silt
I�
Based on HEC -RAS analysis, the shear stress of a 10 -year storm is approximately 0 37 Ib /ftz,
which is estimated to move a particle size of approximately 62 7 mm Bed material larger than
this size will be added to the riffles in Tributary 4 during the restoration effort to ensure a non -
mobile bed
Sediment Capacity
Sediment transport capacity of the three impaired reaches was evaluated using the
POWERSED model The POWERSED model is run by comparing a "stable" reach, located
somewhere along the study river with an "impaired" reach Both reaches should be
_ experiencing a similar bankfull flow and a similar sediment supply (Rosgen, 2006) The stable
reach is assumed to be moving the predicted sediment load without aggrading or degrading
- ' over time The determination of these reaches as stable is based on an evaluation of a
Pfankuch stability rating of the cross - section A Pfankuch stability rating is based on subjective
evaluation of fifteen different observable features of a stream channel, which are given a rating
I and total score indicating a qualitative stability rating of "Good ", "Fair" or "Poor" ( Pfankuch,
1975) By relating a sediment rating curve to the morphological variables of this reach, one can
estimate how changes in morphological variables downstream potentially affect the capacity of
the channel, and predict whether the "impaired" cross - section is aggrading or degrading The
stable cross - section can also be used to design the proposed dimension
Methods
There were two primary goals of the use of the PowerSED model in this analysis 1) compare
existing sections of the impaired reaches with stable sections upstream of the reaches to
3

evaluate any trends of aggradation or degradation and 2) mimic the relationship between unit
stream power vs discharge at the stable reference sections to aid in designing the proposed
channel dimensions
.J
Three reference stable cross - sections were found on the Wicker Branch site, one upstream of
Tributary A, one along the length of Tributary 1 B and one upstream of Tributary 4 (identified as ` 1
cross - sections 1, 5 and 9 on Figure 2.6 in the main body of the report) The cross - sections -J
were deemed to be in a quasi- stable state, based on several factors 1) Pfankuch stability
ratings completed for each cross - section indicating relative stability ( "Good /Fair' ratings), and 2)
the presence of well - defined bankfull benches on one or both sides of the cross - section and 3)
no noticeable scour or deposition in the channel These three sections are representative of
sections receiving a similar sediment supply and bankfull flow as the impaired protect reaches
While a representative stable section could not be found on Tributary 3, the section upstream of
Tributary 4 was deemed suitable for comparison because 1) they have a similarly sized
drainage area and 2) the sediment supply is relatively the same, being located below the dam of
an impoundment and 3) the valley type of both streams is similar Based on the hydraulic and
morphological variables of these cross - sections, a relationship between unit stream power and
sediment transport was developed, using the dimensionless Pagosa reference sediment rating
curves These curves were developed in Colorado from a large dataset, and have recently
been shown to be comparable to the use of analytical methods (Hinton, 2012)
Estimates of mean velocity, discharge, shear stress and unit stream power were calculated for a
variety of stages at each of these cross - sections, and the relationship between unit stream
power and sediment transport developed at the stable sections was applied to the impaired
reaches Combining this with a flow duration curve developed in the FLOWSED model
produced a prediction of annual potential sediment yield at each of the cross - sections, which
reflects the changes in the capacity of the river between each cross section
It should be noted that the goal of using the POWERSED model in this design was to compare
the relative sediment transport capacity of an impaired reach with a stable section
Results of the POWERSED analysis for both existing channels and proposed channels are
shown in Figures 1 through 6
Results and Discussion
Tributary 1A
The evaluation of the impaired section compared to the upstream reference section shows that
the impaired channel has greater sediment capacity, as represented by unit stream power at
various ranges of flows (Figure 1), than the stable channel This is caused by the incision of
Tributary 1A, which prevents access to floodplain and lowering of shear stress /unit stream
power in above - bankfull flows This excess capacity will lead to further degradation of the
channel
4 rI
f

Figure 1. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 1A for a Stable
Reference Section (Blue) and the Impaired Reach (Green)
Unit Power (Ib /ft/s) vs. Discharge (cfs)
3.0
".
2.0
Unit
Power 1.5
(lb /ft /s)
1.0
0.5
Stable
Altered
0 5 10 15 20
Discharge (cfs)
The proposed channel was design with similar hydraulic characteristics as the reference
upstream section. Additionally, the proposed channel will be reconnected to the floodplain.
When this is done the sediment capacity of the proposed (restored) channel closely matches
that of the reference section up to bankfull and above bankfull, showing peak in shear stress at
bankfull flows and then a sharp reduction when storm flows access the floodplain (Figure 2)
Figure 2. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 1A for a Stable
Reference Section (on Tributary 1 B) and the Proposed Channel (Green)
Unit Power (Ib /ft/s) vs. Discharge (cfs)
0.5
0.4 Stable
Unit Power 03
(Ib /ft /s)
0.2
0.1
Altered
0.0
0 5 10 15
Discharge (cfs)
5

Tributary 3
As shown in Figure 3, the existing impaired channel of Tributary 3 possesses excess capacity
up to and above bankfull flows when compared to the stable channel.
Figure 3. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 3 for a Stable
Upstream Section (Blue) and the Impaired Reach (Green)
Unit Power (Ib /ft/s) vs. Discharge (cfs)
1.5
Unit 1.0
Power
(Ib /ft /s) 0.5
Stable
Altered
0.01 — - - --
0 2 4 6 8
Discharge (cfs)
The cross - section of the proposed channel has been created to more closely match capacity
across a range of flows (Figure 4). The proposed channel is expected to be stable based on
capacity analysis,
Figure 4. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 1A for a Stable
Reference Section (on Tributary 1 B) and the Proposed Channel (Green)
Unit Power (Ib /ft /s) vs. Discharge
(cfs)
0.5
0.4 Stable
Unit 0.3
Power
0.2 Y
(Ib /ft/s) 0.1
0.0 Altered
0 2 4 6 8 10
Discharge (cfs)
r.1

Tributary 4
Although Tributary 4 is the least incised channel on the project, the channel still possesses
somewhat excess channel capacity relative to upstream stable section (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 4 for a Stable
Upstream Section and the Impaired Reach
Unit Power (Ib /ft/s) vs. Discharge (cfs)
1.5 ,
Unit
Power
(lb /ft /s)
1.0
0.5
0.0
0 2 4 6 8
Discharge (cfs)
Stable
Altered
The proposed channel more closely matches unit stream power to discharge relationship of the
stable reach up to bankfull flow. The floodplain is more confined in the stable upstream section
so unit stream power continues to increases after reaching bankfull stage while on the proposed
channel storm flows will flow out onto the floodplain and shear stress decreases (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Differences in Unit Stream Power vs. Discharge on Tributary 1A for a Stable
Reference Section (on Tributary 1 B) and the Proposed Channel (Green)
Unit Power (Ib /ft/s) vs. Discharge
(cfs)
0.5
0.4 Stable
Unit 0.4
Power 0.2
(Ib /ft /s) 0.1.
0.01 Altered
0 2 4 6 8 10
Discharge (cfs)
7

1000
O Leopold, Wolman & Miller, 1964
A Leopold, Wolman & Miller, 1964 (upper outliers)
100 O nO /
- - - Trendline (Colorado Date + Upper outliers: Leopold,
W Wolman & Miller, 1964) VVV
E Trendline (Leopold, Wolman & Miller, 1964) O O O
Colorado Data +upper outliers:
Q
4) Leopold, Wolman & Miller, 1964
10 Power Trendline
Dia.(mm) = 253.7 TCO 9672
Rz = 0.9511
2 O
i O
M Leopold, Wolman & Miller, 1964 / O
c
Power Trendline
Dia.(mm) = 77.966 T, oaz O
0 R2 = 0.9336 O
1
io O
0
0.1 0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
T,. = Critical Shear Stress ( Ibs / SgFt. )
Critical Shear Stress (tc: Range 0.001 to 10) Required to Initiate Movement of Grains
(particles), revised for Colorado Rivers. (Rosgen, 2006)

1
DRAFT
I
i
r,
Tributaries of Wicker Branch Stream Mitigation Plan
Union County, NC
Auqust 2013
APPENDIX D: PROJECT PLAN SHEETS

� 1
„ 4 D
t
L 4
d n
O ® ® e
PROJECT
LOCATION ,
VICINITY MAP
TRIBUTARIES OF WICKER BRANCH
STREAM RESTORATION
UNION COUNTY, NC
(PROJECT PLAN SHEETS)
Clearing, grading, erosion control, stream restoration, drainage, landscaping,
and other Improvements as noted on the plans This work will Include all Items
necessary to construct the stream, the wet swales, and associated structures
with the associated landscaping, plantings, seeding and live staking
RECIEVING STREAM WICKER BRANCH
NCDWQ CLASSIFICATION WS -V
C -16 /\1
17 C -3
( Not to Sea END ESTORATIO C -2
TRI 1A
STA 23 +95
/ND TRIB 1B
BEGIN TRIB 1
T -1 TITLE SHEET
C -1 THRU C -8 PROPOSED CHANNEL PROFILE,
AND PLAN VIEW
C -9 THRU C -10 TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
C -11 THRU C -15 GENERAL DETAILS
CONSULTANT AE com
701 Corporate Center Drive, Suite #475 Raleigh ,NC 27607
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
SENIOR DESIGN CONTACT BRYAN DICK, PE (919-854-625Z
STREAM DATA
STREAM REACH
PROPOSED
CENTER LENGTH
MODIFICATION
TYPE
TRIB 1A
1390'
RESTORATION
TRIB 113
1095'
ENHANCEMENT II
TRIB 3
1184
ENHANCEMENT I
TRIB 4
631'
ENHANCEMENT II
C -1
BEGIN RESTORATIO
TRIB 1A f
STA 10 +00
CONSTRUCTIO
ACCESS
ROAD
END TRIB 4
STA 16 +84
END MITIGA
TRIB 3
STA 21 +84
OLD PAGELAND - MONROE
(SR 1941)
HOME
DRIVEWAY
BEGIN MITIGATION ,
TRIB 3
STA 10+00
I
I I�
C-4
I I
I
1 I
i
4
i
C -5 f
i
C -7
i
BEGIN TRIB 4
STA 10 +00
18
r�
\ Pa
APPROXIMATE
HOME
LOCATION
LAI ITUDE ( N
LONGITUDE (
11 9 acres
CONSTRUCTION
ACCESS
KUAU
AIIIUUt'
340 53'54 2"
800 26'48 5"
s
N N
U
Z Q
o�f
m
V N$
m�
s�
2
U
z
z
m0_
x F— W
Y C9
U_O Q
W
0 J
wq ~
w H
m
1 6D22ONz
T -1
IANT! —By - B
STP BMD
u
0
i

USER remmyyr� DATE 8/26/20/3
DON 060220942\400 Tech lnfo�7Iscl Ines%CAD�60220942-psh0ld n TIME 80205 AM
f�Ji 0) ' I V I ODD CAD
O � �O I O i IO i i0
O I I n -0
;0m
�D
- - - - -- OD Z
Im D� I I = 58305' 'Pl =10+36.7 9 2 Q � � o ;-a' O m
IZ El = 584 2' I O c m �
Iv ;0, ;a Rt Z D� r[ � I
i� {, n �� �m Z r m
,2 0� ° z � °
�X I -0 m
-- - r - - - -- -- y y m m o
I- I - -- - - -- -- I Pl =l0 8670 r z
12 O ' El = 582J0' I k'l = 10 +96' 8"
Z GN
%
, I - � -�PI = lI-k3599 X1,
r � Pl 11 +40 82 � I Pl =l1 +45 6 El = 5224' �Q m
✓ � , m
m I El 581.32' � EI'= 5822S' b -D n i� �z.,.l � � m
�mv v �z� ca \ I 0;u I _ Z I � mss, � I m
� X � Pl =11+7407
,
O fn O -- r- + —Pf-= +7�J -68 - -� - - -Pl =1It84 � �, p
� � � I El = 8071'
020 � E 1= 58/ 6 c o m
cn cn c,,, I ,� '�, I . m �
m O m z,-_.
N .� � W I PI =l +0940 o 'I O
El = 58/ lT fn
=0> I El = 8023' Pl' 92 1 v
� C Z Eli 58/J9' V1,
Z' Z � m 1 Pl =12 33 m c ; 12t379El 8081' X El = 5 9.85' El 580 83 � =12+ 833 i El = 8036' Z I ' �!
I Pl X12 +628 ' r ,
� E/ = 57 45' I I O
,
n O
I E/ = 579/' ' Pl = 182 9 El= 0 00' Z
II Pl = 129768 IZ o
P/ =/I +00 68 �J 1123 � a7 r o
CA) = 878'-
pl = 13 +17J2 PI =15+20 05 I El =
� = 5785 I Elm 5795_ 3' I T�_ m
El = 578 2 ' P/ =13 +36 07 E/ = 79 25'
j El = 1 57927
' r r
Pl =13 +6/ 74� I E/ = 8 76'
El = 57782 ; I Pl =l3 +6737 000
<!
El = ; 57878' � Z
Z U)
Pl :N3 187 71 i I v m
El 577 4/'
I Pl =L3 192 44 El = 51I 8.33' y
El =1 5783 81 ;u D
Pl =14 +433 O C�.l I v
Pl = 1412046 I El= 57 82' Z co
I E/ 576 89��_ I Pl =l4 125 99 1 , � co
cn co
I 1
I m
Pl =14 +41304 9
Pl =14 *48 94 AEI = 57738' Z 1 n -n,
Elpi
= 577.39' I --I � D �
-- Pl = 1418476 I I it I �L= 5767' jl r,Z
El = '575 8T Pl =14189 5/ I 1 z/ , O
El = 576.80' r
I I 1 r 1
Pl =15+0249 -- t
Ln I El = 575 53' � Pl =15 +10 06 Ell= 57644,r
� El = 57¢S2' co � N
, I h
-- �Rf= hS - +3l- P1 =15 +2840 � I
/
Pl = 15 +.�5 0/ El 1= 576 01' '
' El = 575 12' �7 1 �
I El = 57609' I
I I P/ 15 +506
'- - --
I I =l5 +60 4�1 -575
j I
El = 57484' I
El = 575 80'
I
El = 574 54' l =15 +84 48��
� Et, = 575 50'
y c/�
� � I PI =15 +9998 � = Z
-€/- 575- 2� -; - - -- Z
- 2 I F°2% I � Z''d � Cu-, �
El - 5795' I =16 +10 ;0 � ,
E'l = 57521' r 0;0 QD o
Pl = �6 +24J3 'D W I C°
Pl =16 +2730 I _ _ 1 O
El = 57433 PI =6+4169 m
�
PI = 16145 03 Pl I , � 1 �
I / = 57 7 ' I =16 +48 7 El = 57473'
' -+_ -- -- ELi_ =57-j' _ --P-1 =I-
P1, =16 +6279 El = 57457
F/ = 573'59' -L
I El �= 57457' � I yoy D
I � Pl 46, +78 87
� EI = 57423'
39
I/= 573.29' Pl =16 +89 i El 57423' � MATCHLINE SHEET C -2
I I I
V I I
' i I
I
o v, r v o TRIBUTARIES OF WICKER BRANCH HORIZONTAL SCALE �
� STREAM RESTORATION 25 0 25 50 s
�o m � PLAN VIEW, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE
m = �o � ��� VERTICAL SCALE
0 o w 5 0 5 10
� im coraorure cfxrFn owvE. ■mean, rauar. He zmm
waee,amo erewax9 cme
0 REVISIONS -DR-N—
CHK
DATE

USER remmyyr DATE 8/26/2013
DGN 050220942\400 Tech Info- lsc1p011a s\C TIME 80209 AM
I
1
I
i
(
O I O ! O O i O
I i
I
j I I P /;; =l6 +8999 I " INE SHEET 1
I I El - 7423,
-4 / _ +02.95
� l =17 +07173 � Pl'�17 +125
573 , El = 7396'
Q/ ,
/ =/7 +32 3 1 � El = 73 68' ! I
' I
00
E = 572 74�' Pl 17 +37 8
' I El � 57368 � C D
- I - - - I-- ----�- -P/--=17 27`2 O Z
Pj =17+580 ( P/ 117 +63.35 E/ = 3.3 �
E/ = 572 41, I !
! El =j 573 36'
Pl =17 +85 47 El = 5 3 04'
, P/ =lm+9264
co I PI =18 +08 4 + Ell -187 6 32
;
El 57180'1 El= 7276' �
=181a
i Pl =18 +30 El = 5 1246'
I El - 57154' 1
r
Pl =18 +5746 � ( x Q
Pl - 8 +6677
-� El = 57/10 - -- =ts +76.Q7 Ln
I I - ----� El 57204
i I Pl =18 +9',422
� ( El = 57070' I I Pl �=19 +065 Z
`�
j E/ 57165' rn
r,
I �Pl =19 +2.340 I i
- l = l 2' Pl X19 +32 ! � r
m �
�°/ rn
I Pl =19 5709 570 6' ! r r I
El = 570 02' I P/ �/9 +62 93 `� ! '
� El =1 57095' �,." !
I / =/9 +7324
I Pl =19+80 /8
El = 56974' I I Pl �I9 +87J1 m
El = 57070'
0 El = 5 45'
E, = 5704' P1 =20 +078/
I
=20+,25 IO El = 1 5704/'
! PI = 20,3/.65 El = 57005'
El = 56 J2' I ( i Pl = �0 +38J9
I
El = 157004'
I � ' Pl =20+ 9= 569 73EI = 56878 Pl = 0 +6406) � i El = 56973' i, =20 +74.9 5695 , l = 568;55� Pl = 0 +83 40 lyE/ X20 +9977 m 568 2' Pl = l +/397 _ EI = 56915' , i ao m (� y L I_ OHO Z I
65 2- 1+2 -7J�. -L ,
Et/ = 567 3' El -- 56887 i Pl = 21 +34J2 ' I Z m � m !
El = 6889' I I v m m
f�! =21+61 4 El ; 568 48'
I I �
E/ = 567 6' i i Pl = 2/, +68 77 i Z
El = 68 47' i
I
I rn
' Pl =21+91 98 I i I Z I 1 Q
N Pj =21+98 7 ! El = 1 568 04' � m .D p
� x X i !
I ' El = 56� 03' ; O fA O x � a o
I m m
- r m G) m � y z r m
n r
P� 22 +35.6 El = 567 60' v G) v
El = 566.66'i I .Pl =22 +4,240 I -I X ca z z o ,
1 I El = 567.5,(Y ! = O D m m z
,
Pl =,22 60 36 =22 +6 38 , m v C
E/ = 1 566 37' ' W t0 � m
' El = 567
11DrnDp � .00m !
_P1 =22N- 7.72.5_ Z r � !
-- -PI = 2 +8286 - - -- - - - - -- - --- El = 56706' � vw G7 --I X � I
E/ = 566 /D' � f+'l =22 +8� 97 ; + O
I ; Il = 56706 c
� �°° 'gym
w I 1 I PI =23 t07 32 I � m D p o o m -Zi � � ( �j
PI =23 +13 48 I El = 566 68' I ( Z s � � � � � x � O � �
E/ = 6 I 23 +19.�i4 v o z m �, � -.m '
� � P-
566,68' � �� � I 1 '� y � Z �t� �
�7 = 2�f314T- i -- --- - -- --_ ; - - o o Z ,
El = 565 5/' I / El- 566 48' I = O
I PI = 23-4520 I I m
Pl =23 +4870 E/ = 56 25' _ + X I � � �
CF—
El 6 2 - - -r -- r -
I Pl =23 X67 57
Pl =23!+7476 � /= 6 1 I G7 1 m
� I E/ = 565 97'
I
� m r o TRIBUTARIES OF WICKER BRANCH HORIZONTAL SCALE �
� i � � m � STREAM RESTORATION 25 0 25 50 s
Z
3
2 N
m
��
�o
�
PLAN VIEW, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE
VERTICAL SCALE
5 0 5 10
m
���
o
c
0
REVISIONS
DRN
CHK
DATE
,�
m
m+ caaavre cortm oat, mare na Rumw xc nar

17
INORTH
I I/
� �,� � ♦ I
� �
�a
\
EXISTING CHANNEL
\\
\
- -------------- - - - - --
\
------------ - - -,�- -�
\
____
;\
I
I FC�FNn
_
- ^-
3 ! L TREE LINE
® LOG SILL
PERMANENT STREAM
_
`
`
BLEND TRIB 2 WITH,,
PROPOSED CHANNEL',,
— EASEMENT BOUNDARY
CROSSING
(TYP)
`
\
'
STREAM ALIGNMENT
`\
�• ■• EXISTINGCHANNEL
`\ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
�( CULVERT
\ BOUNDARY
— — — — MINOR CONTOURS
' AJ
— — — MAJOR CONTOURS
`
\
w
Q
J
Q
_j to J Lo
go_
_ - -�__
-
--
-_
-_
___ -__
_ -_—
___-
- _____
—___
—I
_______
_ - -_-
- _____}___
-_ -__
____-
I
_____ -}
____ -_
______
--------
_
--------------
_
p
x
LU O
>
N
O
_
580-
- -- -
I
-- - -- - - - --
- -
--
------- �
- - - - --
-
-- - - - - --
-
I
-- - - - -- -
-- - - - - --
i
-- - - - - -- I - - --
--
- - - -- --
-- - - - - --
- - - - - --
-- - - - - --
-
I
--
- - - - - --
I
- - - - - -- -
- -- - -- -
-- - - - -
--
I
- - - - --
- - -- --
V
Z
3
—
- --- --
- --- --
--- --
-
--r -- - --
--- - --
- - ---
--
-- -- --- ---
-- - -
-- - --
-- -- --
-- -- --
------
`
- - - -- - -
- --
- - -- - -`-
-- - -
-- -
- - --
-- -- - -j-
-
- - -
- --- -
000 Z
Q
j
- - - - -� -
- -- --
- - -�
J
570
- --
i
— !-
--
i
{ -r
- �- -
--
- - --
- -- —
-
I
- --
--
-—
' - - - - --
-- -
-
I
- - --
- — -
- - - -
--
- - -- -
- - - -- -
- — -- -
-- - -
YQ
3N Z
pj
:..
s
�
I
'
o
�
I
560
z
V
'
---
--
- -- - -- - -
-- - - -- -
- -
DATE 812612073
PROJECT NO
60220942
FILENAME
550
i
I
SHEET NO
DRAWN BY
CHKD
BY
`
3
10
11
12
13
14
15 16
17
STP
BMD
I

EXISTING CHANNEL EXISTING WETLAND
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
-------------------- ------- -- --------------- ------------
EXISTING WETLAND -----------------------
----- -------- -------- ------ I
---------------- -_ - ----------
------------ -------- __- -- --- ---- --- ----- -- - - --
-------------- ---------- ---
---------- -- --------- -
y.............. -----------
.. ........... ... -------
----------------
----------
--------------------
------ -------------------
--------------
---------- ---------
--- -----------------------
- ---------------- --------- -------
--------------------- -----------
m
-------------------- -------------
----- -- 069 --------- Ze (n
I F(.FNr7)
BEGIN TRIB 3 STREAM m
z
_f--(—TREE LINE --------------------------------- CONSTRUCTION STA 10+00 m
LOG SILL — — — — — — — — — — — — ----
EASEMENT BOUNDARY
STREAM ALIGNMENT
EXISTING CHANNEL
CULVERT CONSERVATION EASEMENT7
BOUNDARY
MINOR CONTOURS
— — — — MAJOR CONTOURS
Lo
Lu
C\i
BE IN CONSTRUOTION �3 �O to cf)
+ co Ln rn -i
STA 10+00 cS Ln co L� <
RFM FI RR4_61
0
:;3
BLEND WITH EXISTING
Q_ (3) c\j Ln ENC STREAM PRO >
0
ILE
STA 12+64 6
_RFn
co uj qD WITH EXISI ING tn
cli
Ln ;r ac u')
:tic
c\ Ln
w
580
C-q �q mo Z
O�
z-- --- 47—=
IL
P,16
0(5 Ln
it
z
570 LL
0
Ln co
DEFINE POOI] BELO
LOG STILLS SEE POOL
-ICALSECTLON
_TYP
LEGEND Lu
PROPOSED BANKFULL 5;
560 GROUND z
PROPOSED THALWEG 5
-------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - a.
DATE 81261202
I PROJECT NO
60220942
I FILENAME
SHEET NOC
_4
_B By
550
Er DRAWN Yj CHKD BY
9 10 11 12 13 14 TP
L STP aml:j)
i
cu
II
I
— - - - --
- --
------
C - - - - --
I -- - - --
------
I- - - - - --
— -- ----
- - -
- -- ---
i - - - - --
- --
i -
EXISTING CHANNEL EXISTING WETLAND
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
-------------------- ------- -- --------------- ------------
EXISTING WETLAND -----------------------
----- -------- -------- ------ I
---------------- -_ - ----------
------------ -------- __- -- --- ---- --- ----- -- - - --
-------------- ---------- ---
---------- -- --------- -
y.............. -----------
.. ........... ... -------
----------------
----------
--------------------
------ -------------------
--------------
---------- ---------
--- -----------------------
- ---------------- --------- -------
--------------------- -----------
m
-------------------- -------------
----- -- 069 --------- Ze (n
I F(.FNr7)
BEGIN TRIB 3 STREAM m
z
_f--(—TREE LINE --------------------------------- CONSTRUCTION STA 10+00 m
LOG SILL — — — — — — — — — — — — ----
EASEMENT BOUNDARY
STREAM ALIGNMENT
EXISTING CHANNEL
CULVERT CONSERVATION EASEMENT7
BOUNDARY
MINOR CONTOURS
— — — — MAJOR CONTOURS
Lo
Lu
C\i
BE IN CONSTRUOTION �3 �O to cf)
+ co Ln rn -i
STA 10+00 cS Ln co L� <
RFM FI RR4_61
0
:;3
BLEND WITH EXISTING
Q_ (3) c\j Ln ENC STREAM PRO >
0
ILE
STA 12+64 6
_RFn
co uj qD WITH EXISI ING tn
cli
Ln ;r ac u')
:tic
c\ Ln
w
580
C-q �q mo Z
O�
z-- --- 47—=
IL
P,16
0(5 Ln
it
z
570 LL
0
Ln co
DEFINE POOI] BELO
LOG STILLS SEE POOL
-ICALSECTLON
_TYP
LEGEND Lu
PROPOSED BANKFULL 5;
560 GROUND z
PROPOSED THALWEG 5
-------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - a.
DATE 81261202
I PROJECT NO
60220942
I FILENAME
SHEET NOC
_4
_B By
550
Er DRAWN Yj CHKD BY
9 10 11 12 13 14 TP
L STP aml:j)

i
P _I�
I
I
I
N
N
m
W
BEGIN TRIB 3 STREAM TRIB 3 0
CONSTRUCTION AT
STA 15 +44
- - -- LLEVEL
SPREADER (TYP) U �NORTN �
------ - - - --
BLEND WIT EXISTING = o
------- .� - - - -- ------------- - - ------------------ - - - -�� L 559
--------- - - ---- �� - - - - -- __ -- ___ -- LOG SILL (TYP) Z
__--- __ - -- - _�8�-- - - - - --
L -- - - - - -- to
_ ---_ - - -- -____ -_
?-i�
-------- - - - - -- -
�,� --------- - - - - -- - - - -.,
--------------- a8s ----- ; N 11 °47'41" W
--------------- 602 10' i FGFNn LEVEL SPREADER (TYP)
'✓��;� -�'� LEVEL SPREADER2 (TYP) CONSERVATION EASEMENT
- ses_------ ----- AT AREA OF RILL EROSION TREE LINE
`'� BOUNDARY ® LOG SILL
STREAM REAM AL GNMENT MINOR CONTOURS
� ••■ EXISTING CHANNEL - - - - MAJOR CONTOURS o 0
0
�Q J �
(n V
BEGIN, CONS RUCTIQN a N
STA 16 +44
BLEN WITH � I
i
W590 � - -- I -- I � - -- -- - -a- - - - -- - � --- - - - - -' - - - - -- -- �----- -a - - -- ; - -`� v - � - -- - - - - -+ - - -*., . -' -- -- - -- - -- � I I ; — - -; - - - - -- ' - -; -- — - - -- -
o0i� I ' `�NI O� -- - -h - - -- - �--- - - - - -i - - - - -- - - �- - - - - -- i � C'3 cm
Ln Ln V-" � N rl_
LO
�
I - - - -, -- -I -- pq II Ln i I +tom I NO v-O I i W
ric
�� i�� +�
�
II m� I �� � Q
580 wN y w W n� II Z
0
m-fl
w 4.W I i Lr)� 11 9z
0 570 I I - - - -- � I I � _ � I I �- - - - - -- -- \!-- -- - -� -- — _ -- —� - - - -- - - - - - -- �� Z
DEFINE PO BELO'�IV- -_ -__; W� � oil
��; LOG ILLS E POOL i
DEFINE FOOL B LOW
�I -- � rn Ni TYPICAL SE TTION - - - - -� -- - - - - -- - -- i - - -j - - - -- -- LOG SILL EE OOL - - - -, -- - F- - - - -- - m`�
- -- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - -- -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -
a } `�' � TYPICAL SE TIC � I ; � w_
'
` -0O � I I >
LEGEND ---- � - - - -- -, - -- --- �- - --`�' - - - - -- - - - - -� - - - -' ��` ------- ±-- �°'--- + - - - -- � - - -j- ---- - - -I -� - -- � --- `- `- 0�- +-------- '-- - - - - -- - - - - - --
NOTE DEPTH OF POOLS BELOW SILLS TO PROPOSED BANKFULL 'I '1 � L' *
TO BE DETERMINED IN FIELD AT - - -- EXISTING GROUND II °
' Ln DATE 81261201
3
__ _� DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
PROPOSED
THALWEG
PROJECT�20942
N
FILENAME
SHEEP NO
° 550
c-s
DRAWN BY CHKD BY
13 14 15
16 17
18
19
20
STP
BMD
N
N
m
W
BEGIN TRIB 3 STREAM TRIB 3 0
CONSTRUCTION AT
STA 15 +44
- - -- LLEVEL
SPREADER (TYP) U �NORTN �
------ - - - --
BLEND WIT EXISTING = o
------- .� - - - -- ------------- - - ------------------ - - - -�� L 559
--------- - - ---- �� - - - - -- __ -- ___ -- LOG SILL (TYP) Z
__--- __ - -- - _�8�-- - - - - --
L -- - - - - -- to
_ ---_ - - -- -____ -_
?-i�
-------- - - - - -- -
�,� --------- - - - - -- - - - -.,
--------------- a8s ----- ; N 11 °47'41" W
--------------- 602 10' i FGFNn LEVEL SPREADER (TYP)
'✓��;� -�'� LEVEL SPREADER2 (TYP) CONSERVATION EASEMENT
- ses_------ ----- AT AREA OF RILL EROSION TREE LINE
`'� BOUNDARY ® LOG SILL
STREAM REAM AL GNMENT MINOR CONTOURS
� ••■ EXISTING CHANNEL - - - - MAJOR CONTOURS o 0
0
�Q J �
(n V
BEGIN, CONS RUCTIQN a N
STA 16 +44
BLEN WITH � I
i
W590 � - -- I -- I � - -- -- - -a- - - - -- - � --- - - - - -' - - - - -- -- �----- -a - - -- ; - -`� v - � - -- - - - - -+ - - -*., . -' -- -- - -- - -- � I I ; — - -; - - - - -- ' - -; -- — - - -- -
o0i� I ' `�NI O� -- - -h - - -- - �--- - - - - -i - - - - -- - - �- - - - - -- i � C'3 cm
Ln Ln V-" � N rl_
LO
�
I - - - -, -- -I -- pq II Ln i I +tom I NO v-O I i W
ric
�� i�� +�
�
II m� I �� � Q
580 wN y w W n� II Z
0
m-fl
w 4.W I i Lr)� 11 9z
0 570 I I - - - -- � I I � _ � I I �- - - - - -- -- \!-- -- - -� -- — _ -- —� - - - -- - - - - - -- �� Z
DEFINE PO BELO'�IV- -_ -__; W� � oil
��; LOG ILLS E POOL i
DEFINE FOOL B LOW
�I -- � rn Ni TYPICAL SE TTION - - - - -� -- - - - - -- - -- i - - -j - - - -- -- LOG SILL EE OOL - - - -, -- - F- - - - -- - m`�
- -- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - -- -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - -
a } `�' � TYPICAL SE TIC � I ; � w_
'
` -0O � I I >
LEGEND ---- � - - - -- -, - -- --- �- - --`�' - - - - -- - - - - -� - - - -' ��` ------- ±-- �°'--- + - - - -- � - - -j- ---- - - -I -� - -- � --- `- `- 0�- +-------- '-- - - - - -- - - - - - --
NOTE DEPTH OF POOLS BELOW SILLS TO PROPOSED BANKFULL 'I '1 � L' *
TO BE DETERMINED IN FIELD AT - - -- EXISTING GROUND II °
' Ln DATE 81261201

REDEFINE CROSS - SECTION
1;
TRIB 3
OF EXISTING CHANNEL PER
TYPICAL SECTIONS
CONSTRUCTION
,#CCESS ROAD
U
-------- -- - - --
- - 1
END TRIB 3,STREAM
20_,c00 -
t
CONSTRUCTION
a
- '-
sTA.' 21 +84
--
---- - - - - - . ` -
- --'" "
BLEND WITH EXISTING
-
-- - - - - -- -- --
- -
Lo
--------------
►
36" CMP UPSTREAM
W
-- --- - -
ELEVATION 567 81'
LOG SILL (TYP)
i
;
W
-
----------------- -
- - - -� �
PERMANENT STREAM
Z
_
CROSSING (TYP)
I EGENn
„
J
=
CONSERVAITON EASEMENT
TREE LINE
V
BOUNDARY
® LOG SILL
J
EASEMENT BOUNDARY
CULVERT
Q
STREAM ALIGNMENT
MINOR CONTOURS
i
■ ■• EXISTING CHANNEL — — — — MAJOR CONTOURS
0
0
J
W
I
i i
Lo
QN
Lo
I
I
_— ______
_ -___
—
-�o
Z
U
T
r
0
In
- - - -- --
Q
[(En
0
- -5$�
- - -�
-
- - - --
I
- - - - -� - - --
°�
- - - - --
- - -E QSTR
-AM -P-
OFIL- €--
- - - -�-
-
- - --
- - -- -
1
- - - - --
- - - --
I
I
- - - - --
- - - - --
- - - -- --
- - - --
- - - --
- -
- - --
z
-
- - - --
!
U o
0)
I
BLEND
I
;
�Z o
r
ITH EXISTING
- - - ----
-- - -
-1 II-
- --
- - -- -II �-
L - ----
i-N -
-- - -- -- --
- - -i - -- -- -- - -- - - --- --
- - - ---
- -- ---
---- - -
-
- --
- - - - ---
- - ----
-- -
- - - -- - --
--
- - 7
- - -
-- - - --
i - - -
-- - -
- - - -- -
- -
- - -- - -
- - -- -
- -
- -
mo Z
8
i
-
- - -
--
I— -
- --
+- - -- - --
-- - --
-- --
- - --
-
- --
- - --
- -- - --
- - - -- -
-- - - - - --
-- -
---
- - - --
I - - - --
- - --
- - --
- - -- -
— - -
- -
- -
- -
o
co
p
3
_
DEF
__
NE -po BELnw
- - - - -t-
- -- } - -- -
-
I
-- -
- - -
- --
- -
H
m
cr
LOG
SILLS E POOL
1
- 560-
-
-
TYPICAL
S TION
- - - --
- - --
1
LEGEND
- --
- - --
- - --
-
-
--
- - --
- - --
- - --
'
- - - - --
I - - - --
--
- --
- - --
- - -
- - --
z
v
FULL
PR FULL
- - -- EXISTING GROUND
a
DATE
8120
/20 ,3
!!
W
� --
_ HALWEG PROPOSED T - - --
I
-- -
- - - - - --
- - --
-
--
- -- -
-- - --
- - -
-
PROJECT NO
60220942
FILENAME
SHEET
550
DRAWN BY
CHKD
BY
3
20
21
22 23
24
25
26
STIP
BMD
I

M
N
b
N
0
W
FT77---E
NORTH � _
� BEGIN TRIB 4 �
BOUNDARY !
STREAM ALIGNMENT CONSTRUCTION °
� ••■ EXISTING CHANNEL .' STA 10 +00 ----------------------------------------- r
)---� CULVERT I' BLEND WITH EXISTING. --'""
- - - - MINOR CONTOURS '�
MAJOR CONTOURS
-'' EXISTING CHANNEL m �
r �, �.. --'`r LOG SILL (TYP) Ill
EXISTING POND
O � - - -- "_ �� " -- ---------------------------- - -� _ __575'--------- --
REMOVE RCP ` -------------------------- ------------------ �------- - - - -__ ---------- s---------------
BLEND CHANNEL ,,., - -- - - - - --- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- - - --
UP AND D0WMTREAM
r REDEFINE THALWEG
— — PER DIRECTION OF
ENGINEER
Lc) r
J W
� U
J W � N
a' C) WO
600 I _
- - - - -- LEGEND
-� - - -- -- - - - - -- -- - -- NOTE. DEPTH OF POOLS BELOW SILLS TO - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - --
I BEGIN STR M PR FILE - - -- EXISTING GROUND TO BE DETERMINED IN FIELD AT N
�
STA. 10 +00 PROPOSED THALWEG
_ _ DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
� BLE D WIT EXIS ING �
_590 � --------------- �-------- �----- - -' - -- �- I - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - - - -' - -- -� °- - z
I j I i PLn � I N ; Wp„ Q
J
580 i' W z
° 570 z
I�� DATE 1111013
PROJECT NO
60720942
FILENAME
SHEET NO
560
DRAWN BY
CHKD BY
7
8
9 10 11
12 13
STP
BMD

� - i
N
N
m
O
iFGFNn TRIB 4 a
—— o
TREE LINE
® LOG SILL
EASEMENT BOUNDARY ` � NORT
STREAM ALIGNMENT U
� 1,6�b
oZO S
0
■•• EXISTING CHANNEL
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
�--- -� CULVERT
— — — — MINOR CONTOURS
■• — MAJOR CONTOURS
LOG SILL (TYP) s
~ ---- - - - - -- -15+00 16 � CONSERVATION EASEMENT
- - - - -- - -_ BOUNDARY °
2
� END TRIB 4 STREAM
W REDEFINE THALWEG CONSTRUCTION
Z PER DIRECTION OF STA 16 +25
ENGINEER
U ,tZ 8H
Q � „Ol,�M0 N
� o 0
J W
I
N J
I
600 - - - -�- � ! - - - - -- �- - - - - -- - - -- ------- �------- �- - - - - -- --
!
590 - - - -- � - - - -- - - -- - -- - - - - -� -- � - - -- I � z
ND STREAM PROFILE Y � a � >r
N � "l iTA 16�r25 � cv o Z
580
N + � LEND ITH ISTtNG I f - - - -- o
i
a I
9 570 I
1
�6, POOL BEL � W LEGEND I � DATE aB126=13
LO SILL I � Ln - - -- EXISTING GROUND PROJECT NO
PROPOSED THALWEG I � FILENAME
� 560 I � W I ; I SHEET NO
�
I
DRAWN BY
CHKD BY
13
14
15 16
17
18
19
STT'
BMD
N
N
m
O
iFGFNn TRIB 4 a
—— o
TREE LINE
® LOG SILL
EASEMENT BOUNDARY ` � NORT
STREAM ALIGNMENT U
� 1,6�b
oZO S
0
■•• EXISTING CHANNEL
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
�--- -� CULVERT
— — — — MINOR CONTOURS
■• — MAJOR CONTOURS
LOG SILL (TYP) s
~ ---- - - - - -- -15+00 16 � CONSERVATION EASEMENT
- - - - -- - -_ BOUNDARY °
2
� END TRIB 4 STREAM
W REDEFINE THALWEG CONSTRUCTION
Z PER DIRECTION OF STA 16 +25
ENGINEER
U ,tZ 8H
Q � „Ol,�M0 N
� o 0
J W
I
N J
I
600 - - - -�- � ! - - - - -- �- - - - - -- - - -- ------- �------- �- - - - - -- --
!
590 - - - -- � - - - -- - - -- - -- - - - - -� -- � - - -- I � z
ND STREAM PROFILE Y � a � >r
N � "l iTA 16�r25 � cv o Z
580
N + � LEND ITH ISTtNG I f - - - -- o
i
a I
9 570 I
1
�6, POOL BEL � W LEGEND I � DATE aB126=13
LO SILL I � Ln - - -- EXISTING GROUND PROJECT NO
PROPOSED THALWEG I � FILENAME
� 560 I � W I ; I SHEET NO

a
0
Y
S
U
Z
K
Z
O
VARIES' 4'
VARIES'
EXISTING GROUND 1' 2' 1'
EXISTING GROUND
2 N
- 27 2
—F Lo
1 0
Lo f .
TRIBS 1A
PROPOSED RIFFLE CROSS - SECTION
(TYP )
SCALE NTS
�0 0
J W
J
J N � Lo
J
Z U
N �
OO � o
2
0
(14
8 5'
3' 3' 2 5'
r)
EXISTING GROUND
Z
O
2
=
I zo
�w
r
25'
ch
8–
1 5'
0 O
w
w2 J''
TRIB 1A
Mo U
:
PROPOSED POOL CROSS - SECTION
(TYP)
►-
SCALE NTS
DATE
$$DATE$$
PROJECT NO
60220942
FILENAME
SHEET NO
09
DRAWN BY
CHM BY
CDT
BMD
I

EXISTING GROUND
mnimmemeiat
VARIES'
VARIES'
cD
0
TRIBS 3 AND 4
PROPOSED RIFFLE CROSS - SECTION (TYP )
SCALE NTS
1'
1 5'
8 5'
3'
`V 12 5'
TRIB 3 AND 4
PROPOSED POOL CROSS - SECTION (TYP )
SCALE NTS
EXISTING GROUND
EXISTING GROUND
0 0
J W
tU!) U
J N to
H Q
z U
N �
Oo j o
Lo v
N Lo
U)
z
O
U P
�oW�
U- O
O —
w J
co U
m d
PROJECT NO
60220942
FILENAME
SHEET NO G10
DRAWN BY I CHKD BY
CDT BMD

M
N9
WW
oti
a
0
�i
N
a
9
ti
�i
N
e7
�a
D
W2
�92
NOTES
1 PUT SILT FENCE OR TREE PROTECTION FENCE UP TO ENSURE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS USED
2 A 6" TO 12" MINIMUM STABILIZED PAD OF WASHED STONE SHALL BE LOCATED WHERE TRAFFIC WILL
BE ENTERING OR LEAVING A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO OR FROM A PUBLIC STREET THE STONE SHALL
BE PLACED ON TOP OF FILTER FABRIC FOR A DISTANCE OF 50 FEET MINIMUM
3 THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING
OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC STREETS OR EXISTING PAVEMENT THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP
DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE AS CONDITIONS DEMAND AND REPAIR AND /OR CLEAN OUT OF ANY
MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT
4 ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC STREETS MUST BE REMOVED
IMMEDIATELY
5 IF CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITES ARE SUCH THAT THE MUD IS NOT REMOVED BY THE VEHICLE TRAVELING
OVER THE STONE, THEN THE TIRES OF THE VEHICLES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE ENTERING THE PUBLIC
ROAD WHEN WASHING IS REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE DONE ON AN AREA STABILIZED WITH CRUSHED STONE
WHICH DRAINS INTO AN APPROVED SEDIMENT BASIN
6 ADDITIONAL GRADING SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONNECT THE STONE ENTRANCE TO THE EXISTING GROUh
UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, THE ROAD SHALL BE RETURNED TO A CONDITION THAT MEETS OR
EXCEEDS THE PRE - EXISTING CONDITIONS
i
2 " -3" WASHED STONE
�h
18' MIN
oI
Z o
L
w �s1i
50' (MINIMUM)
BUT SUFFICIENT TO KEEP
SEDIMENT ON SITE
NEW CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING
ROADWA1Y T*
6" L M1 tirii °', 1 MIN
MIN f 1
FABRIC UNDER STONE
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE NTS
FILTER FABRIC FOR
DRAINAGE
ANGLE 10-15
FROM TOP O
FILTER FABRIC
COMPACTED FILL
III — III —II j � 1=III— III -=III-
- ��� -��� 6• III_III�II -���
NOTES l I
WIRE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 32" � � STEEL POST - 2' -0" DEPTH
IN WIDTH AND SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM l
OF 6 LINE WIRES WITH 12" STAY
SPACING
FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE A MINIMUM EXTENSION OF FABRIC AND
OF 36" IN WIDTH AND SHALL BE WIRE INTO TRENCH
FASTENED ADEQUATELY TO THE WIRE AS
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER
STEEL POST SHALL BE 6-0" IN
HEIGHT AND BE OF THE SELF - FASTENER
ANGLE STEEL TYPE
�8' MAX. WITH WIRE
(6' MAX WITHOUT WIRE)
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
If- SHALL BE 12Y2 GAUGE MIN
TOP AND BOTTOM STRAND
SHALL BE 10 GAUGE MIN
WIRE
FILTER FABRIC
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE ( HIGH VISIBILITY)
SCALE NTS
NOTCHED LOG SILL
1 OFT MIN NOTCH
BASEFLOW
PROPOSED °
STREAMBED ELEV FLOW -► m
#57 STONE
L- PROPOSED
STREAMBED ELEV
I
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE, TYPE 2
TO EXTEND 0 5 FT BELOW BOTTOM
OF LOG
PROFILE VIEW
NOTCHED LOG SILL
NOTES
CROSS SECTION A -A'
ALTERNATE SILL DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS
ANGLED NOTCHED LOG SILL
SCALE NTS
�3ft
VARIABLEy�- y4 WIRE MES
DIMENSION
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE
2 f
1 ft min
Y4 WIRE
SEDIMENT CONTROL STOP ft min
1J
WATER FLOW —+
Y4 WIRE
2 f
STEEL POST - 2 11 DEPTH
GENERAL NOTES
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE SHALL BE NO 5
OR NO 57 AND SHALL BE PAID FOR AT THE
CONTRACT UNIT PRICE PER TON "SEDIMENT
CONTROLSTONE"
USE HARDWARE CLOTH 24 GAUGE WIRE MESH
WITH 1/4 INCH MESH OPENINGS
INSTALL 5 FT SELF FASTENER ANGLE STEEL
POST 2 FT DEEP MINIMUM
POST SPACING SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 3 FT
SPECIAL SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE
SCALE NTS
NOTES
1 90% COMPACTION RATE IS REQUIRED
ON CHANNEL PLUG OR AS APPROVED BY
THE DESIGNER
2 SIDE SLOPE THAT IS ADJACENT TO
PROPOSED STREAM NEEDS TO MATCH
PROPOSED CROSS SECTION IN THAT
REGION O
3 THIS STRUCTURE SHALL BE PLACED
AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER B
A
21 A
EXISTING
CHANNEL
MATCH PROPOSED
CHANNEL CROSS- _
SECTION DIMENSIONS
B
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SELECT
CHANNEL MATERIAL
BASE FLOW PLAN VIEW OF EXISTING CHANNEL WITH CHANNEL PLUG
ELEVATION
( VARIES)
MATCH PROPOSED =
CHANNEL CROSS-
SECTION c
PROPOSED VA IES (MIN 15) EXISTING Z J
BANKFULL CHANNEL
ELEVATION11 BOTTOM �
-- {,imr�- -- -- -- -- - - -- -1 ' MIN � OF 0
TOPSOIL \_ IMPERVIOUS SELECT t1 w J s
MATERIAL O LL
CRHANNELD ONTO P4 FITOPSOIL w ,
MEETS CHANNEL BED BOTTOM SECTION A -A fK Z °
W
EXISTING CHANNEL m U'
IDTH VARIF H
EVATIO R
PROPOSED
B
ELEVATION
EXISTG \
CHANNE V
IN
BOTTOM - - IMPERVIOUS SELECT
MATERIAL
DATE
8/262013
SECTION B-B PROJECT NO
60220942
CHANNEL PLUG B°"
DRAWN BY CHKD BY
SCALE NTS STP BMD

I ,
i
i
i
I
C
l'
I
f
i
I
I
I
i
l
NM
N9
mro
tiW
oh
c
R
h
S
h
9
ry
QN
4
mcz
D_
W2
�92
EXTEND ROCK SILLS AS REQUIRED TO RETAIN CHANNEL BANKS AT CROSSING
�BANKFULL TOE OF SLOPE T IE OF SLOPE
l.'BANKFULL
I I i
B DOWNSTREAM ROCK SILL
A
I I B I I A UPSTREAM ROCK SILL
PLAN VIEW
NTS
SOIL FILLISOD
TIE EXISTING
• •
TOINVERT • : • •
ELEVAT • •
LEVELSPREA
DER , �� ,1_;4,r, • •
;F' Dii� ••iiiii•OOiiiii$•i � i �•1,r
EXISTING GUI
(SEE NOTI
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
SCALE NTS
BANKFULL
RIGID TIMBER LIP
ELEVATION 1 0' CLASS B STONE
SIZE TO BE DETERMINED
BY ENGINEER IN FIELD
EXISTING GROUND TIE TO EXISTING GROUND
SOIL
(SEE NOTE 6
E NOTE 9D
EXISTING
\�� \/�
GROUND
z
2 1 (OR FLATTER)
2 1 (OR FLATTER)
FOREBAY VEGETATED
PERMANENTTURF
WITH SOD
REINFORCEMENT MATTING
(SEE NOTE 6)
1 0 MiN
(PTRM)(SEE NOTE 7)
NTS
SOIL FILLISOD
TIE EXISTING
• •
TOINVERT • : • •
ELEVAT • •
LEVELSPREA
DER , �� ,1_;4,r, • •
;F' Dii� ••iiiii•OOiiiii$•i � i �•1,r
EXISTING GUI
(SEE NOTI
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
SCALE NTS
BANKFULL
6" CLASS A STONE
ELEVATION 1 0' CLASS B STONE
FABRIC{
ROCK SILL)
SECTION A -A ROCK SILL
PROPOSED TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION
B
CROSSING
GRADE^ —. - - - - -- THALWEG 6" CLASS A STONE
ELEVATION
1 0' CLASS B STONE
CROCK SILCS
-- - 1 0' CLASS B STONE
FILTER _ - - - -' A
FABRIC _B ,-•_•� ��_•��
CROSS SECTION _ __% __
ROCK SILL SECTION El- ROCK SILL
LEVELSPREADER
SCALE NTS
NOTES
1 LEVEL SPREADER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE LOCATION(S) SHOWN
ON PLANS AND /OR AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN ON THE
PLANS MAY VARY FROM SITE CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION
2 THE DIMENSIONS OF THE LEVEL SPREADER (LENGTH, WIDTH, SLOPE, AND
HEIGHT) SHALL BE BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS AT EACH LOCATION
3 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS FOR
REVIEW BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO GROUND DISTURBANCE
4 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE/EXCAVATE THE LEVEL SPREADER TO
MEET MINIMUM DEPTH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SWALE AND FOREBAY PRIOR
TO INSTALLATION OF PERMANENT TURF REINFORCEMENT MATTING (PTRM)
5 PTRM AND SOD SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS PTRM SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS ACROSS THE ENTIRE FOREBAY AREA `
6 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL SOD OVER THE ENTIRE GRAGED
SURFACE AREA AND SHALL SMOOTHLY TRANSITION INTO THE ADJACENT
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ON ALL SIDES
7 THERE SHALL BE NO LOOSE ENDS OR UNSECURED PTRM ON COMPLETED
WORK
8 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR EXISTING GULLY WITH SOIL FILL AND
PTRM AS NEEDED TO PREVENT FURTHER EROSION
9 FILL MATERIAL SHALL MATCH ADJACENT GROUND SLOPE OR A MAXIMUM OF
5 (H) 1(V) FOR SOIL
I
(n Y
Z J
F
�-
00
Lu
1 J s
Z
W
21 (OR FLATTER) V" (SEE NOTE 5)
EXISTING 10 MIN
GULLY INVERT PERMANENT TURF RIGID TIMBER LIP
REINFORCEMENT NOTE�TTING SIZE ENGINEER IN FIELD DATE
FOREBAY VEGETATED Nzenola
IT
PROJECT NO
(SEE NOTE B) 60220942
SECTION B -B' PLAN VIEW FILENAME
NTS NTS SHEET NO
_12
DRAWN BY CHKD BY
STP BMD

I
l
i
f is
C
I
i
I
i
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
M
�9
mm
WW
oti
a
g
0
a
9
r
N
0
W2
0
Y
S
U
Z
K
O
SEDIMENT FILTER BAG
� STRUCTURAL STONE, EXISTING GROUND
CLASS
PUMP HOSE FLOOD PLAIN
O O o
O O O STREAM 5
w
rc
CLASS B STONE
FILTER FABRIC (8" THICK)
TOP OF BANK ,/ (�74STONq CONTROL STONE 15' MINIMUM
BASE OF
STREAM
z
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE
PLAN VIEW SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
SCALE NTS
TOP OF BANK 2' -0" MIN
FLOW V MIN 'rte �- FLOW IMPERVIOUS DIKE (SAND BAG TYPE SHOWN)
1'-6" MIN —�
� �2 PROPOSED 24" CPP
SEDIMENT CONTROL 7' MIN
STONE (#57 STONq STRUCTURAL STONE, PROPOSED 24" CPP
CLASSI
STREAM BED t IMPERVIOUS FABRIC FLOW
OPOSED CHANNEL
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE CHANNEL
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE EXISTING BOTTOM
CROSS SECTION PROFILE CHANNEL
DIVERSION CROSS SECTION DIVERSION PROFILE
NOTE
SECURE IMPERVIOUS FABRIC
UNDER TOP LAYER OF SANDBAGS PIPE MUST HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE WHEN USING
DIVERSION (0 3% TO 2 0% PIPE SLOPE IS RECOMMENDED)
IMPERVIOUS VARIES
FABRIC MIN
CLASS
STONE SANDBAGS CONSTRUCTION AREA 250' MA)
FLOWZ� 3' MIN (Location Varies Within the Pump Around Areal
OUTFACE ONTO
SANDBAGS STRUCTURE
CHANNEL BOTTOM SECURE IMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS DIKE ( IMPERVIOUS DIKE OR SILT SCREEN STONE CLASS'B'
USE SILT SCREEN AT DOWNSTREAM OR BEDROCK
FABRIC WITH CLASS B STONE 3' MIN SEE DETAIL LOCATION ONLY)
CHANNEL SEE DETAIL
SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS
DIKE PROFILE SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKE
CROSS SECTION z � y
NOTES f � —:• 't � �a ~
€s ll.l
1 THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE USED FOR DIVERTING
AND PUMPING ONLY THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE t y LL w J
S COMPLETE R REMOVED ONCE PUMPING/DIVERTING W
2 EITHER TYPE OF IMPERVIOUS DIKE (SANDBAG OR STONq SPECIAL STILLING BA LU s
MAY BE USED ""'""— °•••«�',�, "w" SEDIMENT PUMP SEE DETAIL ¢ F Z
" "., ""'••....•... .,.,,,,,,, .., AS REQUIRED S rn CWrI
MAINPUMP •.,�„ "w "„ .., � r,., "".,.... „M "..�" ". "". "M� ", ",,���,,."••••.' " °•" ",.",,,,,1� � �
(BASEFLOW) NOTE
CHANNEL SHALL BE MATTED WITH COIR FIBER MATTING (SEE DETAIL)
IMPERVIOUS DIKE PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF EACH WORK DAY
SCALE NTS DATE
PUMP - AROUND /PIPE DIVERSION snsnot3
PROJECT NO
SCALE NTS 60220942
FILENAME
SHEET NO
G13
DRAWN BY
CHKD BY
STP
BMD
M
�9
mm
WW
oti
a
g
0
a
9
r
N
0
W2
0
Y
S
U
Z
K
O
SEDIMENT FILTER BAG
� STRUCTURAL STONE, EXISTING GROUND
CLASS
PUMP HOSE FLOOD PLAIN
O O o
O O O STREAM 5
w
rc
CLASS B STONE
FILTER FABRIC (8" THICK)
TOP OF BANK ,/ (�74STONq CONTROL STONE 15' MINIMUM
BASE OF
STREAM
z
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE
PLAN VIEW SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
SCALE NTS
TOP OF BANK 2' -0" MIN
FLOW V MIN 'rte �- FLOW IMPERVIOUS DIKE (SAND BAG TYPE SHOWN)
1'-6" MIN —�
� �2 PROPOSED 24" CPP
SEDIMENT CONTROL 7' MIN
STONE (#57 STONq STRUCTURAL STONE, PROPOSED 24" CPP
CLASSI
STREAM BED t IMPERVIOUS FABRIC FLOW
OPOSED CHANNEL
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE CHANNEL
STONE IMPERVIOUS DIKE EXISTING BOTTOM
CROSS SECTION PROFILE CHANNEL
DIVERSION CROSS SECTION DIVERSION PROFILE
NOTE
SECURE IMPERVIOUS FABRIC
UNDER TOP LAYER OF SANDBAGS PIPE MUST HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE WHEN USING
DIVERSION (0 3% TO 2 0% PIPE SLOPE IS RECOMMENDED)
IMPERVIOUS VARIES
FABRIC MIN
CLASS
STONE SANDBAGS CONSTRUCTION AREA 250' MA)
FLOWZ� 3' MIN (Location Varies Within the Pump Around Areal
OUTFACE ONTO
SANDBAGS STRUCTURE
CHANNEL BOTTOM SECURE IMPERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS DIKE ( IMPERVIOUS DIKE OR SILT SCREEN STONE CLASS'B'
USE SILT SCREEN AT DOWNSTREAM OR BEDROCK
FABRIC WITH CLASS B STONE 3' MIN SEE DETAIL LOCATION ONLY)
CHANNEL SEE DETAIL
SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS
DIKE PROFILE SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKE
CROSS SECTION z � y
NOTES f � —:• 't � �a ~
€s ll.l
1 THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE USED FOR DIVERTING
AND PUMPING ONLY THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE t y LL w J
S COMPLETE R REMOVED ONCE PUMPING/DIVERTING W
2 EITHER TYPE OF IMPERVIOUS DIKE (SANDBAG OR STONq SPECIAL STILLING BA LU s
MAY BE USED ""'""— °•••«�',�, "w" SEDIMENT PUMP SEE DETAIL ¢ F Z
" "., ""'••....•... .,.,,,,,,, .., AS REQUIRED S rn CWrI
MAINPUMP •.,�„ "w "„ .., � r,., "".,.... „M "..�" ". "". "M� ", ",,���,,."••••.' " °•" ",.",,,,,1� � �
(BASEFLOW) NOTE
CHANNEL SHALL BE MATTED WITH COIR FIBER MATTING (SEE DETAIL)
IMPERVIOUS DIKE PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF EACH WORK DAY
SCALE NTS DATE
PUMP - AROUND /PIPE DIVERSION snsnot3
PROJECT NO
SCALE NTS 60220942
FILENAME

M�
O
�M
N9
�W
Oh
a
0
0
a
U
h
9
0
ti
ti
0
N
�d
a_
J
SIDE BRANCH REMOVED
AT SLIGHT ANGLE
H --1 /5L
FLAT TOP END
TERMINAL BUD _
SCAR
LATERAL BUD
BARK RIDGE I J h
°
BRANCH COLLAR
LOW SEASONAL
WATER TABLE
45' TAPER
BUTT END
NOTES
1 ALL LATERAL BRANCHES SHALL BE
TRIMMED TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THE BARK
RIDGE AND BRANCH COLLAR
2 A MINIMUM OF TWO BUDS (ONE LATERAL
PLUS ONE TERMINAL OR TWO TERMINAL)
SHALL BE ABOVE THE PLANTING DEPTH
CHANNELBANK
LIVE STAKE
SCALE NTS
BANKFULL BENCH
LIVE STAKES
BARE ROOT PLANTED
ON T BETWEEN ROWS
EASEMENT BOUNDARY
ZO E 1
LUNG L
STREAM CHANNEL O
WELL - DRAINED
STREAMBANK
STREAMBAN WELL - DRAINED
FLOODPLAIN
VEGETATION
VEGETATION FLOODPLAIN
VEGETATION
2
2
Tulip poplar
LIVE
1736
BARE ROOT TREE
STAKES
(1' BETWE
TYPICAL
BASEFLOW
ELEVATION
EXISTING
OWS)
EGRAD
GRADE
----------
-- Q BANKFULL - - -_ GRADE
V STAGE
1736
�-
BARE ROOT TREES
Red maple
COIR SECURELY STAKED
UJI
TO CHANNEL TOE
VEGETATION ZOFE,DETAIL- RIFFLE
UT to Wlckers Branch Stream Restoration, Union County_
LUNG L
Scientific Name
Common Name
LS
BR 1plug
CHANNEL SAMBA
Remarks
BARE ROOT PLANTED
VEGETATION
LIVE STAKES EGETATI N
Lrnodendron tuliprfera
Tulip poplar
1736
BARE ROOT TREE
EXISTING
ch
g of
EXISTING
GRADE
Cercis canadensrs
Redbud
GRADE
1736
�-
Acer rubrum
Red maple
573
UJI
Of LL
Drospora wrginrnia
Persimmon
573
z
a u-
TREES AND SHRUBS
N
m
Quercus alba
Wtute oak
1736
Calicarpa amencana
American beautyberry
2246
Y Z
Salix nrgra
Black willow
1000
QO
TREES
One stake per 3 linear feet in 2
N
DD ¢
Sa/rx sencea
Silky willow
500
rows spaced one root apart
Pools outside bend only Riffles
W
Q w
z0
W
w
Sambucus canadensrs
Elderberry
500
both banks Species randomly
>
SHRUBS
distributed
Comus amomum
Silky dogwood
500
N
N
T
W
z
PERMANENT SEED MIX
Use Mellow Marsh Farm Riparian Buffer Mix
Apply at 20lbs /acre
O
N
N
TEMPORARY SEED MIX -
Hordeum sp
Barley
Winter - Apply at 501bs /acre to
Secale cereale
Wrens Abuz�e Winter rye
WWINTER
all disturbed areas
z
N
TEMPORARY SEED MIX -
Panrcum ramosum
TBZ�tlp mullet
Summer - Apply at 50lbslacre
SUMMER
to all disturbed areas
PLANTING TABLE
SCALE NTS
ZONE
WELL - DRAINED
UU
LUNG L
LUIVC -
LUNt 7
CHANNEL SAMBA
WEL - DRAINED
BARE ROOT PLANTED
VEGETATION
LIVE STAKES EGETATI N
FLOODPLAIN
ON T BETWEEN ROWS 2
F
2'
(1' BER EESN)
BARE ROOT TREE
EXISTING
BANKFULL
EXISTING
GRADE
- - - - --- --STAGE- Q- -------
------- - -- - --
GRADE
�-
---- - - - - -- ��NG
VEGETATION ZZOO DETAIL -POOL
�c NTS
x
U
to �
mo QI
iecc F-
ie
t-
0 � YS
O � $
Co
fit W �s
S N UJ
X
FILENAME
SHEET NO
C 14
DRAWN BY I CHID BY
STP BMD

i
l ,
r-
_ �w
oti
w
_ la
Hw
I�
THALWEG
6" CLASS A STONE
6 '
FROM TOP OF BANK
NOTCHED LOG SILL
ELEVATION
19 CLASS B STONE
ELEVATION 1 0 CLASS B STONE
X-- BASE FLOW
PROPOSED —
FLOW —�
STREAMBED ELEV
If
BANKFULL WIDTH + 6'
#57 STONE
SHOWN PLANS AND/O
i
AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN ON THE PLANS MAY
S T REAM ELEV
YZ
VARY FROM SITE
U
FILTERr--c-
CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION
Z
m
I
2 THE DIMENSIONS OF THE RIP RAP SPREADER (LENGTH, WIDTH,
m
i
I i
i FABRIq i
FILTER FABRIC
`�
M
u1
n
LL
0
O
U W
ENGINEER PRIOR TO GROUND DISTURBANCE
FOR DRAINAGE
a
FLOW ► 4 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE/EXCAVATE THE SPREADER TO
I
a A
r
ROCK SILL
r 1�
SECTION A `ROCK SILL
A'
O
;
O
ROCK SILL) SECTION B -B
SPECIFICATIONS
ROCK SILL) -A
1
FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE
MANUFACTURER'S
PROPOSED TYPICAL CHANNEL SECTION
GRADE
---'' `-- i i =
R ' CK SILLS, i 1 0' CLASS B STONE
CROSS SECTION
EXTEND ROCK SILLS AS REQUIRED TO RETAIN CHANNEL BANKS AT CROSSING
�BANKFUL_ L�TOE OF SLOPE -TOE OF SLOPE
I r�l �BANKFULL
DOWNSTREAM ROCK SILL
I I B I A
I
I I I
A �UPSTREAM ROCK SILL
I ( PLAN VIEW I I
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
SCALE NTS
SECTION A -A'
NTS
EXISTING GROUND
RIP RAP /ROCK 18" THICK TIE E NOTE STING GROUND
(SEE NOTE 8)
EXISNG
i ( GROUND EXISTING
GULLY INVERT
/O
LINE LEVEL SPREADER
WITH FILTER FABRIC
4 0' MINIMUM (SEE NOTE 5)
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE, TYPE 2
TO EXTEND 0 5 FT BELOW BOTTOM
OF LOG
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES
ALTERNATE SILL DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS
TIE EXISTING SWALE TO INVERT
ELEVATION OF LEVELSPREADEI.
4 "x8" RIGID Li (TIMBER
RIP RAP /ROCK (S NOTE ##�
(SEE NOTE 7)�
PLAN VIEW
NTS
EXISTING GULLY B
(SEE NOTE 1)
FL
A
SOIURIP RAP FILL 1
r (SEE NOTE ##)
2 1 (OR FLATTER)
a o' MINIMUM LINE LEVEL SPREADER
WITH FILTER FABRIC
(SEE NOTE 5) J
VEGETATIVE COVER
RIP RAP LEVEL SPREADER (SEE NOTE ##)
SCALE NTS 4"x8" RIGID LIP
(SEE
PLAN VIEW
NL
SOIURIP RAP FILL
- (SEE NOTE ##)
NOTCH \
SOIURIP RAP FILL
(SEE NOTE ##)
CROSS SECTION A -A'
FLOW
(ATION
RIES)
ANNEL
SOIURIP RAP FILL
ANGLE 10-15 DEGREES'
FROM TOP OF BANK
NOTCHED LOG SILL
1 0 FT MIN
X-- BASE FLOW
PROPOSED —
FLOW —�
STREAMBED ELEV
If
#57 STONE
SHOWN PLANS AND/O
PROPOSED
AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN ON THE PLANS MAY
S T REAM ELEV
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE, TYPE 2
TO EXTEND 0 5 FT BELOW BOTTOM
OF LOG
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES
ALTERNATE SILL DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS
TIE EXISTING SWALE TO INVERT
ELEVATION OF LEVELSPREADEI.
4 "x8" RIGID Li (TIMBER
RIP RAP /ROCK (S NOTE ##�
(SEE NOTE 7)�
PLAN VIEW
NTS
EXISTING GULLY B
(SEE NOTE 1)
FL
A
SOIURIP RAP FILL 1
r (SEE NOTE ##)
2 1 (OR FLATTER)
a o' MINIMUM LINE LEVEL SPREADER
WITH FILTER FABRIC
(SEE NOTE 5) J
VEGETATIVE COVER
RIP RAP LEVEL SPREADER (SEE NOTE ##)
SCALE NTS 4"x8" RIGID LIP
(SEE
PLAN VIEW
NL
SOIURIP RAP FILL
- (SEE NOTE ##)
NOTCH \
SOIURIP RAP FILL
(SEE NOTE ##)
CROSS SECTION A -A'
FLOW
(ATION
RIES)
ANNEL
SOIURIP RAP FILL
(SEE NOTE ##)
FLOW
NOTES
B SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE LOCATION(S)
ON
SHOWN PLANS AND/O
AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN ON THE PLANS MAY
=
VARY FROM SITE
U
CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION
z (n
2 THE DIMENSIONS OF THE RIP RAP SPREADER (LENGTH, WIDTH,
9 z _5
SLOPE, AND HEIGHT) SHALL BE
BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS AT
m O
F Q
EACH LOCATION
3 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
M
u1
n
FOR REVIEW BY THE
0
O
U W
ENGINEER PRIOR TO GROUND DISTURBANCE
FLOW ► 4 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE/EXCAVATE THE SPREADER TO
rn
J
A' MEET MINIMUM DEPTH
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SWALE AND RIP RAP PRIOR TO INSTALLATION
0'
OF FILTER FABRIC
2
5 FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE A NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE
w ug W
s
SPECIFICATIONS
¢ U) W
FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE
MANUFACTURER'S
0
SPECIFICATIONS ACROSS THE ENTIRE RIP RAP APPLICATION AREA
6 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE RIP RAP USING MECHANICAL
m
MEANS PACK FIRMLY AND
FINISHED WITH A UNIFORM SURFACE FREE OF VOIDS LARGER THAN 6"
7 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY RIP RAP ON THE ENTIRE GRADED
SURFACE AREA A MINIMUM
OF 18" THICK THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CARE NOT TO TEAR
THE FILTER FABRIC DURING
INSTALLATION RIP RAP SHALL SMOOTHLY TRANSITION INTO THE
DATE
FLOW ► ADJACENT EXISTING GROUND
SURFACE ON ALL SIDES
$$DATE$$
PROJECT NO
8 THERE SHALL BE NO LOOSE ENDS OR UNSECURED FILTER FABRIC ON
COMPLETED WORK
60220942
9 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ABANDON EXISTING GULLY ON THE `DOWN
FILENAME
SLOPE' SIDE WITH SOIL
OR RIP RAP TO PREVENT BYPASS OF THE RIP RAP SPREADER FILL
SHEET NO
MATERIAL SHALL MATCH
C-15
ADJACENT GROUND SLOPE OR A MAXIMUM OF 5 (H) 1(V) FOR SOIL
DRAWN By
CHKD BY
OR 3(H) 1(V) RIP RAP
I
-
STP
BMD

J
BEGIN TRIB 1A
STREAM REALIGNMENT
STA 10 +00
31643 S 46 33'37 W
S 321S'33" W
21726 S 4 09 �4" W
1 ' 1
o' I loll
loll
lo I
ol
V ,, , 12, "o
37 00'53" E1'L`c`
23899,
N 4614
s d90 18 Ltz,, " 11
8' '
ONSERVATION EASEMENT
6 BOUNDARY '
,� '
ti r / i
loll
MJ b/£ Odl
I FrFNf�
L TREE LINE ' %;';
— EASEMENT BOUNDARY FLOODPLAIN PLANTING ZONE
STREAM ALIGNMENT
■ ■■ EXISTING CHANNEL
}--� CULVERT STREAMBANK PLANTING ZONE
Z
7�1
n
Z
Z
m
n
S 33 22 05' 61559' ___________
,•,�/
, T
.r,'
'.;
399 21'
247 62 N 35 07 09" E
N 311516 E
,Z£ S£L
3 ££ ZI L£ N
3 8t
O
O
W
J
U
U)
J O
Q �
H
Z
O
N
O0
x
LO 1
x
U
1.
QZ
m0 Q
0o Z
3W o
LL B;
W
a
We
�co
m W 8
DATE
$$DATES$
PROJECT NO
60220942
FILENAME
SHEET N G16
DRAWN BY I CHKD BY
STP BMD

wW
o�
ww
Of�
W2
W2
a
� o
x
U
bf
o z
�y8p Fss \ �oN�N
`\ z
O
w
trS
w
3
edgsoDS®
ai
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS - z
ROAD
00 p pc
--------- --- -- - - ---- M
--
-_ 143 31'
END TRIB 1A
STREAM REALIGNMENT - 56726
STA 23 +90 _ s 2009 '2o'_W - -- ------ - - - - -- ��� /
- -- — END TRIB 1B
0
\ pp J
M 4 \Off U
CA
-------- - - -,ss l8Z --- - - - - -- s \ won
—� a
gg gOZ -- 3 „Zf 62 LZ N \ \ Z
�_ - - -- -3 Sz,L£91" EXISTING CHANNEL \ \ \\ \ \\ N
5Z,
REMOVE INVASIVE `\
SPECIES FROM WOODE `
AREA o, "g \ Lo
N \
\
U
2
WICKER BRANCH m o g
a Z
3W o
0 m
w� a
i Fc;FNn ix w
L TREE LINE 5 C7
FLOODPLAIN PLANTING ZONE m W
r — — EASEMENT BOUNDARY z
STREAM ALIGNMENT
U X01, - - -- EXISTING CHANNEL
W 9N CULVERT STREAMBANK PLANTING ZONE
z
_ / DATE
$$DATE$$
U PROJECT NO
80220942
/ FILENAME
SHEET NO
17
C / DRAWN BY CHKD BY
C STP BMD

WW
WW
o�
wz
J�
Ws
/ BEGIN TRI 419£
CONS
3 ,L£,6V Ll �\
ZSSS6
l[gls M f16�Z0 S
----------------- - 3�516�[F` `
- ____________ -_ ��0/1/
G
- - - - - -- EN
-- - -- _ - CONS
3 80 0S �0 N ',
3 bz 8Zf` '
I NORTH of £y 00 N
` -- -- - -- - -- EXISTING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS
ROAD STREAMBANK PLANTING FLOODPLAIN PLANTING-
ZONE ZONE - -
- - -- - --- - -- -,
BEGIN TRIB 3 I
CONSTRUCTION I
BEGIN TRIB
MITIGATION
;I�.✓}V //p/�/�'�\��' 7---,7m,7 I I�]]�7y1 SS91 Q mrlrrrn- rrrt -- .. .
111.11 III. IIy HYI I�I �IIYI II
IIIII1111111 IIII11111111111111111 III III I
II111111111 ......IIII IIII II11 III III
111111111111111 'IIII 111111 111111 liillllll! III
.1111
11 .....IIII... I.11.11 1111
1 111 I III I ,
Illllllllllll..11llllllllllllll III I
g022g /r�i i l l l l l l ..
.....III 11111.11111. 111111111111111. 111111111. 111111111111....11.... 111.1.. 111111..IIIIlI11I1I111 IIIII11111 llllllllliiii��iii��i�i����
S 233a 21 �� rrI
/T 1
'rr pf�:!i rill l
%f
r r+'
rr
r`
I
I lt1-
T T G.i'1
rT
Y
rrl 1
I I I I I I I 11 ;i y1
L�
�4
_ I
III
++T-I iii ii
rrfll .
.
.
1111. 11111111111111111111111IIII11 ..III11111! IIIIIIII II.
✓}:1.3 == 1111111 1111111111111111111111
/11 III ��rffll Illy ....... 111 111
,�I 1111 J
!lLLLW 11y111w- - .LL'
a•t _IJJ 11111
I
� iilllllliiiiiiiy�/ N 1147 41� W
60210
1111111111..111.11 111111111111111 .1111111111..... .......1.w
1 11/1111 111111 "III
IlillII1111111 IIII 1111111111111111111111111111111
II III Illllil 111111111 Ill lull ; W
1 11.1..1111. l.y 114
1��11�' iiy�Y
N 2 -5%Ar
.. 111111 .111 lI 1111.1.1111 11 ....1
/.1
11.111 111.1 11.11 111....I1IIIII1111
I
3
� � 1
P
I
(n I
01 0D
5��k��
I .... ....... I
Tr * 1 1i�111
ii IIIII I
Ilrlll I ii. ii.�
.. i "1,+
NG CHANNEL
I F=rFNn
�- TREE LINE
— EASEMENT BOUNDARY
STREAM ALIGNMENT
- -- EXISTING CHANNEL
CULVERT
;a
FLOODPLAIN PLANTING ZONE
STREAMBANK PLANTING ZONE
i
I
i
I
i
CTIO
IN
d
0
0
J
U
J W)
Fa-
Z
O
N
N_
LL 0
O
CD
CD u
U
Z u
co° g
t2g aY
U_O Z
3W O
LL 0
o
W a a
Q� W
5 n C7
m W
H R
DATE
SfDATEES
PROJECT NO
80220942
FILENAME
SHEET NO
C-18
DRAWN BY CHKD BY
STP I BMD