20131087 Ver 1_Mitigation Plan_FINAL_20140326

13- 1b8i
lft�LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
720 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 919.782.0495 tel. [phone] fax
TO: NCDWR- Program Development Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Kulz
FDATE. 3/24/2014
RE: 'Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan
We are sending via: ❑ Overnight ® Regular Mail ❑ Pick -up ❑ Hand Delivered
The following items: ❑ Correspondence ❑ Plans ❑ Specifications ® Other as listed below:
COPIES DATE NO. I DESCRIPTION
1 3/24/2014 Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan (hard copy)
1 3/24/2014 Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan (pdf on CD)
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
® For Approval ❑ As Requested ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Returned for Corrections
❑ For Your Use ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Forward to Subcontractor
REMARKS:

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
POPLIN RIDGE STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EEP PROJECT # 95359
CONTRACT # 004672
Yadkin River Basin
HUC 03040105070050
■. rdft !.s
rp
r
i�+-
�-7%j
�... .. _� : � • +die
Prepared for:
r -I%-
O Stem
Ei is ement
PPOGVAM
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
March 2014

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
Union County, North Carolina
EEP Project # 95359
Contract # 004672
Yadkin River Basin
HUC 03040105070050
Prepared for:
0 S1
E� a mC
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
Prepared by:
Environmental Banc & Exchange
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100
Raleigh, NC 27606
919 - 829 -9909
ft
RVDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, NC 28205
704 - 334 -5348
March 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
"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.
These documents govern NCEEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory
mitigation."
The Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project (EEP Project 495359) is located within an agricultural
watershed in Union County, North Carolina, approximately six miles north of Monroe. Many stream
channels in the area have been heavily impacted by channelization and agricultural practices. The project
will involve the restoration and protection of streams in the Stewarts Creek watershed. The purpose of
this restoration project is to restore and enhance a stream complex located within the Yadkin River Basin.
The project lies within USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03040105070050 (USGS, 1998) and within the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Yadkin River Subbasin 03 -07 -14 ( NCDENR,
2002). The easement totals 27.17 acres, and is split into two tributary systems (UT1 and UT2). The
western system (UT1) is divided into seven reaches along four unnamed tributaries to East Fork Stewarts
Creek. The eastern system (UT2) is divided into five reaches, all unnamed tributaries of East Fork
Stewarts Creek. UT1 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.21 square miles (136 acres); it begins at the start of
the restoration project (STA 1 +20) and extends southeast to STA 12 +58. UT1 -Reach 2 has a drainage
area of 0.39 square miles (248 acres); it begins at STA 12 +58 and extends to STA 24 +89. UT1 -Reach 3
has a drainage area of 0.60 square miles (384 acres); it begins at STA 24 +89 and extends to STA 34 +50.
UT1 -Reach 4 is the downstream section of UT1 (STA 34 +50 to 46 +60), and has a drainage area of 1.14
square miles (728 acres). Reach UT1 -A has a drainage area of 0.14 square miles (88 acres) and flows
south directly into UT at the break between Reaches 1 and 2. UT1 -B has a drainage area of 0.19 square
miles (120 acres) and flows south to the break between UT1 Reaches 2 and 3. UT1 -C has a drainage area
of 0.39 square miles (250 acres) and flows east to the break between UT1 Reaches 3 and 4 (Figure Ila).
UT2 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.99 square miles (631 acres); it begins at the start of the UT2 portion
of the restoration project (STA 0 +00) and extends southwest to STA 4 +90. UT2 -Reach 2 has a drainage
area of 1.13 square miles (726 acres); it begins at STA 4 +90 and extends to STA 13 +97. UT2 -Reach 3
has a drainage area of 1.24 square miles (792 acres); it begins at STA 13 +97 and extends to STA 19 +18.
UT2 -Reach 4 has a drainage area of 1.35 square miles (861 acres); it begins at STA 19 +18 and extends to
STA 22 +07. Reach UT2 -A has a drainage area of 0.08 square miles (49 acres) and flows east into UT2 at
the break between Reaches 2 and 3 (Figure llb).
Land uses within and immediately adjacent to the project area include row crops, hay fields, pasture,
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO), and wooded areas. The total easement area is 27.17
acres, approximately 4.69 acres of which are wooded and the remaining 22.48 acres is agricultural fields
and pasture. Land use immediately surrounding the project consists of livestock grazing, row crops, and
forestry. Current stream conditions along the project's proposed restoration reaches demonstrate
significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from livestock and channelization performed to
promote agricultural activities. Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor condition throughout most of
the project area. Much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs, is active pasture and /or crops are
present up to the edge of the existing channel. Little habitat is available to support aquatic life, and the
channels are not maximizing their potential to filter nutrients because they are entrenched.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan March 2014

The goal for the Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration project is to restore the channelized streams based on
reference reach conditions, enrich the aquatic ecosystem through stream restoration, riparian buffer
habitat improvements and cattle exclusion, and provide ecological uplift within the Yadkin River Basin.
The design will be based on reference conditions, USACE guidance ( USACE, 2005), and criteria that are
developed during this project to achieve success.
The objective for this restoration project is to design a natural waterway with appropriate cross - sectional
dimension and slope that will provide function and meet the appropriate success criteria for the existing
streams. Accomplishing this objective entails the restoration of natural stream characteristics, such as
stable cross sections, planform, and in- stream habitat. The floodplain areas will be hydrologically
reconnected to the channel to provide natural exchange and storage during flood events. Additional
project objectives, including restoring the riparian buffer with native vegetation, ensuring hydraulic
stability, and eradicating invasive species, are listed in Section 1.
The design approach for Poplin Ridge is to combine the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain.
The analog method involves the use of a "template" stream adjacent to, nearby, or previously in the same
location as the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach are replicated to create the
features of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and boundary conditions are
similar between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore, et al., 2001). Hydraulic geometry was
developed using analytical methods in an effort to identify the design discharge.
The Poplin Ridge Site will include Priority Level I stream restoration, stream Enhancement Levels I and
II, and Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement. Priority Level I stream restoration will incorporate
the design of a single- thread meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken from a reference
site, published empirical relationships, NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curves, and hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses. Approximately 3,697 linear feet of stream channel will be reconstructed.
Enhancement Level I will be applied to 3,305 linear feet of channel that requires stabilization bank
improvements, and buffer restoration. Enhancement Level II will be applied to an additional 953 linear
feet of channel that requires buffer enhancement and /or minimal bank and habitat improvements.
Additionally, Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement is proposed on 1,192 feet of channel.
The stream and adjacent riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50 -foot permanent conservation
easement, which will be fenced as needed to exclude livestock. However, an approximately 100 -foot
section along the east side of Reach UT1 -R4 is proposed where the minimum 50 -foot conservation
easement cannot be met due to a Union Power Cooperative 100 -foot right -of -way. At this location, the
conservation easement will be extended to a width of 75- to 100 -feet along the west side of the channel to
offset the loss of easement on the opposite side. Additionally, areas within the power easement that fall
within the 50 -foot buffer will be planted with herbaceous /shrub vegetation. No loss in stream credit is
expected at this location since the buffer width will be increased along the west side to offset the
encroachment of the powerline easement as was discussed with the IRT on July 11, 2012.
Throughout the project area, there will be several breaks within the conservation easement where stream
credits will not be generated to account either for 60 -foot farm crossings or for existing Union Power
overhead utility crossings. Along UT1, one existing crossing will be moved outside of the project, one
new culvert crossing will be installed, and three culvert crossings will be upgraded. Along UT2, the
existing culvert crossing will be upgraded, and there will be one 30 -foot easement break associated with
an existing Union Power easement. These two easement breaks will be planted with herbaceous /shrub
vegetation within the 50 -foot buffer.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan March 2014

After completion of all construction and planting activities, the site will be monitored on a regular basis.
A physical inspection of the site will be conducted a minimum of twice per year throughout the seven
year post - construction monitoring period, or until performance standards are met. These site inspections
will identify site components and features that require routine maintenance. The measure of stream
restoration success will be documented bankfull flows and no change in stream channel classification.
The measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 210 trees per acre at the end
of Year 7 of the monitoring period. Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP monitoring
template.
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
State of North Carolina (State). The State 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan March 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................. ...............................
1
2. SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................ ...............................
2
2.1 Directions to Site ........................................................................................... ...............................
2
2.2 Site Selection ................................................................................................. ...............................
2
2.2.1 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NC DWQ River Basin ..................... ...............................
2
2.2.2 Project Components ............................................................................... ...............................
2
2.2.3 Historical Land Use and Development Trends ...................................... ...............................
3
2.3 Historical condition ....................................................................................... ...............................
3
2.3.1 Project Site Vicinity Map ...................................................................... ...............................
5
2.3.2 Project Site Watershed Map .................................................................. ...............................
6
2.4 Soil Survey ..................................................................................................... ...............................
7
2.4.1 Project Site NRCS Soil Survey Map ..................................................... ...............................
8
2.4.2 Project Site Current Condition Plan View ............................................. ...............................
9
2.4.3 Project Site Current Condition Plan View (cont.) ............................... ...............................
10
2.4.4 Project Site Historical Condition Plan View ....................................... ...............................
11
2.5 Site Photographs .......................................................................................... ...............................
12
3. SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ................................................................ ...............................
15
3.1 Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information ................................... ...............................
15
3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure ................................................................ ...............................
16
4. BASELINE INFORMATION ............................................................................. ...............................
17
4.1 Watershed Summary Information ................................................................ ...............................
17
4.1.1 Drainage Area ...................................................................................... ...............................
17
4.1.2 Surface Water Classification ............................................................... ...............................
17
4.1.3 Endangered/Threatened Species .......................................................... ...............................
18
4.1.4 Cultural Resources ............................................................................... ...............................
19
4.2 Reach Summary Information ....................................................................... ...............................
19
4.2.1 Channel Classification ......................................................................... ...............................
20
4.2.2 Discharge ............................................................................................. ...............................
21
4.2.3 Channel Morphology ........................................................................... ...............................
21
4.2.4 Channel Stability Assessment .............................................................. ...............................
24
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification ........................................................................... ...............................
25
4.2.6 Vegetation .............................................................................................. .............................26
4.2.7 Quantitative Habitat Assessment ......................................................... ...............................
26
4.3 Wetland Summary Information ................................................................... ...............................
30
4.3.1 Existing Wetlands ................................................................................ ...............................
30
4.3.2 Wetland Impacts .................................................................................. ...............................
31
4.4 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints .................................. ...............................
37
4.4.1 Property Ownership, Boundary, and Utilities ...................................... ...............................
37
4.4.2 FEMA/ Hydrologic Trespass ............................................................... ...............................
37
5. DETERMINATION OF CREDITS .................................................................... ...............................
39
6. CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE ...................................................................... ...............................
40
6.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits .......................................................... ...............................
40
6.2 Subsequent Credit Releases ......................................................................... ...............................
40
7. MITIGATION WORK PLAN ............................................................................. ...............................
42
7.1 Reference Stream Studies ............................................................................ ...............................
42
7.1.1 Target Reference Conditions ............................................................... ...............................
42
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan i March 2014

7.1.2 Reference Site Search Methodology .................................................... ...............................
44
7.1.3 Reference Watershed Characterization ................................................ ...............................
44
7.1.4 Reference Soils Characterization ......................................................... ...............................
44
7.1.5 Reference Discharge ............................................................................ ...............................
44
7.1.6 Reference Channel Morphology .......................................................... ...............................
44
7.1.7 Reference Channel Stability Assessment ............................................. ...............................
45
7.1.8 Reference Bankfull Verification .......................................................... ...............................
45
7.1.9 Reference Riparian Vegetation ............................................................ ...............................
45
7.1.10 Stream Habitat Assessment — Woody Debris ...................................... ...............................
46
7.2 Design Parameters ....................................................................................... ...............................
46
7.2.1 Stream Restoration Approach .............................................................. ...............................
46
7.2.2 Natural Plant Community Restoration ................................................. ...............................
55
7.2.3 Best Management Practices ................................................................. ...............................
57
7.2.4 Site Preparation .................................................................................... ...............................
57
7.3 Data Analysis ............................................................................................... ...............................
57
7.3.1 Stream Data Analysis ........................................................................... ...............................
57
7.3.1 Mitigation Summary ............................................................................ ...............................
63
8. MAINTENANCE PLAN .................................................................................... ...............................
64
9. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ....................................................................... ...............................
65
9.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria ............................................................ ...............................
65
9.1.1 Bankfull Events .................................................................................... ...............................
65
9.1.2 Cross Sections ...................................................................................... ...............................
65
9.1.3 Digital Image Stations ......................................................................... ...............................
65
9.2 Vegetation Success Criteria ......................................................................... ...............................
65
9.3 Scheduling /Reporting .................................................................................. ...............................
65
10. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ................................................................ ...............................
67
10.1 As -Built Survey ........................................................................................... ...............................
67
10.2 Visual Monitoring ........................................................................................ ...............................
67
10.3 Cross Sections .............................................................................................. ...............................
68
10.4 Bank Pin Arrays ........................................................................................... ...............................
68
10.5 Surface Flow ................................................................................................ ...............................
68
10.1 Vegetative Success Criteria ......................................................................... ...............................
68
10.2 Remedial Actions ......................................................................................... ...............................
68
11. LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................... ...............................
70
12. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................ ...............................
71
13. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES ........................................................................... .............................72
14. OTHER INFORMATION ............................................................................... ...............................
73
14.1 References ...................................................................................................... .............................73
14.2 Definitions ................................................................................................... ...............................
75
14.3 Appendix A — Site Protection Instrument( s) ................................................ ...............................
76
14.4 Appendix B — Baseline Information Data .................................................... ...............................
77
14.5 Appendix C — Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses .......................... ...............................
149
14.6 Appendix D — Poplin Ridge Design Plan Sheets (11" x17") ...................... ...............................
179
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan ii March 2014

List of Tables
Table 1. Poplin Ridge Site Project Components - Stream Mitigation ...............................
Table 2. Historical Land Use and Development Trends ..................... ...............................
Table 3. Project Parcel and Landowner Information .......................... ...............................
Table 4. Project Information ............................................................... ...............................
Table 5. Project Watershed Summary Information ............................ ...............................
Table 6. Reach Summary Information ................................................ ...............................
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics ..................... ...............................
Table 8. Channel Stability Assessment Results - UT1 ....................... ...............................
Table 9. Channel Stability Assessment Results - UT2 ....................... ...............................
Table 10. Natural Community Summary ............................................ ...............................
Table 11. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD structures used in the design reach ...
Table 12. Small Woody Debris calculations for the reference and design reach ..............
Table 13. Wetland Summary Information .......................................... ...............................
Table 14. Regulatory Considerations .................................................. ...............................
Table 15. Determination of Credits .................................................... ...............................
Table16. Project Components ............................................................ ...............................
Table17. Component Summation ...................................................... ...............................
Table18. Stream Credits .................................................................... ...............................
Table 19. Tree Communities at the Reference Reach for Poplin Ridge Site .....................
Table 20. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters .... ...............................
Table21. Proposed Plant List ............................................................. ...............................
Table 22. Peak Flow Comparison ....................................................... ...............................
Table 23. Stable Channel Design Output ............................................ ...............................
Table 24. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses .... ...............................
Table 25. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities ........... ...............................
Table 26. Maintenance Plan ............................................................... ...............................
Table 27. Monitoring Requirements ................................................... ...............................
List of Figures
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map ............................
Figure 2. USGS/Watershed Map .........................
Figure 3. NRCS Soils Map ... ...............................
Figure 4a. Current Conditions - UT 1 ..................
Figure 4b. Current Conditons - UT2 ...................
Figure 5. 1976 Historical Conditions Map ..........
Figure 6. Project Site NWI Wetlands Map..........
Figure 6a. Wetland Impacts .. ...............................
Figure 7. Project Site Land Use ...........................
Figure 8. Project Site Natural Communities........
Figure 9. Project Site FEMA Map .......................
Figure 10. Reference Reach Site Map .................
Figure l la. Project Site Conceptual Plan Design
Figure l lb. Project Site Conceptual Plan Design
3
4
... 15
... 17
... 18
... 19
... 20
... 25
... 25
... 26
... 27
... 28
... 31
... 37
... 39
... 39
... 39
... 40
... 46
... 54
... 56
... 59
... 60
... 60
... 61
... 64
... 67
5
6
9
... 10
... 11
... 33
... 34
... 35
... 36
... 38
... 43
... 51
... 52
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan iii March 2014

1. RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project is located in the Lake Twitty- Stewarts Creek Watershed
(http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /eep /priorities -map). This 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC
03040105070050) is identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee
Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP).
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) develops River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) 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 TLWs receive priority for EEP planning and restoration project funds. Currently, no
Local Watershed Plan (LWP) is available for the project area.
The watershed is characterized by approximately 60 percent agricultural land use area with over 30
animal operations. The Poplin Ridge Mitigation Site drains into Stewarts Creek. The 2012 NC 303(d) List
rates Stewart Creek as Impaired for aquatic life because of ecological and biological integrity of benthos.
From 0.4 miles downstream of Stumplick Branch to Lake Twitty, Stewart's Creek is a Water Supply III
watershed that services the City of Monroe. Lake Twitty is impaired for aquatic life because of low
dissolved oxygen, copper, and chlorophyll a. This suburban stream is likely affected by both low flows
and nonpoint runoff from its urban /suburban watershed. (BAU Memo B- 060928; Appendix A -Use
Support Ratings -Rocky River)
The 2009 Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP identified water quality, point and non -point source runoff, and
animal operations as major stressors within this TLW. The Poplin Ridge Stream and Wetland Restoration
Project was identified as a Stream and Wetland opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and
hydrology within the TLW.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW, and include the following:
• Nutrient removal,
• Sediment removal,
• Reducing runoff from animal operations,
• Filtration of runoff, and
• Improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Establishing riparian buffer areas adjacent to CAFOs,
• Converting active farm fields to forested buffers,
• Stabilization of eroding stream banks,
• Reduction in stream bank slope,
• Restoration of riparian buffer bottomland hardwood habitats, and
• Construction of in- stream structures designed to improve bedform diversity and trap detritus.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 1 March 2014

2. SITE SELECTION
2.1 Directions to Site
The Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site (Site) is located in Union County approximately six miles north
of Monroe, NC (Figure 1). To access the Site from the city of Monroe, travel west on West Roosevelt
Boulevard, then turn north onto Secrest Short Cut Road. To access UT1, travel 3.6 miles on Secrest Short
Cut Road, then turn right onto a gravel farm road and drive approximately 0.6 miles. To access UT2,
travel north on Secrest Short Cut Road for 2.8 miles, then turn right onto Roanoke Church Road. After
0.8 miles, turn left onto a gravel farm road. This private road will split just past the pond on the left. At
the split, stay to the left and travel approximately 800 feet to access the downstream end of UT2.
2.2 Site Selection
2.2.1 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NC DWQ River Basin
The project is located within the Yadkin River Basin (8 -digit USGS HUC 03040105, 14 -digit USGS
HUC 03040105070050) (USGS, 1998) and the NCDWQ Yadkin 03 -07 -14 sub -basin ( NCDWQ, 2002)
(Figure 2).
2.2.2 Project Components
The project area is comprised of two perennial drainage features that flow from north to south towards
their confluence with Stewarts Creek (Figure 4). UT1 has three smaller tributaries, one of which is
intermittent. A small intermittent tributary (UT2 -A) enters UT2 from the west, and an impoundment is
located on the UT2 stream channel near the upper end of the project. Each drainage feature was assessed
using the NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11). The stream mitigation project components
are summarized in Table 1.
US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping depicts four wetlands within
the project site area (Figure 6). Three of these wetlands are small ponds classified as PUBHh (Palustrine
Unconsolidated Bottom Permanently Flooded Diked/Impounded). These small ponds are adjacent to the
stream channels; one is in the proposed buffer on UT2 and will be filled, one is within the project limits
on UT2, and the third, at the head of UT1, is classified a PFO1 (Palustrine Forested Broad - Leaved
Deciduous Temporarily Flooded). This NWI wetland was field verified and found not to be present or
within the proposed project area.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 2 March 2014

Table 1. Poplin Ridge Site Project Components — Stream Mitigation
Total 9,214 9,147 6,345
P = Priority 1; SP &BE = Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement
2) The calculations for existing and proposed lengths and SNWs do not include stream segments associated with existing
culverts or breaks in the proposed conservation easement associated with culvert or utility crossings.
3) Reach UT2 -3 has a lower mitigation ratio of 1:1.5 due to previous impacts from the landowner. The proposed lower
ratio is based on coordination with USACE.
4) See Figures 11A and 11B for reach locations.
2.2.3 Historical Land Use and Development Trends
2.3 Historical condition
Aerial imagery and information provided by the property owners indicate that the subject site has been
used extensively for agricultural purposes. The locations of the streams have not changed in over 50 years
(Figure 5). From 1961 to present, the land has been primarily used for agricultural crop production.
Portions of forested buffers along UT1 and UT1 -C were cleared between 1969 and 1976. By 1976, one
poultry house was constructed along both UT1 and UT2. Between 1976 and 1983, two CAFOs (poultry
houses) were added to the UT1 site and three additional houses were added along UT2. A pond on the
eastern UT2 site (UT2 -R2) was also constructed between 1976 and 1983. Between 1983 and 1993, three
additional poultry houses were added, for a total of six along the UT1 site. No noticeable changes
occurred along UT2 site. The 1998 aerial photography shows the forested area above UT2 -R2 (pond) was
cleared and converted into agriculture fields between 1993 and 1998. No other changes to land use are
noticeable at that time. Since 1998 little development has occurred at the project site or adjacent property.
The area remains in an agricultural use, with some neighboring forested property. As detailed in this
section, several watershed characteristics, including groundwater, vegetation, surface drainage, and soils,
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 3 March 2014
Existing
Proposed
Reach
Mitigation
Stationing
Length
Length
Mitigation
SMUs2
Type
(Proposed)
Ratio
(LF)
(LF)
UTl -1
SP &BE
1 +20
to
6 +92
572
572
1:5.0
114
UTl -1
Enhancement I
6 +92
to
12 +58
566
566
1
:1.5
377
UTl -2
P1 Restoration
12 +58
to
24 +89
1,284
1,171
1
: 1.0
1,171
UTl -3
P1 Restoration
24 +89
to
34 +50
833
901
1
: 1.0
901
UTl -4
Enhancement I
34 +50
to
46 +60
1,252
1,210
1
: 1.5
807
UTl -A
Enhancement I
0 +65
to
2 +82
197
217
1:
1.5
145
UTl -B
SP &BE
0 +09
to
6 +29
620
620
1:5.0
124
UTl -B
Enhancement I
6 +29
to
11 +46
512
455
1
:1.5
303
UTl -C
Enhancement I
1 +21
to
9 +78
883
857
1:1.5
571
UT2 -1
Enhancement II
0 +00
to
4 +90
490
490
1
:2.5
196
UT2 -2
P1 Restoration
4 +90
to
13 +97
875
847
1
: 1.0
847
UT2 -3
P1 Restoration
13 +97
to
19 +18
495
521
1
: 1.5
347
UT24
P1 Restoration
19 +18
to
22 +07
270
257
1
: 1.0
257
UT2 -A
Enhancement II
0 +65
to
5 +28
365
463
1
:2.5
185
Total 9,214 9,147 6,345
P = Priority 1; SP &BE = Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement
2) The calculations for existing and proposed lengths and SNWs do not include stream segments associated with existing
culverts or breaks in the proposed conservation easement associated with culvert or utility crossings.
3) Reach UT2 -3 has a lower mitigation ratio of 1:1.5 due to previous impacts from the landowner. The proposed lower
ratio is based on coordination with USACE.
4) See Figures 11A and 11B for reach locations.
2.2.3 Historical Land Use and Development Trends
2.3 Historical condition
Aerial imagery and information provided by the property owners indicate that the subject site has been
used extensively for agricultural purposes. The locations of the streams have not changed in over 50 years
(Figure 5). From 1961 to present, the land has been primarily used for agricultural crop production.
Portions of forested buffers along UT1 and UT1 -C were cleared between 1969 and 1976. By 1976, one
poultry house was constructed along both UT1 and UT2. Between 1976 and 1983, two CAFOs (poultry
houses) were added to the UT1 site and three additional houses were added along UT2. A pond on the
eastern UT2 site (UT2 -R2) was also constructed between 1976 and 1983. Between 1983 and 1993, three
additional poultry houses were added, for a total of six along the UT1 site. No noticeable changes
occurred along UT2 site. The 1998 aerial photography shows the forested area above UT2 -R2 (pond) was
cleared and converted into agriculture fields between 1993 and 1998. No other changes to land use are
noticeable at that time. Since 1998 little development has occurred at the project site or adjacent property.
The area remains in an agricultural use, with some neighboring forested property. As detailed in this
section, several watershed characteristics, including groundwater, vegetation, surface drainage, and soils,
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 3 March 2014

have been modified. Soil structure and surface texture have been altered from intensive agricultural
operations. Historical land use development trends for the Site are summarized in Table 2. Figure 5
shows 1976 aerial photography for the Site; additional historical aerial photographs from 1961, 1969,
1976, 1983, 1993, and 1998 are included in the Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) report in
Appendix B.
Table 2. Historical Land Use and Development Trends
Date Land Use and Development Observations*
Agricultural fields throughout the project area. UT1 Reach 3 and 4 were forested
1961 on the left bank. UT1 -C also had a forested buffer on both banks. No evidence of
CAFO (poultry houses) on either UT or UT2 sites.
1969 Little change.
The forested corridor where UT1 -R3, UT1 -R4, and UT1 -C are proposed has
1976 been logged and converted into agricultural fields. One CAFO (poultry house)
had been added to the western UT1 site. On the eastern UT2 site, one CAFO and
a few buildings have been added.
Two CAFO (poultry houses) have been added to the UT1 site. Three additional
1983 CAFO (poultry houses) have been added to the UT2 site. UT2 -R2 (pond) is
present.
1993 On the western UT1 farm operation, three additional poultry houses have been
added for a total of six houses. The eastern UT2 farm has not changed.
1998 The forested area above UT2 -R2 (pond) has been logged and converted into
agricultural fields. No other changes to land use are noticeable.
2010 Depicts current site conditions.
* Observations based on aerial imagery
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 4 March 2014

2.3.1 Project Site Vicinity Map
, E", BOX
UNION COUNTY
r
.�
Scale, INTS
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 5 March 2014

J.2 Project Site Watershed Map
� ��_ .. ' _ i, rte-' � �... 1 �ti.- �'� # s�, � � /` ����� �, � � N •-�
11 191
Roan
I ' •� / w iii___ ' lYr- 1, C 8 � o.
(,�\�� •• • l! � `�~ �� \ 1 _ �� .J `� ` ,�� jam.
f_
v
Figure 2. Legend
USGSIVIIatershed Map Future Monroe By -Pass Route
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Proposed Streams
Proposed Easement
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
Feet � Drainage Areas
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 6 March 2014
1 inch = 2,500 feet � Waterbodies
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 6 March 2014

2.4 Soil Survey
The Poplin Ridge site is located in the Southern Piedmont Physiographic Province. The watershed is
underlain by a fractured bedrock aquifer. Groundwater in the area is from aquifers that are local in nature
(recharged generally from surrounding high topographic areas; generally within one mile). Aquifers are
part of the Piedmont regolith- fractured bedrock groundwater system. Bored wells tap the regolith
(saprolite) part of the system and drilled wells tap the bedrock fractures. Fractured -rock aquifers may not
always convey or store large quantities of water. The water generally is suitable for drinking and other
uses, but iron, manganese, and sulfate locally occur in objectionable concentrations. The water from these
aquifers is mostly a calcium bicarbonate type and is considered too hard.
The project area falls within the Badin - Cid - Goldston -Tatum soil association. The landscape where this
association is found includes wide ridges with upland depressions and narrow ridges with convex side
slopes along the major streams. Much of the area is shallow to fractured slate bedrock. The Union County
Soil Survey depicts a limited number of soil types within the project area (Figure 3). The map units
present are Badin channery silt loam, Chewacla silt loam, Cid channery silt loam, Goldston -Badin
complex, Tarrus gravelly silt loam, and Tarrus gravelly silty clay loam, moderately eroded. Of the six
mapped soil series that occur throughout the project, the majority consists of Chewacla and Tarrus. The
loamy Chewacla soil is derived from alluvium of the fine- grained rocks found in the local upland
watersheds. The remaining soils as well as the upland soils in the watershed formed in residuum
weathered from schist, argillite or other fine- grained metavolcanic rocks of the Carolina Slate Belt.
Badin channery silt loam is moderately deep, well- drained soil and has moderate permeability with
medium to rapid runoff. The seasonal high water table is greater than 80 inches below the surface.
Chewlaca silt loam is a somewhat poorly drained soil. It has moderate permeability with very slow runoff
and typically floods frequently for brief periods. The seasonally high water table ranges from 6 to 18
inches below the surface. Cid channery silt loam is moderately well or somewhat poorly drained soil. It
has up to 35 percent rock fragment. Permeability is slow and runoff is slow to moderate. The seasonally
perched water table ranges from 12 to 30 inches below the surface in the winter and spring. The
Goldston -Badin complex consists of two soils that cannot be shown separately on the maps. This unit is a
well- drained soil found on hill slopes on ridges. Permeability ranges from very low to high with a
seasonal high water table greater than 80 inches below the surface. Tarrus gravelly silty clay loam is
moderately eroded. This soil is well drained and has moderate permeability with low to very rapid runoff
and a seasonal high water table greater than 80 inches below the surface. Rock fragments of quartz or
other fine- grained rock range up to 40 percent.
The Chewacla soil has bedrock at five to ten feet deep and the remaining soils found at the project site are
shallow to weathered and hard fractured slate bedrock. These soils are typically used as cropland, pasture,
or woodland. The Chewacla and Tarrus gravelly silt loam are considered prime farmland. The Chewacla
series is considered to have small areas of hydric inclusions. The Badin and Cid soils are considered
farmland of statewide importance. These soils are shallow to weathered bedrock, typically 20 to 40 inches
for Badin and Cid, and 40 to 80 inches for Goldston -Badin complex soils and Tarrus.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 7 March 2014

2.4.1 Project Site NRCS Soil Survey Map
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 8 March 2014
Figure 3. Legend
NRCS Soils Map Proposed Streams
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Proposed Easement
0 750 1,500 3,000
Feet Union County Soils
1 inch = 1,500 feet Target Parcels
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 8 March 2014

2.4.2 Project Site Current Condition Plan View
Left Stream Bank
Riparian Stream Buffer'
Existing Stre#f
Crossing
Right Stream Bank
Existing Stream
Crossing
as
Q
L
m
MOMD
Stable - <10%
momm
active erosion
[3131313
Mod. Unstable 10-
50% actve erosion
c
Highly Unstable
> 50% active erosion
Mature No Mature
Hardwoods Hardwoods
as
Q
L
m
MOMD
momm
[3131313
Riparian Stream
Mature
Hardwoods
Other N
Woody Cover W
c
C
Herbaceous R
t
U
Stable Disturbance Invasives Both
Present Present Present
` � N
Existing Stream
'Crossing
( -Left Stream Bank
..Stream bed /Channel Size
NX
1
sr
1
1
1
— �e -- raoi —u9� —�
rading Eroding Bedrock Stably
a07 mx
O
dx
07- 1.3 c N
m m
X w
1.3 D
'm
m
Figure 4a. Legend
Current Conditions - UT1
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Parcels
Not to Scale Contours
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 9 March 2014

2.4.3 Project Site Current Condition Plan View (cont.)
i
s
Existing Road Crossi
Y'04--ir,
Right Stream Banki
r
Streambed /Channel Size
Riparian Stream Buffer
Stream Bank
Aggrading Eroding Bedrock Stable
Bank Vegetation I Buffer Condition
Stable - 101%
-- active erosion
n
� ? Mad. Unstable 10 -
active erosion
m50%
c
m Highly Unstable
7
m
- -- > 50% active erosion
Mature No Mature
Hardwoods Hardwoods
Stable uistoroance invasives tram
Present Present Present
< 0.7 �. m
o x
m rg
07 -1.3 2 x
m tr1
X
,1 3
Mature
Hardwoods
Other
Woody Cover
Herbaceous
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 10 March 2014
Figure 4b.
Current Conditions - UT2 Legend
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Parcels
Not to Scale Contours
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 10 March 2014

2.4.4 Project Site Historical Condition Plan View
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 11 March 2014
`gene Hobbs ,4
�0�0
Now
0
72
40
C,,
CDs
m
a,
I
o
1
Oke C
c h
Se
cress
o 4r�h
- a
Sho
4E
Source: 1976 Aerial Photography
Figure 5. Legend
1976 Historical Conditions Map Proposed Streams
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Q Proposed Easement
0 750 1,500 3,000
Feet Target Parcels
1 inch = 1,500 feet
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 11 March 2014

2.5 Site Photographs
Facing downstream on UT1 -RI (Stream
Preservation and Buffer Enhancement
section). 12/11/12
Facing downstream on UT1 -RI
(Enhancement I section).
12/11/12
Facing downstream on UT 1 -R2 (P 1
Restoration).
12/11/12
Facing upstream on UT 1 -R3 (P 1
Restoration).
1/9/13
Facing upstream on UT1 -R4
(Enhancement 1).
1/9/13
Facing upstream on UT1 -A (Enhancement I)
(Enhancement 1).
12/11/12
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 12 March 2014

Facing upstream on UT1 -B (Enhancement I
section).
1/9/13
Facing upstream on UTI -C (Enhancement I).
1/9/13
Facing downstream on UT2 -R1
(Enhancement II).
12/11/12
Facing upstream on UT2 -R3 (P1
Restoration).
12/11/12
Facing upstream on UT2 -R4
(PI Restoration) .
12/11/12
Facing downstream on UT2 -A
(Enhancement II).
12/11/12
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 13 March 2014

Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 14 March 2014

3. SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
3.1 Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the following parcels. A copy of the land protection instrument(s) is included in the
appendices.
Table 3. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
When available, the recorded document(s) will be provided. If the recorded document(s) are not available,
the template documents will be provided.
All site protection instruments require 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 15 March 2014
Site
Deed Book
Acreage
Landowner
PIN
County
Protection
and Page
protected
Instrument
Number
POPLIN THOMAS RAY &
Parcel A
8273001
Union
10.18
JUDY H
Parcel B
SIMPSON DON SCOTT
8273007
Union
4.44
AYCOTH BILLY F SR
Parcel C
8303014
Union
8.80
TRUSTEE
Parcel D
HAMILTON KAREN S
08273006A
Union
2.17
BAUCOM TAMMY
Parcel E
08273006B
Union
1.35
RENEE S
PHUNG FRANK &
Parcel F
08303014C
Union
0.23
SYLVIA
TOTAL 27.17
When available, the recorded document(s) will be provided. If the recorded document(s) are not available,
the template documents will be provided.
All site protection instruments require 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 15 March 2014

3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure
Site protection instrument figures will be provided as easement plats become available.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 16 March 2014

4. BASELINE INFORMATION
Table 4. Project Information
Project Name
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
County
Union
Project Area (acres)
27.17
Project Coordinates (latitude and
longitude)
UTl: 35° 03' 15.97" N 80° 34' 21.64" W
UT2: 35° 03' 17.99" N 80° 33'46.77" W
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
4.1.1 Drainage Area
The easement totals 27.17 acres and is split into two tributary systems (UT1 and UT2). The western
system (UT1) is divided into seven reaches along four unnamed tributaries to East Fork Stewarts Creek.
The eastern system (UT2) is divided into five reaches, all unnamed tributaries of East Fork Stewarts
Creek. UT1 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.21 square miles (136 acres); it begins at the start of the
restoration project (STA 0 +00) and extends southeast to STA 12 +58. UT1 -Reach 2 has a drainage area of
0.39 square miles (248 acres); it begins at STA 12 +58 and extends to STA 24 +89. UT1 -Reach 3 has a
drainage area of 0.60 square miles (384 acres); it begins at STA 24 +89 and extends to STA 34 +50. UT1-
Reach 4 is the downstream section of UT1 (STA 34 +50 to 46 +60), and has a drainage area of 1.14 square
miles (728 acres). Reach UT1 -A has a drainage area of 0.14 square miles (88 acres) and flows south
directly into UT at the break between Reaches 1 and 2. UT1 -B has a drainage area of 0.19 square miles
(120 acres) and flows south to the break between UT1 Reaches 2 and 3. UT1 -C has a drainage area of
1.35 square miles (861 acres) and flows east to the break between UT1 Reaches 3 and 4 (Figure Ila).
UT2 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.99 square miles (631 acres); it begins at the start of the UT2 portion
of the restoration project (STA 0 +00) and extends southwest to STA 4 +90. UT2 -Reach 2 has a drainage
area of 1.13 square miles (726 acres); it begins at STA 4 +90 and extends to STA 13 +95. UT2 -Reach 3
has a drainage area of 1.24 square miles (792 acres); it begins at STA 13 +95 and extends to STA 18 +90.
UT2 -Reach 4 has a drainage area of 1.35 square miles (861 acres); it begins at STA 18 +90 and extends to
STA 29 +59. Reach UT2 -A has a drainage area of 0.08 square miles (49 acres) and flows east into UT2 at
the break between Reaches 2 and 3 (Figure I1b).
The land use in the project watershed is approximately 68 percent managed herbaceous and cultivated
crops, 26 percent deciduous and evergreen forest, and six percent developed (mix of low, medium and
high densities) and water bodies. Current land use around the project is primarily agricultural and
forestry. Land use immediately surrounding the project consists of livestock grazing, row crops, and
forestry. Future land use is projected to become more developed in the future due to the proximity to the
Charlotte area. The Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Plan (RBRP) indicates that urban
land use may increase by over 350 percent with a population growth of 184 percent in Union County by
the year 2030.
4.1.2 Surface Water Classification
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0301, because none of the streams within the project area are individually
classified, they all carry "the same classification as that assigned to the stream segment to which
it is tributary." UT1 is one of two main stems of the project which, after leaving the project area,
confluences directly with East Fork to Stewarts Creek. UT2 is a section of East Fork to Stewarts Creek
and has a NCDWQ classification of WS -III. Class WS -III waters are typically in low to moderately
developed watersheds. These waters are used for drinking, food processing purposes and where WS -1 or
II are not feasible. WS -III waters are also protected for Class C uses. Class C waters are suitable for
aquatic life, secondary recreation, and agricultural usage.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 17 March 2014

Table 5. Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040105070050
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -07 -14
Project Drainage Area (acres)
UT1: 1.14 square miles (728 acres)
UT2: 1.35 square miles (861 acres)
Project Drainage Area
Percentage of Impervious Area
UT1: 8%
UT2: 5%
CGIA Land Use Classification
developed (open space, low density, med. density, high density), cultivated crops, pasture /hay,
deciduous forest, evergreen forest
4.1.3 Endangered/Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under
provisions of sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Rare and protected
species listed for Union County, and any likely impacts to the species as a result of the project
construction, are discussed in the following sections.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (updated 22 September 2010) lists three
endangered species for Union County, North Carolina: Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorate),
Schweinitz's sunflower (Hehanthus schweinitzii), and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). The Georgia
aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum) is listed as a Candidate species that is under consideration for official
listing in the future, but is not currently protected. No protected species or potential habitat for protected
species was observed during preliminary site evaluations. Designated Critical Habitat for the Carolina
Heel splitter in Union County is north of the project watershed in Goose Creek and drains directly to the
Rocky River. There is no critical habitat in the Stewarts Creek watershed, which drain into Richardson
Creek before entering the Rocky River. The project will not affect the Designated Critical Habitat.
hl addition to the USFWS database, the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database was consulted
to determine whether previously cataloged protected species "element occurrences" had been mapped
within one mile of the project site. Results from NHP indicated that there are no element occurrences
within one mile of the project area. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to federally protected
species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
WK Dickson submitted a request to USFWS and North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
( NCWRC) for review and comments on the proposed Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project on June 7,
2012 in regards to any potential impacts to threatened and endangered species. No response was received
within a 30 -day period from the USFWS; therefore, it is assumed that the initial determination of no
effect to endangered and threatened species will result from the proposed project. hl a letter dated June
20, 2012 (Appendix B), the NCWRC stated that their biologists had "reviewed the subject information"
and recommended establishing native, forested buffers in the riparian areas to protect water quality,
improve terrestrial habitat, and a travel corridor for wildlife species.
The proposed project offers some potential to improve or create suitable habitat for several Federal
Species of Concern. Habitat may be improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by
improving water quality, in- stream and near - stream forage, and providing stable conditions not subject to
regular maintenance or disturbance. Improved bottomland habitat may benefit dwarf aster (Eurybia
mirabilis) and Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum). Improved stream habitat may benefit
Virginia quillwort (Isoetes virginica), American eel (Anguilla rostrata), and Carolina darter (Etheostoma
collis collis). The environmental screening phase of the project will include USFWS coordination to
confirm these findings.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 18 March 2014

4.1.4 Cultural Resources
Cultural resources include historic and archeological resources located in or near the project area. WK
Dickson completed a preliminary survey of cultural resources to determine potential project impacts. No
architectural structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted during surveys of the site
for restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of the site has historically been disturbed due to
agricultural practices and channel modifications.
WK Dickson submitted a request to the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to search records
to determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that may
be affected by the Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project on June 7, 2012. In a letter dated June 18,
2012 (Appendix B), the SHPO stated that they had "conducted a review of the project and are aware of
no historic resources which would be affected by the project."
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Table 6. Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Ur1-R1
Ur1-R2
Ur1-R3
Ur1-R4
Url -A
Url -B
Length ofreach (linear feet)
1,138
1,284
833
1,252
197
1,132
Valley Classification
VIll
VIll
VIll
VIII
VIll
VIll
Drainage area acres
136
248
384
728
88
120
NCDWQ stream identification
35.0
22.5
30.0
31.0
35.0
35.0
score
NCDW Q Water Quality
Classification
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
Morphological Description
E4
E4
E4
C4
E4
E4 /C4
streamt e
Evolutionary trend
Stage I
Stage 11
Stage 11
Stage V
Stage I
Stage UIII
Underlying mapped soils
CmB
CmB, TbB2
CmB, TbB2
ChA
CmB
CmB
somewhat
Drainage class
mod. well
mod. well; well
mod. well; well
mod. well
mod. well
poorly
Soil H dric status
Not H dric
Not H dric
Not H dric
Partially H dric
Not H dric
Not h dric
Slope
0.48%
0.70%
0.40%
0.50%
1.20%
1.80%
FEMA classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
Zone AE
N/A
N/A
mixed hardwood
mixed hardwood
Native vegetation community
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
forest, cultivated
forest, cultivated
Percent composition ofexotic
10%
0%
Fo %
0%
5%
15%
invasive vegetation
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 19 March 2014

Table 6. Reach Summary Information (cont.)
Parameters
Uri -C
UT2 -R1
Ur2 -R2
Ur2 -R3
Ur2 -R4
Ur2 -A
Length ofreach (linear feet)
883
490
875
495
270
365
Valley Classification
VIll
VIll
VIII
VIII
VIll
VIll
Drainage area acres
250
631
726
792
861
49
NCDWQ stream identification
1.0
0.0120
UT1 -B Pres.
120
6.1
11.2
1.0
35.0
33.5
33.5
22.5
33.5
33.5
score
1.1
6.6
1.0
0.0180
UT1 -C
250
NCDW Q Water Quality
10.0
1.1
10.0
1.0
0.0080
UT1 -RI Pres.
Classification
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
WS-111
Morphological Description
136
10.4
7.5
1.8
5.4
1.0
0.0110
E4
C4c
N/A
E4
E4
C4
streamt e
0.0070
UTl -R3
384
22.2
12.8
2.4
Evolutionary trend
Stage IV
Stage VI
N/A
Stage 11
Stage II
Stage IV
Underlying mapped soils
TbB2
ChA
ChA
ChA, BaB
ChA
ChA, CmA
25.6
1.7
somewhat
somewhat
somewhat
somewhat
somewhat
Drainage class
well
- --
- --
- --
0.0010
UT2 -R3
792
22.4
poorly
poorly
poorly; well
poorly
poorly; mod. well
Soil Hydric status
Not Hydric
Partially Hydric
Partially Hydric
Partially Hydric
Partially Hydric
Not Hydric
Sloe
0.80%
0.27%
0.10%
0.57%
0.31%
1.30%
FEMA classification
N/A
Zone AE
Zone AE
Zone AE
Zone AE
N/A
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan
20
woody cover,
March 2014
Native vegetation community
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
cultivated
Percent composition ofexotic
0%
20%
0%
0%
0%
0%
invasive vegetation
*Most of the project area is characterized by rolling hills and narrow valleys, which does not exactly match any of the valley
types characterized under the Rosgen (1996) classification system. The closest valley type representative of the project streams is
type VIII, narrow or wide alluvial valleys that typically support C, D, E, F, or G stream types.
4.2.1 Channel Classification
The project area streams have been classified as intermittent and perennial using the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form version 4.11 (Appendix B) and are predominantly E4 or C4 stream types using the
Rosgen stream classification method (Rosgen, 1994). The design reaches have been separated into 12
distinct sections that are described in Section 4.2.3. Channel characteristics are summarized in Table 7.
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics
Reach
Drainage
ABKFt
Width Max Depth
Width:Depth
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
Ratio
Sinuosity
Slope (ft /ft)
(Ac)
UT1 -A
88
6.8
6.9
1.4
6.9
1.0
0.0120
UT1 -B Pres.
120
6.1
11.2
1.0
20.4
1.1
0.0120
UT1 -B Enh.
120
5.5
6.0
1.1
6.6
1.0
0.0180
UT1 -C
250
10.0
10.0
1.1
10.0
1.0
0.0080
UT1 -RI Pres.
136
10.1
7.9
2.0
6.2
1.2
0.0048
UTI -RI Enh.
136
10.4
7.5
1.8
5.4
1.0
0.0110
UT1 -R2
250
14.2
9.9
2.0
7.0
1.0
0.0070
UTl -R3
384
22.2
12.8
2.4
7.4
1.0
0.0040
UTl -R4
728
21.9
17.5
2.3
14.0
1.0
0.0050
UT2 -RI
631
19.6
25.6
1.7
33.5
1.1
0.0027
UT2 -R2
726
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
0.0010
UT2 -R3
792
22.4
16.2
2.6
11.8
1.0
0.0057
UT2 -R4
861
12.6
12.1
1.6
11.6
1.0
0.0031
UT2 -A
49
3.0
6.1
1.2
12.2
1.0
0.0130
' ABKF = cross - sectional area (measured from top of bank)
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan
20
March 2014

4.2.2 Discharge
Estimating bankfull flows (discharge) for Poplin Ridge is difficult due to the existing ditches that have
been maintained and channelized over time. Because bankfull indicators such as point bars and vegetation
lines were not present, several models, regression equations, and Piedmont regional curves were used to
estimate existing discharges. Land use and slope were considered when the discharge calculations were
developed. All hydraulic and hydrologic analyses are discussed in Section 7.3.1. Data and analysis of the
hydrologic and hydraulic models are included in Appendix C.
4.2.3 Channel Morphology
The project area is comprised of two perennial drainage features that flow from north to south towards
their confluence with Stewarts Creek (Figure 2). UT1 has three smaller tributaries, one of which is
intermittent. A small intermittent tributary (UT2 -A) enters UT2 from the west and an impoundment is
located on the UT2 stream channel near the upper end of the project. Each drainage feature was assessed
using the NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11), and the scores are presented in Appendix
B.
In general, the streams do not typically function to their full potential. Having been channelized in the
past and ditched to drain nearby wetlands for row crops, the streams do not access their floodplains as
often as they naturally would have prior to the farm operations. In some cases, the streams are not
hydraulically stable, causing erosion and undercutting of the banks. Habitat along the restoration reaches
is poor in that there is little to no debris for fish cover or protection for other aquatic species. Vegetation
and habitat diversity are poor along the reaches and offers little benefit to area wildlife. Site photographs
are located in Section 2.5 and morphological parameters are in Appendix B.
Each project reach was classified using Simon's channel evolution model (Simon, 2006) in an attempt to
predict future channel changes resulting from historical channel impacts or watershed changes. See Table
6 for channel evolution stages. The majority of the project reaches exhibit disturbed and /or unstable
characteristics resulting from straightening and channelization occurring prior to the 1950's or 1970's. Of
the channelized reaches, UT1 -R2, UT1 -R3, UT2 -R3, and UT2 -R4 appear to be in Stage II — Channelized.
If these channels continue through the evolutionary stages, the reaches will continue to degrade and widen
before reaching a quasi - equilibrium stage. Reaches UT1 -R4, UT1 -B, UT1 -C, and UT2 -A appear to be in
Stages III, IV and V where the channels are degrading and /or widening, or aggrading and widening.
These channels are actively adjusting as they move toward the quasi - equilibrium stage. Finally, the
remaining project reaches that are stable and are proposed for enhancement are either in Stage I —
Sinuous, Pre - modified, or Stage VI — Quasi - equilibrium.
4.2.3.1 UTl
UT1 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.21 square miles (136 acres). It is a perennial stream that flows in a
southeasterly direction. The upper segment of this stream reach is surrounded by a mature forested buffer.
The lower half of this stream reach is bound by agricultural fields, although a narrow buffer is present.
The planform of this E -type channel is slightly incised throughout, as bankfull elevations appear to be 0.5
to 1.0 feet below top of bank.. Within the forested (Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement)
section, the channel exhibits a sinuosity of 1.2. The current cross sectional area of the section is 10.1
square feet with approximate dimensions of 7.9 feet wide and 2.0 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0048 ft /ft.
The existing length of the Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement section is 572 linear feet. Within
the Enhancement I section of UT1 -Reach 1, the channel has a sinuosity value of 1.0. The current cross
sectional area of the Enhancement I section is 10.4 square feet with approximate dimensions of 7.5 feet
wide and 1.8 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0011 ft /ft. The existing length of the Enhancement I section is
566 linear feet. The channel scored 58 and 38 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6) for
the upper and lower segments, respectively.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 21 March 2014

UT1 -Reach 2 has a drainage area of 0.39 square miles (250 acres). It begins at a farm crossing just below
the confluence of UT1 -Reach 1 and UT1 -A. This stream reach also flows in a southeasterly direction. A
narrow shrubby and herbaceous buffer approximately 20 to 30 feet wide is present along the right bank of
the stream channel. UT1 -Reach 2 is surrounded by cultivated fields on both stream banks. Six poultry
houses are located on the right bank approximately 150 LF upslope from this stream reach. The current
cross sectional area is 14.2 square feet. This channel is 2.0 feet deep and 9.9 feet wide, and has a gradient
of 0.0070 ft /ft. The planform of this E -type channel is generally straight with occasional bends and
exhibits little to no incision. The channel has an existing length of 1,284 linear feet, and the banks are
nearly vertical in many locations. UT1 -Reach 2 had the highest volume of large woody debris present of
the four assessed stream reaches due to the presence of a thin buffer. The channel scored 52 on the
NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
UT1 -Reach 3 has a drainage area of 0.60 square miles (384 acres) and an existing length of 833 linear
feet. It begins at the confluence of UT1 -Reach 2 and UT1 -B. This stream channel has a slope of 0.0040
ft /ft. Cultivated fields are adjacent on both banks leaving no buffer to contain sediment input and
pollutants from adjacent agricultural uses. This reach has been historically straightened and dredged.
UT1 -Reach 3, an E -type channel, has a planform that is straight throughout. The current cross sectional
area is 22.2 square feet, and the channel is approximately 2.4 feet deep and 12.8 feet wide. The entire
reach has steep banks and bankfull stage is approximately located at top of bank. The dominant bed
materials are cobble and gravel. The channel scored 40 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form
(Revision 6).
UT1 -Reach 4 is the downstream most segment of UT1. It has a drainage area of 1.34 square miles (728
acres) and an existing length of 1,252 linear feet. UT1 -Reach 4 starts at the confluence of UT1 -Reach 3
and UT1 -C and flows south to the property boundary. This stream reach has similar land use as UT1-
Reach 3 with agricultural fields on both left and right banks. A power line easement runs along the
eastside through the field, and there is an existing farm crossing located at the downstream end of the
reach. UT1 -Reach 4 is a C -type channel with a sinuosity of 1.0. The current cross sectional area is 21.9
square feet, and the channel is 2.3 feet deep and 17.5 feet wide. It has a gradient of 0.0050 ft/ft. Bankfull
stage is located near top of bank, and alternating, vegetated bars were observed along the reach. The
banks are nearly vertical in many locations, the buffer is comprised of agricultural crops and /or grasses,
and minimal amounts of woody debris were observed in the channel. The channel scored 27 on the
NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
UT1 -A is an intermittent stream that flows from north to south before joining UT1 -Reach 1. UT1 -A has a
drainage area of 0.14 square miles (88 acres), an existing length of 217 linear feet and is surrounded by
agricultural fields. This stream reach is generally straight, is appropriately sized, and has little to no
stream buffer within the project area. Above the project area, UT1 -A has a forested stream buffer. The
current cross sectional area is 6.8 square feet with approximate dimensions of 6.9 feet wide and 1.4 feet
deep, and a gradient of 0.0120 ft /ft. The channel scored 36 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form
(Revision 6).
UT1 -B is a stable perennial channel that flows from north to south into UT1 -Reach 2. UT1 -B has a
drainage area of 0.19 square miles (120 acres). The upper half of UT1 -B is stable and has an intact stream
buffer dominated by hardwoods with a few localized areas of dense privet. The lower portion of UT1 -B
presents areas of unstable stream banks where it has abandoned its historical flowpath within a
channelized ditch and has cut a new channel through a cultivated field and has no stream buffer. Within
the Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement section, the channel has a sinuosity value of I.I. The
current cross sectional area of the Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement section is 6.1 square feet
with approximate dimensions of 11.2 feet wide and 1.0 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0120 ft /ft. The
existing length of this section is 620 linear feet. Within the Enhancement I section of UT1 -B, the channel
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 22 March 2014

has a sinuosity value of 1.0. The current cross sectional area of this section is 5.5 square feet with
approximate dimensions of 6.0 feet wide and 1.1 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0180 ft /ft. The existing
length of the enhancement section is 512 linear feet. The channel scored 67 and 53 on the NCDWQ
Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6) for the upper and lower segments, respectively.
UT1 -C is a perennial stream channel impaired by channelization to promote agricultural activities. UT1 -C
has a drainage area of 0.39 square miles (250 acres) and an existing length of 883 linear feet. There one
culvert crossing located near the upstream end of the reach that is in poor condition. The current cross
sectional area is 10.0 square feet with approximate dimensions of 10.0 feet wide and 1.1 feet deep, and a
gradient of 0.0080 ft/ft. The channel flows straight down the middle of the valley, is slightly oversized in
some areas, and exhibits localized bank instability throughout. The stream buffer is in poor condition as it
has been cleared to the top of bank for agricultural purposes. UT1 -C flows west to east to the confluence
with UT1 -Reach 3. The channel scored 61 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
4.2.3.2 UT2
UT2 -Reach 1 is a stable perennial channel that lies between an active pasture and a cultivated field. The
stream buffer, which lacks mature hardwoods, has been disturbed by agricultural practices and cattle
access. UT2 -Reach 1 flows into a farm pond (UT2 -Reach 2). UT2 -Reach 1 has a drainage area of 0.99
square miles (631 acres) and an existing length of 490 linear feet. This stream reach has a sinuosity of 1.1.
The current cross sectional area is 19.6 square feet with approximate dimensions of 25.6 feet wide and 1.7
feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0027 ft /ft. The channel scored 56 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form
(Revision 6).
UT2 -Reach 2 is currently a 1.3 -acre farm pond. This pond has a drainage area of 1.13 square miles (726
acres) and is surrounded by cultivated fields. The pond is shallow to bedrock around the edges and is
approximately 3.0 feet at it deepest point. UT2 -Reach 2 has an existing length of 875 linear feet and a
gradient of 0.0010 ft /ft.
UT2 -Reach 3 is a perennial channel that lies between an active pasture and a cultivated field. This stream
reach has been straightened in the past, is appropriately sized, and has little to no stream buffer within the
project area. The upper portion of this reach is experiencing active erosion of the bed and banks. The
lower portion of the reach has a stable bed with moderate bank erosion. UT2 -Reach 3 has a drainage area
of 1.24 square miles (792 acres) and an existing length of 495 linear feet. The current cross sectional area
is 22.4 square feet with approximate dimensions of 16.2 feet wide and 2.6 feet deep, and a gradient of
0.0057 ft/ft. The channel scored 37 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
UT2 -Reach 4 is a perennial channel that flows through active pasture and cultivated fields. This reach is
straight, undersized, and has a highly disturbed buffer with invasive species present. The bed is stable in
most places, and the banks are moderately unstable through much of the reach. The downstream -most
portion of the reach has stable banks. UT2 -Reach 4 has a drainage area of 1.35 square miles (861 acres)
and an existing length of 270 linear feet. The current cross sectional area is 12.6 square feet with
approximate dimensions of 12.1 feet wide and 1.6 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0031 ft/ft. The channel
scored 27 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
UT2 -A is an intermittent channel that flows into a farm pond (UT2 -Reach 2). This reach flows through an
active cattle pasture and lacks a vegetated buffer. UT2 -A is appropriately sized for most of the reach;
however, active erosion of the bed and banks was observed throughout. UT2 -A has a drainage area of
0.08 square miles (49 acres) and an existing length of 365 linear feet. The current cross sectional area is
3.0 square feet with approximate dimensions of 6.1 feet wide and 1.2 feet deep, and a gradient of 0.0130
ft/ft. The channel scored 25 on the NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Form (Revision 6).
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 23 March 2014

4.2.4 Channel Stability Assessment
A modified version of the channel stability assessment method (CSA) provided in "Assessing Stream
Channel Stability at Bridges in Physiographic Regions" by Johnson (2006) was used to assess channel
stability for the Poplin Ridge existing channels and reference reach. This method may be rapidly applied
on a variety of stream types in different physiographic regions having a range of bed and bank materials.
The original CSA method was designed to evaluate thirteen stability indicators in the field. These
parameters are: watershed characteristics (frequency of watershed disturbances such as agricultural
activities, urbanization, etc), flow habit, channel pattern, entrenchment /channel confinement, bed
material, bar development, presence of obstructions /debris jams, bank soil texture and coherence, average
bank angle, bank vegetation /protection, bank cutting, mass wastingibank failure, and upstream distance to
bridge. See Appendix B for a detailed description of the stability indicators. As this method was initially
developed to assess stability at bridges, a few minor adjustments were made to remove indicators that
contradict stability characteristics of natural channels in favor of providing hydraulic efficiency at
bridges. First, the "channel pattern" indicator was altered such that naturally meandering channels scored
low as opposed to straightened /engineered channels that are favorable for stability near bridges. Secondly,
the last indicator, "upstream distance to bridge," was removed from the assessment as bridges are not a
focus of channel stability for this project. The twelve indicators were then scored in the field, and a rating
of excellent, good, fair, or poor was assigned to each project reach based on the total score.
The CSA results (scores and ratings) for the Poplin Ridge project and reference reaches are provided in
Table 8 and Table 9. Five of the nine stream reaches along UT1 received "Fair" ratings, while three
reaches received "Good" ratings. UT1 -R4 had a rating of "Poor." UT2 stream reaches scored significantly
higher with three "Poor" ratings. UT2 -RI received a rating of "Good" and UT2 -A was "Fair." Overall,
the existing project streams appear to be physically stable as there is little active erosion present;
however, all channels have been straightened and most are slightly entrenched and are actively
maintained. These characteristics are reflected in the poor CSA scores for channel pattern and bank
vegetation/protection. Most reaches also scored poorly for watershed characteristics since the surrounding
land use is dominated by agriculture activities (Table 8 and Table 9).
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 24 March 2014

Table 8. Channel Stabilitv Assessment Results — UT1
*Excellent (0 < Score <= 33), Good (33 < Score <= 66), Fair (66 < Score <= 99), Poor (99 < Score <= 132)
Table 9. Channel Stabilitv Assessment Results — UT2
UTl -RI
Pres.
UTl -RI
Enh.
UTl-
R2
UTl-
R3
UTl-
R4
UTl-
A
UTl -B
Pres.
UTl -B
Enh.
UTl-
C
Reference
Reach
1
Watershed
6
7
7
7
9
7
4
7
7
7
Flow habit
characteristics
10
9
8
8
2
3
Channel pattern
7
12
10
2
Flow habit
9
9
7
6
9
9
9
8
5
2
3
Channel pattern
5
8
5
9
11
9
5
6
3
2
4
Entrenchment /channel
3
6
Bar development
10
12
10
11
6
5
7
Obstructions /debris jams
4
7
3
8
9
8
4
5
5
5
2
9
confinement
3
coherence
9
5
Bed material
10
6
4
6
9
7
3
6
3
3
6
Bar development
10
2
5
7
11
1
10
7
6
5
7
Obstructions /debris
7
3
6
5
8
3
5
5
4
2
NA
jams
NA
Score
65
132
101
113
86
37
8
Bank soil texture and
Poor
Poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent (0 < Score <= 33), Good (33 < Score <=
66), Fair (66 < Score <=
99), Poor (99 < Score <= 132)
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification
3
7
5
6
8
7
5
7
4
3
consideration in order to
coherence
9
Average bank angle
5
9
7
10
11
9
6
6
6
5
10
Bank
3
4
9
10
12
6
2
11
11
2
vegetation /protection
11
Bank cutting
6
4
8
6
10
6
2
7
5
2
12
Mass wasting /bank
5
4
7
6
11
4
2
7
3
2
failure
13
Upstream distance to
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
bridge
Score
76
66
78
87
117
72
58
82
62
37
Rating
Fair
Good
Fair
Fair
Poor
Fair
Good
Fair
Good
Good
*Excellent (0 < Score <= 33), Good (33 < Score <= 66), Fair (66 < Score <= 99), Poor (99 < Score <= 132)
Table 9. Channel Stabilitv Assessment Results — UT2
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 25 March 2014
UT2 -RI
UT2 -R2
UT2 -R3 UT2 -R4
UT2 -A
Reference
Reach
1
Watershed characteristics
8
10
9
11
7
7
2
Flow habit
6
10
9
8
8
2
3
Channel pattern
7
12
10
11
9
2
4
Entrenchment /channel
3
10
7
11
7
2
confinement
5
Bed material
10
12
10
10
5
3
6
Bar development
10
12
10
11
6
5
7
Obstructions /debris jams
4
12
8
11
4
2
8
Bank soil texture and
5
10
8
9
6
3
coherence
9
Average bank angle
4
12
8
7
7
5
10
Bank vegetation/protection
3
12
10
10
11
2
11
Bank cutting
3
10
6
8
9
2
12
Mass wasting/bank failure
2
10
6
6
7
2
13
Upstream distance to bridge
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Score
65
132
101
113
86
37
Rating
Good
Poor
Poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent (0 < Score <= 33), Good (33 < Score <=
66), Fair (66 < Score <=
99), Poor (99 < Score <= 132)
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification
Bankfull can be difficult to identify
on a
streams that
are actively maintained for agricultural purposes.
Because the usual indicators rarely exist,
other factors have to be taken into
consideration in order to
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 25 March 2014

accurately identify a bankfull stage. Other factors that can be used are wrack lines, vegetation lines, scour
lines, or top of a bankfull bench. Throughout the entire project, most stream channels are slightly incised
and actively maintained, which means bankfull indicators were limited or non - existent. Therefore, the
bankfull stage was estimated by using the Piedmont Regional Curves, existing cross sections, and in-
house spreadsheets to calculate bankfull area and bankfull discharge.
4.2.6 Vegetation
Current land use around the project is primarily agriculture and forestry. Land use immediately
surrounding the project consists of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO), livestock grazing,
row crops, and forestry. The pasture is a mix of tall fescue (Schedonorus phoenix), Bermuda grass
(Cynodon dactylon), and other pasture grasses. The row crops are corn and soybeans. Weedy herbaceous
species are also common and include Canada goldenrod (Sohdago canadensis), beggarticks (Bidens sp.),
blackberry (Rubus argutus), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), spiny plumeless thistle (Carduus
acanthoides), and American pokeweed (Phytolacca americana).
Wetter areas in depressions and along the channel banks include common rush (Juncus effusus),
Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum), and sedges (Carex spp.). Where not maintained
frequently, a few woody stems persist along the channel banks, including sweetgum (Liquidambar
styracifua), American black elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. canadensis), black willow (Salix nigra),
cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera). Non woody species include
sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus) and fescue. Some exotics were noted including Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multijora), tree -of- heaven (Ailanthus altissima), Nepalese
browntop (Microstegium vimineum), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). Only Chinese privet
is widespread. Table 10 summarizes the natural communities at the Site.
Table 10. Natural Community Summary
Land Use /Natural Community Percent of Schafale and Weakley Community
Study Area
Agriculture — Row Crops 61 NA
Agriculture — Pasture/Hayfields 19 NA
Mixed Pines/Hardwoods 9 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
- Piedmont Subtype
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation 7 NA
Open Water 1 NA
Residential/Managed Herbaceous 3 NA
4.2.7 Quantitative Habitat Assessment
A quantitative habitat assessment was performed in December 2012 on the reference reach and in January
2013 on existing Poplin Ridge reaches UT1 -R2, UT1 -R4, UT1 -B, and UT2 -R4 to measure the volume of
woody debris and fish cover. These data were used to establish a baseline for measuring functional uplift
and as a tool to determine the placement and volume of woody debris in the design reaches. The total
available woody debris (not buried) in the reference reach exceeds the design reaches on a per linear foot
basis. In addition, surveys conducted pre- and post - construction in the restoration reach will enable the
quantification of habitat deficiencies and habitat gains over time.
The length of each sample reach was thirty to forty times the base -flow wetted width of the channel with
a minimum reach size of 200 feet. The sample reach was divided into ten transects spaced evenly over the
entire reach. Transect length was five feet upstream and five feet downstream of the transect midpoint,
and extended the full width of the channel. Parameters measured at each transect were small woody
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 26 March 2014

debris (SWD), fish cover, substrate material, and riparian composition. At each transect, the channel bed
form was noted and an average width and depth were recorded. The following is an analysis of the habitat
assessment data.
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement reaches were not sampled during the habitat assessment
due to the presence of an intact stream buffer. Any restoration or enhancement stream reach that was not
sampled in the habitat assessment was due to similarity with other sampled reaches.
4.2.7.1 Small Woody Debris Methods and Results
Small woody debris was measured at the reference reach in order to design SWD habitat structures
similar to those found in the reference reach (Appendix B). SWD greater than 0.2 inches in diameter was
measured in each reference reach transect. A diameter of 0.2 was selected arbitrarily as a cutoff between
individual small sticks that makeup a negligible percentage of the total SWD volume versus small
branches that provide more significant volume and habitat benefits. Large woody debris was eliminated
from the analysis since these are analogous to structures such as log grade controls and log toes currently
applied to most restoration designs.
Transects were identified as either riffle, pool, run, or glide bed form types resulting in three pools, three
riffles, two glides and two runs measured at the reference reach. Measurements of SWD were summed for
each bed form type and divided by the number of corresponding transects to get the average volume of
SWD per bed feature. The average volume was then divided by the average transect area to get the
volume of SWD per square foot. The average design reach bed form area was calculated by assuming a
length of ten feet (based on reference transects) and multiplying that by the average bottom cross section
width. The average volume was multiplied by the ratio of average reference reach transect area to the
average area in the design reach to obtain the volume of SWD to be installed at each fixed pool and at
select locations along the design bed feature.
WK Dickson currently uses wattles, dead brush, and woody debris bundles in the design of restoration
channels. Based on the reference reach SWD analysis, these SWD structures will be concentrated in pool
habitats and throughout runs and glides in volumes and size classes similar to those found in the reference
reach. Wattles are woody branch structures tied together and embedded into the bank so that the free ends
stick out into the wetted channel. Dead brush structures are shrub or tree tops that are anchored to the
bottom of the channel. Woody debris bundles are bundles of sticks one to four inches in diameter and one
to four feet long that are anchored to the streambed. Although root wads serve as bank stability structures,
they also provide a significant amount of SWD volume to the restoration reach. The average volume of
each SWD structure is presented in Table 11. A combination of structures listed in Table 11 will be used
in the design to attempt to achieve the calculated average volume per bed form type listed in Table 12.
Table 11. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD structures used in the design reach
SWD Average Volume
Woody Debris Bundle
509
Dead Brush
589
Wattle
42
Root Wad
562
Leaf Pack
120
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 27 March 2014

Table 12. Small Woodv Debris calculations for the reference and design reach
In addition to the habitat assessment conducted at the reference site, UT and UT2 of the project site were
assessed in order to measure representative habitat gains over time post - construction. Based on these
assessments, there is a large disparity of SWD volume between the reference reach and the design reaches
(Chart 1).
Number
Total
Average
1200
Average volume to be a lied to design per 10 LF
g g
Channel
of
volume
volume in
Percent
of channel
el (in)
bed form
transects
(in)
reference
of WD
reach (in)
UTl -R2
UTl -R3 UT2 -R2/3
UT2 -R4
Riffle
3
9721
3240
65%
2,819
3,240 4,083
4,342
Pool
3
710
237
5%
206
237 298
317
Run
2
2137
1069
14%
930
1,069 1,346
1,432
Glide
2
2315
1158
16%
1,007
1,158 1,458
1,551
Total
10
14883
5703
100%
4,962
5,703 7,186
7,642
In addition to the habitat assessment conducted at the reference site, UT and UT2 of the project site were
assessed in order to measure representative habitat gains over time post - construction. Based on these
assessments, there is a large disparity of SWD volume between the reference reach and the design reaches
(Chart 1).
Chart 1. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD per assessed reach. This chart represents existing
conditions in all assessed reaches.
Woody debris collected in streams provides habitat for macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians, and
increases stream productivity by retaining carbon in the channel. While it would be difficult to replicate
the volume and spatial distribution of SWD found in the reference channel, this quantitative habitat
assessment provides guidance for improving habitat conditions through specifically placed and sized
SWD structures, and provides a means for assessing functional gains over time. These structures are
included in the design plans (Appendix D).
4.2.7.2 Fish Cover Methods and Results
Fish cover measurements were taken at each transect along the reference reach and Poplin Ridge Reaches
1 and 2. Fish cover area was visually calculated within the ten -foot transect length. Fish cover types
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 28 March 2014
Average SWD Per Reach
1400
1200
+r 1000
saa
saa
CL
CD
400
a
7
200
o
Reference Reach
LJT1 -R2 LJT1 -R4 UT1 -B UT2 -R4
Assessed 200'Reaches
Chart 1. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD per assessed reach. This chart represents existing
conditions in all assessed reaches.
Woody debris collected in streams provides habitat for macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians, and
increases stream productivity by retaining carbon in the channel. While it would be difficult to replicate
the volume and spatial distribution of SWD found in the reference channel, this quantitative habitat
assessment provides guidance for improving habitat conditions through specifically placed and sized
SWD structures, and provides a means for assessing functional gains over time. These structures are
included in the design plans (Appendix D).
4.2.7.2 Fish Cover Methods and Results
Fish cover measurements were taken at each transect along the reference reach and Poplin Ridge Reaches
1 and 2. Fish cover area was visually calculated within the ten -foot transect length. Fish cover types
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 28 March 2014

include small woody debris and brush, aquatic macrophytes, overhanging vegetation, undercut banks, and
boulders. For each transect, a percentage of total fish cover and individual cover type areas were
calculated (Chart 2). Location and general habitat data was recorded for each fish cover measurement to
assess spatial distribution.
Comparison of Average Fish Corer Between the Reference Reach
and Poplin Ridge Restoration Reaches
10
70
60
c 5
40
24
10 - TL L L F
Riles Pools Runs Glides - ---,each
■Reference Reach oUT1 -R2 ■UT1 -R4 • UT1 -B P UT2 -R4
Chart 2. Average percent of fish cover per channel bed form type in the existing and reference reaches.
The fish cover analysis revealed that the average area of fish cover is almost twice as high in Poplin
Ridge Reach UT1 -R2 and UT2 -R4 as in the reference reach. This is because the UT2 -R4 streambed is
mostly covered by macrophytic vegetation along the majority of the assessed reach. Both Poplin Ridge
Reaches UT1 -R2 and UT2 -R4 also had shrubby overhanging bank vegetation, whereas the reference
reach ran through a mature forested buffer with few shrubs and overhanging bank vegetation. Fish cover
from low growing brush will increase in the restoration reaches after the riparian planting occurs. Woody
debris structures will also provide additional fish cover habitat and resting areas for fish swimming
upstream.
4.2.7.3 Substrate Composition
Substrates were divided into eight classes as follows: coarse /fine particulate organic matter,
silt/clay /muck, fine sand, coarse sand, gravel, cobble, boulder, and bedrock (Chart 3). Channel width and
water depth were measured at each transect in four equally spaced intervals from bank to bank. Substrate
coverage was visually determined between widths measured at each major change in substrate type.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 29 March 2014

Comparison of Substrate Between the Reference Reach and
Poplin Ridge Restoration Reaches
100
90
80
70
N
2 60
U
50
a
40
30
20
10
D
CIFPOM SilUMud Fine Coarse Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■Reference Reach 11UT1 -R2 ■UT1 -R4 ■ UT1 -B ■UT2 -R4
Chart 3. Comparison of substrate composition between the reference reach and the restoration reaches.
The substrate composition analysis revealed that the reference reach has similar substrate as the four
assessed stream reaches. A slight difference is noticed in the amount of silt /mud and fine materials within
the project reaches. These differences may be attributed to several factors, including the absence of a
vegetated stream banks, a forested buffer and sediment input from adjacent agricultural fields.
Macroinvertebrate abundance and diversity has been tied to the ability of a channel to retain carbon.
Several design structures and vegetation plantings can be used to increase organic substrate composition.
Constructed leaf packs will be installed in select locations for immediate macroinvertebrate colonization.
SWD bundles will serve to collect organic matter flowing downstream increasing carbon retention. By
adding sinuosity and creating a better floodplain connection, adding SWD in select locations, and creating
pool habitats, restored substrate composition will more closely resemble reference reach conditions.
4.3 Wetland Summary Information
4.3.1 Existing Wetlands
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping depicts four wetlands within the project site area
(Figure 6). Three of these wetlands are small ponds classified as PUBHh (Palustrine Unconsolidated
Bottom Permanently Flooded Diked /Impounded). These small ponds are adjacent to the stream channels.
Only one is in the proposed buffer on UT2 and will be breached/filled, and only one is within the project
limits on UT2. A third, at the head of UT1, is classified a PFO1 (Palustrine Forested Broad - Leaved
Deciduous Temporarily Flooded). This NWI wetland was field verified and found not to be present or
within the proposed project area.
A wetland delineation was performed in February 2013. Wetland boundaries were delineated using
current methodology outlined in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (DOA
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 30 March 2014

1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern
Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2012). Soils were
characterized and classified using the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0
(USDA -NRCS 2010). Wetland boundaries were marked with sequentially numbered wetland survey tape
(pinkiblack striped). Flag locations were located using a mapping grade GPS handheld unit under the
direction of a Professional Licensed Surveyor (PLS).
A jurisdictional determination of the wetlands has not been made by the US Army Corps of Engineers
( USACE), but the USACE has visited the restoration site. Wetland forms are included in Appendix B.
Onsite wetlands include riparian wetlands along both sides of UT -R1 and at the upstream limit of UT2 -
R3 on the right bank. An inline pond on UT2 is present but does not meet jurisdictional requirements to
be classified as a wetland.
The existing wetland areas on -site are riparian. The wetlands are immediately adjacent to UT2 and have
relatively high groundwater elevations. Based on vegetation, soil, and hydrology indicators, it appears
that these areas are inundated or saturated for most of the growing season in a typical year. The wetlands
are low topographic floodplain areas. They are impacted by some spoil material along the channel and
runoff erosion from adjacent agriculture fields. Field indicators of wetland hydrology include water
stained leaves, saturated soil within one foot of the surface, crayfish burrows, and hydrophytic vegetation.
These wetlands are mapped on the somewhat poorly drained Chewacla soils.
Wetland A is identified within the floodplain along the east and west sides of UT2-RI located
approximately 590 feet upstream of the existing pond dam. Wetland B is located just below the pond dam
on the west side of UT2 -R3. Potential impacts associated with restoration efforts occurring adjacent to the
existing wetlands (Wetlands A and B) along UT2-RI and UT2 -R3 have been minimized by placing the
proposed channel in a non - wetland area. Table 13 summarizes the sizes of each existing wetland and its
location.
The existing wetlands have been historically disturbed and lack the typical vegetation of bottomland
hardwood wetlands. Creating a new channel that will provide an overall increase in wetland function with
the addition of native trees and shrubs planted along the stream banks. Impacts to hydrology should be
minimal. Wetland A contains mostly invasive species (e.g., Chinese privet). Stream restoration and
enhancement activities in these areas will also remove the invasive species.
Table 13. Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland A
Wetland B
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.52
0.01
Wetland Type
Riparian
Riparian
Mapped Soil Series
Chewacla
Chewacla
Drainage Class
Somewhat
Somewhat
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric with Hydric Inclusions
Hydric with Hydric Inclusions
Source of Hydrology
Overbank Flows & Groundwater
Overbank Flows & Groundwater
Hydrologic Impairment
NA
Ditched
Native vegetation community
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Clear -cut
Percent composition of exotic
invasive vegetation
20% Chinese Privet
0%
4.3.2 Wetland Impacts
Wetland impacts will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable and are anticipated to be minor
and almost entirely temporary. Impacts within wetland A will be temporary and total 0.008 acre and
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 31 March 2014

result from disturbance during grade control structure installation. Impacts to wetland B will be
permanent, total 0.007 acre, and result from channel relocation (Figure 6a).
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 32 March 2014

Figure 6. Project Site NWI Wetlands Map
Figure 6. Legend
NWI Map Proposed Streams
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Proposed Easement
0 750 1.500 3,000 ® NWI Wetlands
Feet
1 inch = 1,500 feet Target Parcels
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 33 March 2014

Figure 6a. Wetland Impacts
Figure 6a.
Wetland Impacts
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site
0 80 160 320
Feet
1 inch = 160 feet
Legend
Proposed Streams
Proposed Easement
Delineated Wetlands
1Metland Impacts
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 34 March 2014

Figure 7. Project Site Land Use
High Intensity Developed Water Bodies Mixed Upland Hardwoods
Managed Herbaceous Cover Cultivated Bottomland Forest/Hardwood Swamps
Figure 7. Legend
Landuse Map
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Proposed Streams
0 750 1,500 3,000 Proposed Easement
Feet parcel Boundaries
1 inch = 1,500 feet
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 35 March 2014

Figure 8. Project Site Natural Communities
Agricultural - Pasture /Hay Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Open Water
Agricultural - Row Crops Mixed Pines /Hardwoods Reside ntallManaged Herbaceous
Figure 8.
Natural Communties Map Legend
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site Proposed Streams
0 750 1,500 3,000 Proposed Easement
Feet Target Parcels
1 inch = 1,500 feet
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 36 March 2014

4.4 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints
4.4.1 Property Ownership, Boundary, and Utilities
There are no conflicts with the anticipated easement acquisition; however, there are several constraints at
the Poplin Ridge Site. An existing overhead power line easement is located adjacent to the left bank near
the downstream end of UT1. This results in approximately 0.09 acre of riparian buffer that cannot be
planted with trees. An herbaceous /shrub planting zone is proposed in this area to provide stability, and the
right bank buffer has been increased to a width that varies between 75 and 100 feet to compensate for the
area that cannot be planted. The future Monroe Bypass is located immediately west and south of the
proposed project. The Site is located within five miles of two General Aviation airports. The project will
decrease waterfowl habitat by removing an existing dam and draining the pond along UT2.
4.4.2 FEMA/ Hydrologic Trespass
There are no hydrologic constraints to the proposed Poplin Ridge project. Seven crossings will be
improved and /or added, stabilized, and maintained for future use. These crossings will include
appropriately sized culverts and will be fenced (where needed) to prevent livestock access to any part of
the stream channel or riparian buffer. Five minor agricultural drainage swales will enter the proposed
easement. Three of the swales, all non jurisdictional, will be retrofitted with structures to provide diffuse
flow into the riparian buffer. Both primary drainages (UT1 and UT2) are mapped FEMA 100 -year
floodplain (Figure 9). Restoration or enhancement on those channels will require a no -rise or a
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA. It is anticipated that a no -rise will meet the
project requirements and the necessary report and documentation will be submitted to NCEM upon the
final approval of the project from EEP and the IRT.
Table 14. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States -
Yes
Yes
Appendix B
Section 404
Waters of the United States -
Yes
Yes
Appendix B
Section 401
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Section 4.1.3; Appendix B
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Section 4.1.4; Appendix B
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA) /Coastal Area
No
NA
N/A
Management Act (CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
No
Section 4.4.3; Appendix B
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
NA
N/A
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 37 March 2014

Figure 9. Project Site FEMA Map
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 38 March 2014
Legend
Pon
Fl 9. — - Proposed Streams
FEMA Map
MA Q Proposed Easement
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site
Target Parcels
o Aso 1,500 3,000
Feet FEMA Zone AE -
1 ircn = 1,500 feet Detailed 100yr. Floodplair
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 38 March 2014

5. DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Mitigation credits presented in these Tables 15 -18 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.
Table 15. Determination of Credits
Poplin Ridge Site, Union County
EEP Project # 95359
Mtigation Credits
Existing
Footage or
Acreage
Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non - riparian
Wetland
Nitrogen Nutrient Phosphorous
Buffer Offset Nutrient Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
1:5.0
Totals
6,107
238
N/A
N/A
N/A
I N/A
N/A N/A N/A
Table 16. Project Com onents
Project
Component
or Reach ID
Stationing/
Location
Existing
Footage or
Acreage
Approach
(PI PII, etc.)
Restoration (R)
or Restoration
Equivalent (RE)
Restoration
Footage or
Acreage
Mitigation
Ratio
SMUs
UT1 -1
1 +20 to 6 +92
572
Preservation
RE
572
1:5.0
114
UT1 -1
6 +92 to 12 +58
566
Enhancement
R
566
1:1.5
377
UT 1-2
12 +58 to 24 +89
1,284
P1 Restoration
R
1,171
1 : 1.0
1,171
UT 1-3
24 +89 to 34 +50
833
P1 Restoration
R
901
1 : 1.0
901
UT 1-4
34 +50 to 46 +60
1,252
Enhancement
R
1,210
1:1.5
807
UT1 -A
0 +65 to 2 +82
197
Enhancement
R
217
1:1.5
145
UT1 -13
0 +09 to 6 +29
620
Preservation
RE
620
1:5.0
124
UT1 -13
6 +29 to 11 +46
512
Enhancement
R
455
1:1.5
303
UT1 -C
1 +21 to 9 +78
883
Enhancement
R
857
1:1.5
571
UT2 -1
0 +00 to 4 +90
490
Enhancement 11
R
490
1 : 2.5
196
UT2 -2
4 +90 to 13 +97
875
P1 Restoration
R
847
1 : 1.0
847
UT2 -3
13 +97 to 19 +18
495
P1 Restoration
R
521
1 :1.5
347
UT24
19 +18 to 22 +07
270
P1 Restoration
R
257
1 : 1.0
257
UT2 -A
0 +65 to 5 +28
365
Enhancement 11
R
463
1 : 2.5
185
1) Pi = Priority 1
2) The calculations for existing and proposed lengths and SMUs do not include stream segments associated with existing
culverts or breaks in the proposed conservation easement associated with culvert or utility crossings.
3) Reach UT2 -3 has a lower mitigation ratio of 1:1.5 due to previous impacts from the landowner. The proposed lower
ratio is based on coordination with USACE.
4) See Figures 11A and 11B for reach locations.
Table 17. Com onent Summation
Restoration
Level
Stream
(linear feet)
Riparian Wetland
Non - Riparian Wetland
(acres)
Buffer
(square feet)
Upland
(acres)
Riverine
Non - Riverine
Restoration
3,697
Enhancement
Enhancement I
31305
Enhancement 11
953
Creation
Preservation
1,192
High Quality
Preservation
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 39 March 2014

6. 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 18. Stream Credits
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.
(65%)
3
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
60%
standards are being met.
(75 %)
4
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
15%
70%
standards are being met.
(85 %)
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
85%
5
standards are being met and project has received close -out
15%
(100 %)
approval.
a reserve of 15 % of the 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.
6.1 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
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.
6.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
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
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 40 March 2014

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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 41 March 2014

7. MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Reference Stream Studies
7.1.1 Target Reference Conditions
The restoration site is characterized by agricultural practices. Several ditches exist in the watershed and
contribute to the project site. Physical parameters of the site were used, as well as other reference
materials, to determine the target stream type. An iterative process was used to develop the final
information for the site design.
To develop the target reference conditions, physical site parameters were reviewed. This included the
drainage area, land use, soils mapping units from the Union County Soil Survey for the watershed and
site, typical woody debris and habitat available for the area, as well as general topography. The
"Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina" was also used to narrow the potential
community types that would have existed at the site (Shafale and Weakley, 2003).
Targeted reference conditions included the following:
• Located within the Physiographic Region — Piedmont Region,
• Similar drainage area,
• Similar land use onsite and in the watershed,
• Similar watershed soil types,
• Similar site soil types,
• Ideal, undisturbed habitat — several types of woody debris present,
• Similar topography,
• Similar slope,
• Pattern common among Piedmont streams, and
• Minimal presence of invasive species.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 42 March 2014

Figure 10. Reference Reach Site Map
®
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 43 March 2014
Figure 10. Reference Reach Site
Poplin Ridge Reference Reach
2
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site streams
0 500 1,000 2,000 Union County Parcels
Feet Drainage Area = 426 Ac.
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 43 March 2014

7.1.2 Reference Site Search Methodology
All the parameters in Section 7.1.1 were used to find appropriate reference stream sites. Obtaining
property owner information and owner authorization for access was another factor in locating suitable
reference sites for the project. For this project, there was no predetermined amount of reference sites
needed as long as the site was suitable and met nearly all the parameters. Six potential reference sites
were visited, and their characteristics were noted. It is difficult to a find reference site because many have
been disturbed by farming or residential development. Streams tend to be modified ditches and may have
some of the characteristics that are sought in a reference, but too few to make it an ideal reference for the
project site. One reference stream site that proves to be ideal in both geomorphology and habitat is located
approximately eight miles northeast of the restoration site in a wooded corridor.
A GIS -based search was initially conducted for the identification of reference stream sites in the
watershed. The GIS process was based on a search through quadrangle maps, aerial photography, and
topography. Drainage areas for each reference site were delineated. Soils and land use were considered
for each site, as well as accessibility and location in comparison to the restoration reach. Once sites were
identified, all six sites were visited and assessed. Many of the identified reaches were affected by farming
practices, dense invasive species, and disturbed or altered floodplains. This was the case for most of the
sites visited; and therefore, these sites were not considered. One site was identified for use as a reference
reach.
7.1.3 Reference Watershed Characterization
The reference stream flows north and drains into Grassy Creek (Figure 10). The reach that was surveyed
and analyzed is approximately 320 feet long. The drainage area for the unnamed tributary to Grassy
Creek (UT) is 0.67 square miles (427 acres). The land use in the watershed is characterized by mostly
cultivation (57 percent), managed herbaceous cover (15 percent), mixed upland hardwoods (26 percent),
unmanaged herbaceous upland (1 percent), and southern yellow pine (1 percent). Site photographs of the
reference stream are located in Section 2.5.
The current State classification for the UT to Grassy Creek and Grassy Creek is Class C (NCDWQ,
2005). Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life, secondary recreation, and agricultural usage. Using
Rosgen stream classification, the stream is classified as an E4 stream type.
7.1.4 Reference Soils Characterization
The soils found in and around the reference reach are mapped as Badin and Tatum, both of which are
non -hydric soils. Badin soils typically are moderately deep and well drained. Badin soils are commonly
found along ridges and side slopes of uplands ranging from 2 to 45 percent. Badin and Tatum soils are
clayey, mixed, thermic Typic Hapludults, and are formed in material weathered from Carolina Slates.
Tatum soils have similar characteristics and are commonly associated with Badin soils. The soils
immediately adjacent to the reference reach have similar characteristics and properties to the soils found
at the Poplin Ridge Restoration Site.
7.1.5 Reference Discharge
Several hydrologic models /methods were used to develop a bankfull discharge for the reference site.
Existing drainage area, land use, slope, roughness, and cross - sectional area were all factors considered
when performing the calculations. Using a combination of Piedmont Regional Curves, in -house
spreadsheet tools, and a project specific regional flood frequency analysis; the existing discharge was
calculated to be approximately 50 cubic feet per second (ft3 /s). See Section 7.3.1.1 for a more detailed
description of the hydrologic analyses performed for this project.
7.1.6 Reference Channel Morphology
In comparison to the restoration reaches, the reference reach is larger than UT1 when comparing pattern,
dimension and profile and smaller than UT2, which is the reason for using a scaling factor for the design.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 44 March 2014

The scaling factor is based on a smaller or larger bankfull area of the reference channel. Since the
reference stream is smaller than UT2, it was necessary to scale up the analog reach in order to use it for
design. Likewise, since the reference stream is larger than UT1, it was necessary to scale down the
analog reach. The new reach would then have the necessary dimensions of an appropriate stream similar
in size to the existing channel that would correspond to the larger drainage area. The reference reach is
typically thirteen to eighteen feet wide and one to three feet deep. The cross sectional area is typically
around 19.1 square feet with a width to depth ratio close to 10.5.
7.1.7 Reference Channel Stability Assessment
The reference reach is stable and shows no evidence of incision or erosion in the portion that was
surveyed and analyzed. The stream appears to maintain its slope and has sufficient amounts of vegetation
to secure its banks. Riparian buffer widths exceed fifty feet on each side. The CSA results (scores and
ratings) for the reference reach are provided above in Table 8 and Table 9 (Section 4.2.4). The reference
reach received a "Good" rating as the channel demonstrates a stable meandering pattern and a well -
vegetated riparian buffer.
7.1.8 Reference Bankfull Verification
Typical indicators of bankfull include vegetation at the bankfull elevation, benches /inner berm, and point
bars. Throughout the entire length of the reference reach, bankfull is located at the top of bank elevation
and /or the back of existing point bars. The accuracy of this bankfull stage is verified by comparing the
discharges from the Piedmont Plain Regional Curves and flood frequency analysis results to the
discharges generated using Manning's equation based on measured hydraulic geometry and slopes.
Evidence that further supports the location of bankfull is the lack of any benches or berm features within
the channel, and wrack lines present within the floodplain.
7.1.9 Reference Riparian Vegetation
The reference reach riparian community is characteristic of a Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest - Piedmont
Subtype. This community is approximately 20 to 25 years old, as evidenced by the representative
diameter at breast height (DBH) measurements and historical aerial photography. Table 19 lists the
coverage estimates and species encountered. The right bank is denoted as RB and the left bank is denoted
as LB.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 45 March 2014

Table 19. Tree Communities at the Reference Reach for Poplin Ridge Site
It is anticipated that a local seed source for these high dispersal species is present and will disperse across
much of the mitigation site. These species are often found in early successional communities and quickly
fill disturbance gaps. Because many of these high dispersal species often become aggressive in these sites,
they are not included in the Restoration Planting List (Section 7.2.2). Hardwood species typical of the
target community were observed in adjacent and nearby communities, and were judged to be more
appropriate for this site.
7.1.10 Stream Habitat Assessment — Woody Debris
The habitat assessment for the reference stream channel is included in the habitat assessment discussion
for Poplin Ridge Site (Section 4.2.7).
7.2 Design Parameters
7.2.1 Stream Restoration Approach
Stream restoration efforts along the unnamed tributaries to East Fork Stewarts Creek were accomplished
through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design approach applies a
combination of analytical and reference reach based design methods that meet objectives commensurate
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 46 March 2014
Percent
Percent
Representatiw
Transect
Location
Coverage
Ewr reen
Deciduous
DBH(in.)
Species
LB
85
- --
100
10
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Liguidambar styracii lua
1
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Carya ovata
RB
80
- --
100
6
LB
90
- --
100
10
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua
2
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Carya ovata,
RB
80
- --
100
6
Quercus ni ra
LB
90
- --
100
10
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua
3
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Carya ovata,
RB
75
- --
100
6
Quercus ni ra
LB
85
- --
100
12
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua
4
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Carya ovata,
RB
75
- --
100
8
Quercus ni ra
LB
85
- --
100
10
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua
5
RB
80
- --
100
4
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Carya ovata
LB
90
- --
100
10
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Carya ovata,
Liquidambarstyr aci ua
6
RB
70
1
99
4
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua,
Jun i erus virgin iana, Ma nolia grandiflora
LB
80
1
99
8
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua,
Ilex o aca
7
RB
70
1
99
6
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Pinus palustris, Quercus alba,
Jun i erus virgin iana
LB
80
- --
100
8
Liriodendron tulipifera , Liguidambar styraciflua, Quercus rubra,
Quercus falcata
8
RB
70
1
99
4
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Liguidambar styracii lua,
Pinus palustris, Juni erus vir iniana
LB
75
- --
100
6
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba, Liguidambar styracii lua
9
RB
70
5
95
4
Pinus palustris, Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba
LB
80
1
99
8
Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Ilex opaca, Quercus alba
10
Pinus palustris, Quercus rubra, Quercus falcata, Quercus alba
RB
70
5
95
6
It is anticipated that a local seed source for these high dispersal species is present and will disperse across
much of the mitigation site. These species are often found in early successional communities and quickly
fill disturbance gaps. Because many of these high dispersal species often become aggressive in these sites,
they are not included in the Restoration Planting List (Section 7.2.2). Hardwood species typical of the
target community were observed in adjacent and nearby communities, and were judged to be more
appropriate for this site.
7.1.10 Stream Habitat Assessment — Woody Debris
The habitat assessment for the reference stream channel is included in the habitat assessment discussion
for Poplin Ridge Site (Section 4.2.7).
7.2 Design Parameters
7.2.1 Stream Restoration Approach
Stream restoration efforts along the unnamed tributaries to East Fork Stewarts Creek were accomplished
through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design approach applies a
combination of analytical and reference reach based design methods that meet objectives commensurate
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 46 March 2014

with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. Proposed treatment activities may range from minor
bank grading and planting to re- establishing stable planform and hydraulic geometry. For reaches
requiring full restoration, natural design concepts have been applied and verified through rigorous
engineering analyses and modeling. The objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically stable
channel that provides habitat improvements and ties into the existing landscape.
The Poplin Ridge Site will include Priority Level I stream restoration, stream Enhancement Levels I and
II, and Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement. Priority Level I stream restoration will incorporate
the design of a single- thread meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken from the reference
site described in Section 7.1 above, published empirical relationships, NC Rural Piedmont Regional
Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. Approximately 4,444 linear feet of stream channel will be
reconstructed. Enhancement Level I will be applied to 3,305 linear feet of channel that requires
stabilization and bank improvements, and buffer restoration. Enhancement Level II will be applied to an
additional 953 linear feet of channel that requires buffer enhancement and /or minimal bank and habitat
improvements. Additionally, Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement is proposed on 1,192 feet of
channel. Conceptual plan views are provided in Figures I I a and IIb.
Current stream conditions along the proposed restoration reaches demonstrate significant habitat
degradation as a result of impacts from livestock and channelization performed to promote agricultural
activities. Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor condition throughout most of the project area. Much
of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs and active pasture and /or crops are present up to the
edge of the existing channel.
The Poplin Ridge Site design approach began with a thorough study of existing conditions, including the
onsite streams and ditches, valleys, and watershed. Design parameters, including active channel, habitat
and floodplain features were developed from analyses performed at the reference site. Analytical design
techniques were used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole.
Engineering analyses were performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach based design. A combination of methods (including Hydraflow Hydrographs, regional
curves and flood frequency analysis) were used to calculate flows received by the channel for bankfull
and other significant storm events. HEC-RAS was then used to simulate water surface elevations of
flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The development of the HEC models is an important
component to the design; therefore, model input parameters are field verified when possible. Through this
hydrologic analysis, the design discharge (typically referenced as bankfull or dominant discharge) was
determined, and the subsequent design was based on this calculated discharge. Design parameters
developed through the analyses of reference reach data and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling were
confirmed using the Stable Channel Design function components within HEC-RAS and through
spreadsheet tools.
Engineering analyses were performed concurrently to geomorphic and habitat studies. While the stream
design was verified by simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of desirable habitat
features were derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both riparian habitat
features and in- stream structures such as riffle grade controls, cross weirs, log toes, and step pools were
used throughout the project to act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and
redirecting the stream's energy. Bank stability will also be enhanced through the installation of cuttings
bundles and live stakes that include native species (e.g. black willow (Salix nigra) and silky dogwood
(Cornus amomum)).
In- stream habitat is highly dependent on available cover and organic material. A quantitative habitat
assessment method was used to measure type, location, and quantity of habitat in the reference streams.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 47 March 2014

During design, the habitat assessment results were scaled appropriately to the design parameters such that
the quantity and placement of the habitat features along the restored channel mimics reference conditions.
This process provides a natural channel design that addresses aquatic function improvements in addition
to stability.
Sections of abandoned stream channel will be backfilled to the elevation of the floodplain in areas
adjacent to the new channel with material excavated onsite and by installing channel plugs where
necessary. The floodplain will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will
provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Stream banks will be stabilized using a
combination of grading, erosion control matting, bare -root plantings, native material revetment techniques
(i.e. bioengineering), structure placement, and sod transplants where possible. The stream and adjacent
riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50 -foot permanent conservation easement, which will be
fenced as needed to exclude livestock. However, an approximately 100 -foot section along the east side of
Reach UT1 -R4 is proposed where the minimum 50 -foot conservation easement cannot be met due to a
Union Power Cooperative 100 -foot right -of -way. At this location, the conservation easement will be
extended to a width that varies between 75 and 100 feet along the west side of the channel to offset the
loss of easement on the opposite side. Additionally, areas within the power easement that fall within the
50 -foot buffer will be planted with herbaceous /shrub vegetation. No loss in stream credit is expected at
this location since the buffer width will be increased along the west side to offset the encroachment of the
powerline easement as was discussed with the IRT on July 11, 2012.
When all of these components are combined, a functional and stable channel with diverse habitat will be
restored. According to Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003) published by the US Army Corps of
Engineers, the US Environmental Protection Agency, The North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, and the NCDWQ, the proposed restoration design will meet the guidelines of stream
restoration and will be subject to a mitigation ratio of 1:1. Note: UT2 -R3 has a proposed mitigation ratio
of 1.5:1 per communication with USACE. The lower mitigation ratio accounts for minor unpermitted
impacts to the channel by the landowner.
Throughout the project area, there will be several breaks within the conservation easement where stream
credits will not be generated to account either for 60 -foot farm crossings or for existing Union Power
overhead utility crossings. Along UT1, one existing crossing will be moved outside of the project, one
new culvert crossing will be installed, and three culvert crossings will be removed and replaced, two of
which will remain outside of the project. Along UT2, the two existing culvert crossings will be removed
and replaced at their current location, and there will be two 30 -foot easement breaks associated with
Union Power easements. These two easement breaks will be planted with herbaceous /shrub vegetation
within the 50 -foot buffer.
Poplin Ridge has been broken into the following design reaches:
UTl -RI (STA 1 +20 to 12 +58) — Upper -most portion of UT1 totaling 572 linear feet of Stream
Preservation and Buffer Enhancement and 566 linear feet of Enhancement Level I. The upper
portion of this reach is stable and has a mature hardwood buffer. The lower portion is only
partially forested and flows through cultivated fields. This lower portion is experiencing active
erosion and has a disturbed buffer. Stabilization /enhancement activities will include performing
minor bank grading, installing grade control and habitat structures, and planting the buffer.
• UTl -R2 (STA 12 +58 to 24 +89) — Upper of the two middle reaches along UTI totaling 1,171
linear feet of Priority I Restoration. This reach flows through cultivated fields and has highly
unstable banks and a highly disturbed buffer. Restoration will involve constructing a meandering
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 48 March 2014

channel, installing habitat and grade control structures, filling and plugging the abandoned
channel, and re- vegetating the buffer with native plants.
UTl -R3 (STA 24 +89 to 34 +50) — Lower of the two middle reaches along UT1 totaling 901
linear feet of Priority I Restoration. This reach flows through cultivated fields and has highly
unstable banks and a highly disturbed buffer. Restoration will involve constructing a meandering
channel, installing habitat and grade control structures, filling and plugging the abandoned
channel, and the buffer planted with native vegetation. A 60 -foot culvert crossing is proposed at
STA 25 +41.
UTl -R4 (STA 34+50 to 46 +60) — Downstream -most portion of UT1 totaling 1,210 linear feet of
Enhancement Level L This reach flows through cultivated fields, has moderately unstable banks
and a highly disturbed buffer. Enhancement activities will include laying back banks, enhancing
existing benches, installing grade control and habitat structures, and replanting the buffer. The
existing culvert crossing just downstream of the project at STA 47 +30 will be removed and
replaced with upgraded culverts.
UTl -A (STA 0 +65 to 2 +82) — Upper -most tributary to UT1 totaling 217 linear feet of
Enhancement Level I. This reach originates just downstream of a forested area, flows through
cultivated fields, and exhibits minor bank erosion. Enhancement activities will include reshaping
the channel, removing an existing culvert, and installing habitat structures. A ford crossing will
be installed just upstream of the project near STA 0 +37 to allow the landowner continued access
across the property.
UTl -B (STA 0 +09 to 11 +46) — Tributary of UT1 that flows north to south totaling 620 linear
feet of Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement and 455 linear feet of Enhancement Level I.
This upper portion of this reach is stable and has an intact riparian buffer throughout. Below STA
6 +29, the channel flows through a cultivated field, has no buffer, and exhibits channel incision
along the downstream section. Enhancement activities will include reshaping the channel,
removing an existing culvert, re- vegetating the buffer and installing habitat and grade control
structures.
• UT1 -C (STA 1 +21 to 9 +78) — Southern -most tributary to UT1 totaling 857 linear feet of
Enhancement Level L This reach flows west to east through cultivated fields and lacks a riparian
buffer. Stabilization /enhancement activities will include bank grading and channel reshaping,
installing grade control and habitat structures, and planting the buffer. The existing culvert near
STA 1 +22 will be removed and replaced just upstream of the proposed easement at STA 0 +87.
UT2-RI (STA 0 +00 to 4 +90) — Upper -most portion of UT2 totaling 490 linear feet of
Enhancement Level IL This reach flows between an active pasture and a cultivated field. The
stream buffer, which lacks mature hardwoods, has been disturbed by agricultural practices and
cattle access. Enhancement activities will include reshaping the channel, invasive species
treatment, riparian plantings, and installing grade control structures at the downstream end of the
reach.
UT2 -R2 (STA 4 +90 to 13 +97) — Upper of the two middle reaches along UT2 totaling 847 linear
feet of Priority I Restoration. This reach is currently a 1.3 acre farm pond with a drainage area of
723 acres and is surrounded by cultivated fields. Restoration will involve draining the pond and
removing and replacing the existing perched culverts at a lower elevation to maintain normal flow
through the proposed culverts. It is anticipated that a baseflow channel will form on its own once
the pond has been drained. Once the pond bed has dried sufficiently to support construction
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 49 March 2014

equipment, the newly formed channel will be enhanced and stabilized. Habitat and grade control
structures will be installed, and the buffer will be planted with native vegetation.
UT2 -R3 (STA 13 +97 to 19 +18) — Lower of the two middle reaches along UT2 totaling 521
linear feet of Priority I Restoration. This reach is a perennial channel that lies between an active
pasture and a cultivated field. This stream reach is generally straight and has little to no stream
buffer within the project area. The upper portion of this reach is experiencing active erosion of
the bed and banks. The lower portion of the reach has a stable bed with moderate bank erosion.
Restoration will involve constructing a meandering channel, installing habitat and grade control
structures, filling and plugging the abandoned channel, and the buffer planted with native
vegetation.
UT2 -R4 (STA 19 +18 to 22 +07) — Downstream -most portion of UT2 totaling 257 linear feet of
Priority I Restoration. This reach is a perennial channel that flows through active pasture and
cultivated fields. This reach is generally straight and has a highly disturbed buffer with invasive
species present. Restoration will involve constructing a meandering channel, installing habitat
and grade control structures, filling and plugging the abandoned channel, and the buffer planted
with native vegetation.
• UT2 -A (STA 0 +65 to 5 +28) — The only tributary to UT2 totaling 463 linear feet of Enhancement
Level IL UT2 -A is an intermittent channel that flows into a farm pond (UT2 -Reach 2). This reach
flows through an active cattle pasture, and lacks a vegetated buffer. Stabilization /enhancement
activities will include minor bank grading, installing grade control and habitat structures, and
replanting the buffer.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 50 March 2014

Figure lla. Project Site Conceptual Plan Design
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 51 March 2014
Figure 11a.
Conceptual Design - UT1
2
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site
Feet
0 275 550 1.100
1 inch = 550 feet
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 51 March 2014

Figure 11b. Project Site Conceptual Plan Design
N
UT2 -Ri
490 LF of Enhancement II IF
Channel Slope = 0.0027 ft/ft
Drainage Area = 0.99 mil Wetland A Impacts
' Temp: 0.007 Ac.
UT2 -R2
847 LF of P1 Restoration
Channel Slope = 0.0010 ft/ft
Drainage Area = 1.13 mil
UT2 -A /
463 LF of Enhancement II Remove Pond Dam
Channel Slope = 0.0130 ft/ft i
Drainage Area = 0.08 miz
UT2 -R3 Wetland B Impacts
521 LF of P1 Restoration Temp: 0.003 Ac.
Channel Slope = 0.0057 ft/ft
Drainage Area = 1.24 mi
UT2 -R4
257 LF of P1 Restoration
Le-gend Channel Slope = 0.0031 Tin
Stream Crossings
Drainage Area = 1.35 mil
BMP Locations
Q Reach Breaks
X — Easement Fencing `.
— Contours 2 ti �i����•
P1 Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
/
Proposed Easement
Parcels
® Wetlands
Figure 11b.
Conceptual Design - UT2
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Site
Feet
0 275 550 1,100
1 inch = 550 feet
7.2.1.1 Design Discharge
Based upon the hydrologic analysis described in Section 7.3.1.1 below, design discharges were selected
that fell within ranges resulting from the 1 and 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis and the 1 -year
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 52 March 2014

Hydraflow Hydrographs modeling for each reach. The selected flows are 36 ft'/s, 52 ft'/s, 65 ft'/s, and 74
ft3 /s for Reaches UT1 -R2, UT1 -R3, UT2- R2 /R3, and UT2 -R4 respectively. These discharges will provide
frequent inundation of the adjacent floodplain.
These discharges were selected based on the following rationale:
• The calculated bankfull discharge for the analog /reference reach closely matches the results of the
1.1 -year flood frequency analysis,
• The results of the 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis matched well with the NC regional curve,
• Approximate bankfull discharges for existing conditions for UTIfall between the 1.1 and 1.5 -year
flood frequency analysis results,
• Approximate bankfull discharges for existing conditions for UT2 fall near the 1 -year Hydraflow
Hydrographs analysis results,
• Selecting design discharges between the 1 and 1.5 -year storm events allows frequent inundation
of the floodplain, while also preventing adjacent active agriculture land from flooding at a high
frequency.
7.2.1.2 Design Methods
There are three primary methods that have demonstrated success in stream restoration; analog, empirical,
and analytical. All three methods have advantages and limitations, and it is often best to utilize more than
one method to address site - specific conditions or to verify the applicability of design elements. This is
particularly true in developed watersheds where existing conditions do not always reflect current inputs
and events, and sediment and hydrologic inputs may remain unstable for some time. Combinations of
analytical and analog methods were used to develop the stream designs for Poplin Ridge.
Analytical Approach
Analytical design is based on principles and processes considered universal to all streams, and can entail
many traditional engineering techniques. The analytical approach utilizes continuity, roughness equations,
hydrologic and hydraulic models, and sediment transport functions to derive equilibrium conditions.
Since the project is located within a rural watershed, restoration designs are based on hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses, including rainfall - runoff models to determine design discharges coupled with
reference reach techniques.
Analog Approach
The analog method of natural channel design involves the use of a "template" or reference stream located
near the design reach, and is particularly useful when watershed and boundary conditions are similar
between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore et al., 2001). In an analog approach, the planform
pattern, cross - sectional shape, longitudinal profile, and frequency and locations of woody debris along the
analog reaches are mimicked when developing the design parameters for the subject stream. A scaling
factor was calculated from the survey data in order to correctly size the planform design parameters for
the project site. The scaling factors for each design reach were derived from the design cross - sectional
area and topwidth of each reach as follows:
1. The appropriate bankfull cross - sectional area (ABKF) of each design reach was calculated using an
in -house spreadsheet based on Manning's equation. The input parameters included the design
discharge as determined by the hydrologic analysis described above, and proposed slope based on
site conditions and the sinuosity measured for the analog reach.
2. The cross - sectional shape was adjusted within the spreadsheet to replicate the width -depth ratios
and side slopes surveyed along the analog reach, while also maintaining the ABKF necessary to
convey the design discharge.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 53 March 2014

3. The scaling factor is determined from the ratio of the design topwidth to the analog topwidth
(Table 20). For this project, several cross - sections were obtained at the analog site, resulting in an
average width of 13.6 feet.
4. Pool cross - sectional areas were calculated using both typical reference reach techniques and the
analog approach. Design ABKF areas were determined using the measured analog ratios of riffle
ABKF to pool ABKF as applied to the design ABKFS. The pool cross - sectional shape was adjusted
within the in -house spreadsheet as described above in step 2.
Table 20. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters
Reach Drainage Proposed Bankfull Design Analog Reach Scaling
Area (ac) ABKF (ft) Topwidth (ft) Topwidth (ft) Factor
UTl -Reach 2
248
14.5
11.8
13.6
0.87
UTl -Reach 3
384
20.3
13.6
13.6
1.00
UT2 -Reach 2/3
792
31.5
17.2
13.6
1.26
UT2 -Reach 4
861
34.8
18.2
13.6
1.34
7.2.1.3 Typical Design Sections
Typical cross sections for shallows and pools are shown on the design plan sheets in Appendix D. The
cross - section dimensions were developed for the three design reaches by using a WK Dickson in -house
spreadsheet described in Section 7.2.1.2 of this report. The cross - sections were altered slightly to
facilitate constructability; however, the cross - sectional area, width to depth ratio, and side slopes were
preserved. Typical pool sections include pools located on straight reaches and pools on meander bends.
7.2.1.4 Typical Meander Pattern
The design plans showing the proposed channel alignment are provided in Appendix D. The meander
pattern was derived directly from the analog reach and sized using the scaling factors described in Table
20. The analog meander pattern was altered in some locations to provide variability in pattern, to avoid
onsite constraints, to follow the valley pattern, and to make the channel more constructible. The
morphologic parameters summarized in Appendix C were applied wherever these deviations occurred.
7.2.1.5 Longitudinal Profiles
The design profiles are presented in Appendix C. These profiles extend throughout the entire project for
the proposed channel alignment. The profiles were designed using the analog reach bed features that were
sized with the scaling factors. The bed slopes and bankfull energy gradients were determined for each
design reach based on the existing valley slope and the sinuosity of the design reach. Log structures will
be utilized in the design to control grade, divert flows, and provide additional habitat diversity and
stability.
7.2.1.6 In- Stream Structures
Structures will be incorporated into the channel design to provide additional stability and improve aquatic
habitat. Native materials and vegetation will be used for revetments and grade control structures where
applicable. Additionally, woody debris will be placed throughout the channel at locations and at a
frequency that is similar to those mapped in the analog reaches. The analog reach has woody debris
throughout the length of the channel, providing grade control for shallows and forcing scour pools.
Woody habitat features installed will include leaf packs, dead brush, woody debris bundles, root wads,
and wattles. Sod mats harvested onsite will be installed along stream banks during construction if and
when feasible. Sod mats will only be harvested and used if comprised of appropriate vegetation. The use
of sod mats that include aggressive turf grasses will be avoided. Sod mats are natural sections of
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 54 March 2014

vegetation taken from the banks when they were cut during construction, and generally range between
0.75 to 1.0 feet in thickness. Before installation, proposed banks are graded lower than specified to
accommodate the thickness of the mat. The mats are placed on top of the bank to act as a natural stabilizer
of native species, and they grow much faster than the combination of coir fiber matting and seeding (see
detail Appendix D). Other bank stability measures include the installation of cuttings bundles at three to
five foot intervals along the tops of banks, live staking, and log toes. Typical details for proposed in-
stream structures and revetments are in Appendix D.
7.2.2 Natural Plant Community Restoration
7.2.2.1 Plant Community Restoration
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the site's restoration. The selection of
plants is based on what was observed at the reference reach and the forest surrounding the restoration site
and what is typically native to the area. Several sources of information were used to determine the most
appropriate species for the restoration project along with existing and proposed topography. The reference
stream is located within a narrow Piedmont Bottomland Forest that is surrounded by Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest. Dominant species along the reference reach include northern red oak (Quercus rubra),
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), white oak (Quercus alba), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata) and
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) in the canopy. Shrubs include American holly (Ilex opaca) and
eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana). Canopy closure limited herbaceous vegetation along the
reference reach. The forests near the mitigation site also support many species typical of this community
type.
A narrow Piedmont Bottomland Forest is located along the reference reach's banks and grades upward
into well- drained Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. The restoration site exhibits atypical narrow floodplain
between the steeper slopes found in this area of the Piedmont. Based on observations of the reference
community, the communities surrounding the mitigation site, and the narrow floodplain, a single
community is appropriate. Therefore, Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest will be the target community type
and will be used for all areas within the project, as well as for buffer around the site. A plant species list
has been developed and can be found in Table 21. Species with high dispersal rates are not included
because of local occurrence and the high potential for natural regeneration. The high dispersal species
include red maple, tulip poplar, and sweetgum.
The restoration of plant communities along Poplin Ridge will provide stabilization and diversity. For
rapid stabilization, silky dogwood, silky willow, and black willow were chosen for live stakes along the
restored channel because of their rapid growth patterns and high success rates. Willows will also be
quicker to contribute organic matter to the channel. Willows typically grow at a faster rate than species
planted around them and stabilize the stream banks. When the other species are larger, the black willow
and silky willows will slowly stop growing or die out because the other species would outgrow them and
create shade that the willows do not tolerate. The live stake species will be planted along the outside of
the meander bends three feet from the top of bank, creating a section along the top of bank to provide
stabilization. The willows will be spaced every three feet with alternate spacing. See Appendix D for a
detailed planting plan.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 55 March 2014

Table 21. Proposed Plant List
7.2.2.2 On -Site Invasive Species Management
Some invasive species have been noted on the site. They include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens). These invasive species are common but not limited to
any confined location. The movement of topsoil will also activate "weed seeds," but most will be
inhibited by raising the water table on the site. It will be important during monitoring site visits to check
for significant encroachment of invasive species and to develop a plan of action to control any such
problem.
Control for invasive species will be required within all grading limits associated with stream restoration
and stream Enhancement Levels I and II. Three areas outside the grading limits are designated for
invasive species control and consist of spot treatment or full invasive control based upon density of aerial
coverage: low (less than 10 percent aerial coverage; medium (10 to 50 percent aerial coverage; and, high
(greater than 50 percent aerial coverage). Full invasive control will be required within all areas designated
as high density. (Where invasive coverage is greater than 50 percent, mechanical removal of top growth
and spraying of herbicide may be used.) Spot treatment will be required within all areas designated as
moderate density. (Where stems and coverage are greater than 10 percent, but less than 50 percent,
individuals shall be cut and stumps sprayed with appropriate herbicide.) Areas of low coverage will be
evaluated on a case by case basis and may be reclassified for spot treatment.
Invasive species will require different and multiple treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and
the location of the species being treated. All treatment will be conducted so as to minimize its
effectiveness and reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods will
include mechanical control (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw and chemical control (foliar
spray, cut stump, and hack and quirt techniques). Plants containing mature, viable seeds will be removed
from the site and properly disposed of All herbicide applicators will be supervised by a certified ground
pesticide applicator with a North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(NCDA &CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to herbicide labels and NC
and Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated, type of treatment
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 56 March 2014
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Common Name
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator
Percent
Composition*
River birch
Betula nigra
FACW
5%
Common hackberry
Celtis occidentalis
FACU
10%
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
FACW
10%
American sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
FACW
10%
Southern red oak
Quercus falcata
FACU
20%
Water oak
Quercus nigra
FAC
15%
Northern red oak
Quercus rubra
FACU
15%
Slippery Elm
Ulmus rubra
FAC
15%
*Planting density = approximately 680 stems per acre
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Common Name
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator
Percent Composition
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
FACW+
45%
Silky willow
Salix sericea
OBL
45%
Black willow
Salix nigra
OBL
10%
7.2.2.2 On -Site Invasive Species Management
Some invasive species have been noted on the site. They include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens). These invasive species are common but not limited to
any confined location. The movement of topsoil will also activate "weed seeds," but most will be
inhibited by raising the water table on the site. It will be important during monitoring site visits to check
for significant encroachment of invasive species and to develop a plan of action to control any such
problem.
Control for invasive species will be required within all grading limits associated with stream restoration
and stream Enhancement Levels I and II. Three areas outside the grading limits are designated for
invasive species control and consist of spot treatment or full invasive control based upon density of aerial
coverage: low (less than 10 percent aerial coverage; medium (10 to 50 percent aerial coverage; and, high
(greater than 50 percent aerial coverage). Full invasive control will be required within all areas designated
as high density. (Where invasive coverage is greater than 50 percent, mechanical removal of top growth
and spraying of herbicide may be used.) Spot treatment will be required within all areas designated as
moderate density. (Where stems and coverage are greater than 10 percent, but less than 50 percent,
individuals shall be cut and stumps sprayed with appropriate herbicide.) Areas of low coverage will be
evaluated on a case by case basis and may be reclassified for spot treatment.
Invasive species will require different and multiple treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and
the location of the species being treated. All treatment will be conducted so as to minimize its
effectiveness and reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods will
include mechanical control (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw and chemical control (foliar
spray, cut stump, and hack and quirt techniques). Plants containing mature, viable seeds will be removed
from the site and properly disposed of All herbicide applicators will be supervised by a certified ground
pesticide applicator with a North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(NCDA &CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to herbicide labels and NC
and Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated, type of treatment
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 56 March 2014

employed, type of herbicide used, application technique, and herbicide concentration and quantities used.
These records will be included in all reporting documents. In areas where full invasive control is
performed, seed from appropriate bottomland mast producing species will be planted in the fall following
the first full year after invasive control is performed. Records will be kept of date collected, species,
provenance, approximate density of each species (pounds /acre), and location planted. Mast seed planted
will be recorded. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Areas where full invasive species control is performed will be direct seeded with bottomland mast -
producing species. The seeding will take place the first fall after invasive species control is performed.
These areas will be monitored for additional invasive species control.
7.2.3 Best Management Practices
Due to the rural nature of this project, individual stormwater best management practices (BMPs) will not
be required. However, diffuse flow structures will be applied at locations where ditches or other forms of
concentrated flow enter the conservation easement. These structures will consist of a pool (forebay)
located just outside the conservation easement that will attenuate runoff combined with grading and
stabilization techniques that will diffuse flow upon entering the buffer. All diffuse flow structures will be
installed within the conservation easement so that landowners will not have access to the structures.
Failure or maintenance of the structures is not anticipated as these structures will be installed in low -
gradient areas, and the areas proposed to diffuse flow will be well vegetated and matted.
Stormwater management issues resulting from future development of adjacent properties will be governed
by the applicable state and local ordinances and regulations. It is recommended that any future stormwater
entering the site maintain pre - development peak flow. Any future stormwater diverted into the project
should be done in a manner as to prevent erosion, adverse conditions, or degradation of the project in any
way.
7.2.4 Site Preparation
After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified and any compaction will be deep tilled before
the topsoil is placed back over the site. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be stockpiled
and placed over the site during final soil preparation. This process should provide favorable soil
conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will provide natural stabilization for the
site.
7.3 Data Analysis
7.3.1 Stream Data Analysis
7.3.1.1 Stream Hydrologic Analysis
Hydrologic evaluations were performed for the design reaches using multiple methods to determine and
validate the design bankfull discharge and channel geometry required to provide regular floodplain
inundation. The use of various methods allows for comparison of results and eliminates reliance on a
single model. Peak flows (Table 22) and corresponding channel cross - sectional areas were determined for
comparison to design parameters using the following methods:
• Regional Flood Frequency Analysis,
• AutoCAD's Hydraflow Hydrographs,
• NC and VA Regional Curves for the Piedmont, and
• USGS regional regression equations for rural conditions in the Piedmont.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 57 March 2014

Regional Flood Analysis
A flood frequency analysis was completed for the study region using historic gauge data on all nearby
USGS gauges with drainage areas less than 6,400 acres (10 mil) which passed the Dalrymple
homogeneity test (Dalrymple, 1960). This is a subset of gauges used for USGS regression equations.
Regional flood frequency equations were developed for the 1.1 -, 1.5 -, and 2 -year peak discharges based
on the gauge data. Discharges were then computed for the design reach. These discharges were compared
to those predicted by the discharge regional curve bankfull flow, USGS regional regression for the 2 -year
peak flow, and modeling results for the 1 -year and 2 -year storm events.
AutoCAD's Hydraflow Hydrographs
Hydraflow Hydrographs was used to simulate the rainfall - runoff process and establish peak flows for the
watersheds. Hydraflow Hydrographs was chosen over the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers model HEC -1
because it allows the user to adjust the peak shape factor for existing watershed conditions. Rainfall data
reflecting a 284 peak shape factor and a standard Type II distribution were used, along with NRCS
hydrology (time of concentrations and runoff curve numbers), to simulate the rainfall - runoff process.
Regional Curve Regression Equations
The North Carolina Piedmont regional curves by Doll et al. (2002) and Harman et al. (1999) and the
Virginia (Lotspeich, 2009) Piedmont regional curves for discharge were used to predict the bankfull
discharge for the site. The NC regional curves predicted flows that are similar to those predicted by the
1.1 -year flood frequency, while the VA curves are comparable to flows predicted by the 1.5 -year flood
frequency. The equations for North Carolina and Virginia regional discharges are:
(1) Qbkt= 91.62 *(DA)0." (Doll et al., 2002)
(2) Qbkt= 89.04 *(DA)0'3 (Harman et al., 1999)
(3) Qbkj= 43.895 *(DA)o.9472 (Lotspeich, 2009)
Where Qbkf= bankfull discharge (ft3 /s) and DA= drainage area (mi2).
USGS Regional Regression Equations
USGS regression equations estimate the magnitude and frequency of flood -peak discharges (Gotvald, et
al., 2009). The regression equations were developed from gauge data in different physiographic regions of
the Southeastern United States. For this analysis, there was only concern for the 2 -year return interval.
The equation for the rural Piedmont/Foothills (Hydrologic Region 1) is:
(1)
Q2=15 8 * (DA)0.649
Where Q2=2 -year peak discharge (ft3 /s) and DA= drainage area (mi2).
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 58 March 2014

Table 22. Peak Flow Comparison
Reach
Drain
Drainage
Area ag
)
Hydraflow
Hydrographs
Qi
FFQ
Qi.i
FFQ
Qi.s
NC
Regional
Curve Q
VA /NID
Regional
Curve Q
Regional
Regression
Eqns. Qz
Design/
Calculated
Q
Reference
426
NA
48
73
66
30
121
50
UTl -1
136
15
19
29
29
10
58
22
UT1 -2
250
32
31
48
45
18
85
36
UT1 -3
384
46
44
67
61
27
113
52
UT1 -4
631
86
74
113
98
50
172
70
UT1 -A
88
NA
13
21
21
7
44
15
UTl -B
120
NA
17
27
26
9
53
17
UTl -C
250
NA
31
48
45
18
86
31
UT2 -1
631
47
66
100
88
43
157
51
UT2 -2
726
56
74
112
98
49
171
60
UT2 -3
792
61
79
120
104
54
181
65
UT24
861
71
85
129
111
58
192
74
Based upon the hydrologic analysis described above, design discharges were selected that fell within
ranges resulting from the 1 and 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis and the 1 -year Hydraflow Hydrographs
modeling for each reach. These discharges will provide frequent inundation of the adjacent floodplain.
Selection of design discharge for the restoration reaches (UT1 -2, UT1 -3, UT2 -2, UT2 -3, and UT24) was
selected based on the following rationale:
• The calculated bankfull discharge for the analog /reference reach closely matches the results of the
1.1 -year flood frequency analysis,
• The results of the 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis matched well with the NC regional curve,
• Approximate bankfull discharges for existing conditions for UTIfall between the 1.1 and 1.5 -year
flood frequency analysis results,
• Approximate bankfull discharges for existing conditions for UT2 fall near the 1 -year Hydraflow
Hydrographs analysis results,
• Selecting design discharges between the 1 and 1.5 -year storm events allows frequent inundation
of the floodplain, while also preventing adjacent active agriculture land from flooding at a high
frequency.
7.3.1.2 Sediment Transport Analysis
An erosion and sedimentation analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design creates a
stable gravel that neither aggrades nor degrades over time. Typically, sediment transport is assessed to
determine a stream's ability to move a specific grain size at specified flows. Various sediment transport
equations are applied when estimating entrainment for sand and gravel bed streams found in the
piedmont. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) report, Stability Thresholds for Stream
Restoration Materials (Fichenich, 2001), was used to obtain permissible shear stresses and velocities.
Data found in this document was obtained from multiple sources using different testing conditions. The
following methods and published documents were utilized during the sediment transport analysis:
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 59 March 2014

• HEC -RAS Stable Channel Design (Copeland Method)
• Permissible Shear Stress Approach
• Permissible Velocity Approach
Stable Channel Design
Design cross - section dimensions as determined from the analog approach were evaluated using the stable
channel design functions within HEC-RAS. These functions are based upon the methods presented in the
SAM Hydraulic Design Package for Channels developed by the USACE Waterways Experiment Station.
The Copeland Method was chosen to determine stable channel dimensions as a function of slope,
discharge, roughness, side slope, bed material gradation, and the inflowing sediment discharge. Results
are presented as a range of widths and slopes, and their unique solution for depth, making it easy to adjust
channel dimensions to achieve stable channel configurations. The stable design output parameters are
listed in Table 23. The results are acceptable and match closely with the design reach parameters.
Table 23. Stable Channel Design Output
Reach
Q
(ft /s3)
Bottom
Width (ft)
Depth (ft)
Energy
Slope (ft /ft)
Composite
n value
Velocity
(ft /s)
Shear Stress
Obs /ft)
UTl -2
36
8
1.6
0.0058
0.061
2.08
0.58
UTl -3
52
9
1.9
0.0045
0.057
2.2
0.54
UT2 -3
65
11
2.1
0.0032
0.056
2.07
0.42
UT2 -4
74
12
2.2
0.003
0.055
2.08
0.41
Permissible Shear Stress Approach
Shear stress is a commonly used tool for assessing channel stability. Allowable channel shear stresses are
a function of bed slope, channel shape, flows, bed material (shape, size, and gradation), cohesiveness of
bank materials, vegetative cover, and incoming sediment load. The shear stress approach compares
calculated shear stresses to those found in the literature. Shear stress is the force exerted on a boundary
during the resistance of motion as calculated using the following formula:
(1) i = yRS
i = shear stress (lb /ft)
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft')
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
S = average channel slope (ft/ft)
Table 24. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses
Proposed Shear Stress at Critical Shear Stress Allowable Shear
Reach Bankfull Stage Obs /ft) Obs /ft2) Stress' Obs /ft2)
UTl -1
0.3
0.27
0.5
UTl -2
0.42
0.07
0.33
UTl -3
0.42
0.13
0.33
UTl -4
NA
0.42
0.5
UT2 -2
NA
NA
NA
UT2 -3
0.27
0.13
0.33
UT2- 4
0.26
0.13
0.33
i(Fischenich, 2001)
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 60 March 2014

Review of Table 24 shows that the proposed shear stresses for the Poplin Ridge design reaches fall
between the critical shear stress (shear stress required to initiate motion) and the allowable limits for
reaches UT1 -1, UT2 -3 and UT24; and just above the allowable limits for reaches UT1 -2 and UT1-
3. The published allowable shear stresses do not take into account additional bed stability provided by the
cohesiveness of the existing bed materials. In addition, the bed material found in reaches UT1 -2 and
UT1 -3 has a relatively wide range in size, which provides an additional degree of stability to the bed that
is not accounted for in the published allowable shear stress. For these reasons, the allowable shear
stresses shown in Table 24 are considered conservative and can be described more as targeted design
values and not as maximum values to initiate motion. The existing channels currently exhibit little to no
vertical instabilities. The reduced bank heights and bed slopes will slightly reduce shear stresses in the
proposed conditions when compared to pre - project conditions. Because the existing channel is relavely
stable vertically, there is not a concern with the allowable shear stresses in reaches UT1 -2 and UT1 -3
shown in Table 24 being larger than the targeted values. An additional level of protection to prevent
channel downcutting and incision is the natural bedrock observed throughout reach UT and the proposed
grade control structures proposed throughout the project. These existing and proposed structures will
further provide bed stability. Because UT1 -A, UT1 -B, and UT1 -C are enhancement sections only, a
hydraulic evaluation of allowable shear stress was not performed on these reaches.
Permissible Velocity Approach
Published data are readily available that provide entrainment velocities for different bed and bank
materials. A comparison of calculated velocities to these permissible velocities is a simple method to aid
in the verification of channel stability. Table 25 compares the proposed velocities calculated using
Manning's equation with the permissible velocities presented in the USACE Stability Thresholds for
Stream Restoration Materials report.
Table 25. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities
Reach
Manning's "n"
value
Design Velocity
(ft /s)
Bed Material
Allowable
Velocity' (ft /sec)
Silty -sand to very coarse pebbles
4
UTl -Reach 2
0.055
2.4
Fine to course pebbles
3.75
UTl -Reach 3
0.055
2.3
Fine to course pebbles
3.75
UT1 -Reach 4
0.045
2.3
Course pebbles to very coarse pebbles
4.5
UTl -A
0.045
2.4
Silty -sand to medium sand
3
UTl -B
0.045
3.75
Medium to course pebbles
3.75
UTl -C
0.045
2.6
Medium to course pebbles
3.75
UT2 -Reach 2
0.055
2
Fine to course pebbles
3.75
UT2 -Reach 3
0.055
2
Fine to course pebbles
3.75
UT2 -Reach 4
0.055
2
Fine to course pebbles
3.75
1(USACEFischenichReport, 2001)
The calculated velocities from HEC-RAS are average values for a cross section. These average values
may underestimate velocities in sections of the channel that are constricted or located on meandering
bends. Review of Table 25 shows that all of the proposed channels are at or below the threshold limits for
stability.
Sediment Supply
In addition to the stability assessment, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply was performed by
characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of field reconnaissance and windshield surveys,
existing land use data, and historical aerial photography were analyzed to assess existing and past
watershed conditions and to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact sediment
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 61 March 2014

supply. As discussed in Section 2.2.3, the land use throughout the site, and primarily around restoration
reaches UT1 -R2, UT1 -R3, UT2 -3, and UT24 has changed little since 1961. Much of the project area has
been used primarily for agricultural purposes over the past 50 years; and current land use within the
project is composed of approximately 78% cultivated land and 22% forest cover. Since 1961, there have
been several significant land disturbing events near the project. During the 1970's, forested corridors
along UT1 -R3, UT1 -R4, and UT1 -C were cleared, poultry houses were added adjacent to both UT1 and
UT2, and the inline pond on UT2 was installed. During the 1980's and 1990's, eight more poultry houses
were added to the project area; two adjacent to UT1 and six adjacent to UT2. The only other noticeable
event occurred between 1993 and 1998 when portions of the forested buffer along UT2 just upstream of
the project area were cleared and converted to agricultural fields. Overall, the project watershed is
relatively stable and has largely been maintained as agricultural land since the 1960's. Much of the
forested areas are located either within the headwater portions of the watersheds or along existing stream
channels. Land use has remained relatively constant within this rural watershed, and significant land
disturbing activities are not anticipated for the future.
A large percentage of the cultivated areas are located in the middle and lower portions of the project
watershed for UT1 and within the upper and lower portions of the watershed for UT2. Additionally, the
land use within the watersheds of the restoration reaches is comprised of over 60% agriculture fields and
between 20% and 30% forest. Observations and assessments of these reaches show little signs of
aggradation (deposition) or degradation and that the streams appear physically stable, indicating that the
reaches are able to effectively transport the sediment supplied by their respective watersheds. There are
several localized areas of instability and erosion along the channels, which appear to be a result of cattle
activity and agricultural activities occurring up to and along channel banks and not from watershed
activities. It is anticipated that sediment supply from agricultural land adjacent to the project will decrease
as buffers are enhanced and widened, and flow from existing agricultural ditches will be diffused before
entering the proposed channel.
Since little deposition or degradation (scour) was observed along the restoration reaches, it appears that
the channels are able to effectively move the sediment supplied from the surrounding watershed. Because
observed areas of degradation can be attributed to farming practices adjacent to the channel and not
watershed activities, a threshold channel design approach was used. This approach assumes minimal
movement (vertical or lateral migration) of the channel boundary during design flow conditions, and that
the channel is not sensitive to sediment supply. Additionally, grade controls have been integrated
throughout the design to provide vertical stability in the event scour should occur.
7.3.1.1 Hydraulic Analyses
Hydraulic evaluations were performed for the restoration design reaches of UT1 and UT2. These analyses
were performed to confirm that the restoration designs will convey the design discharge, provide more
frequent overbank flooding, and that significant structures will perform as designed.
HEC -RAS Anal
A hydraulic analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design results in a channel that will
convey the design discharge and provide for frequent flooding of the adjacent riparian floodplain and
wetlands. Channel characteristics, including cross - sectional dimension, slope, and roughness, were used
to analyze and adjust design parameters calculated by the analog /reference reach approach.
HEC -RAS was used to perform the hydraulic analysis. This model is a hydraulic model developed by the
US Army Corps of Engineers' Hydrologic Engineering Center to perform one - dimensional (1 -D) steady
and unsteady flow calculations. The model uses representative geometric data (cross- sections) and
hydraulic computation routines.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 62 March 2014

Design cross - sectional dimensions determined through the analog /reference reach approach were
evaluated using the 1 -D steady flow analysis component and the channel design functions within the
HEC -RAS Model (Version 4.0.0). The cross - sectional dimensions for reaches UT1 and UT2 were
iteratively adjusted based on the model results to produce a channel design that will regularly flood the
adjacent riparian areas. Model results are presented in Appendix C. The results are organized by reach,
discharge, and STA number and include water surface elevation, velocity, flow area, stream power, and
shear stress.
7.3.1 Mitigation Summary
Natural channel design techniques have been used to develop the restoration designs described in this
document. The combination of the analog and analytical design methods was determined to be
appropriate for this project because the watershed is rural, the causes of disturbance are known and have
been abated, and there are minimal infrastructure constraints. The original design parameters were
developed from the measured analog /reference reach data and applied to the subject stream. The
parameters were then analyzed and adjusted through an iterative process using analytical tools and
numerical simulations of fluvial processes. The designs presented in this report provide for the restoration
of natural Piedmont gravel channel features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat. The
proposed design will allow flows that exceed the design bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain.
A large portion of the existing stream will be filled using material excavated from the restoration channel.
However, many segments will be left only partially filled to provide habitat diversity and flood storage.
Native woody material will be planted throughout the restored reach to reduce bank stress, provide grade
control, and increase habitat diversity.
Forested riparian buffers of at least fifty feet on both sides of the channel will be established along the
project reach. An appropriate riparian plant community (Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest - Piedmont
Subtype) will be established to include a diverse mix of species. Replanting of native species will occur
where the existing buffer is impacted during construction. Reductions in nutrients and other pollutants
will be achieved with the buffer restoration work, providing substantial benefits to the watershed.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 63 March 2014

8. MAINTENANCE PLAN
NCEEP shall monitor the site on a regular basis and shall conduct a physical inspection of the 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 26. Maintenance Plan
Compone nt/Feature
Maintenance through project close -out
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in-
stream structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and
supplemental installations 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
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 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 Boundary
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, 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.The entire boundary will be checked annually as part of
monitoring.
Utility Right -of -Way
Utility rights -of -way within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Ford Crossing
Ford crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Road Crossing
Road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Other Activities
Beaver activity will be evaluated annually during the monitoring period and
will be managed as necessary.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 64 March 2014

9. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The success criteria for the Poplin Ridge Site stream restoration will follow accepted and approved
success criteria presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NCEEP and
agency guidance. Specifically, success criteria will be established in accordance with the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream and Wetland
Mitigation (Section IV C) dated November 7, 2011. The performance standards shall be consistent with
the requirements described in Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the
Federal Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.5
paragraphs (a) and (b). Specific success criteria components are presented below.
9.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
9.1.1 Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven -year monitoring period. The two
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until two
bankfull events have been documented in separate years.
9.1.2 Cross Sections
There should be little change in as -built cross - sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down - cutting or
erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross - sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross - sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
9.1.3 Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
9.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will
follow NCEEP Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover
a minimum of two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the fall of
each year. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320
three -year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five -year old trees at the end of Year 5, and the final
vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees per acre at the end of Year 7.
9.3 Scheduling/Reporting
A monitoring baseline document and as -built drawings documenting stream restoration activities will be
developed within 60 days of the planting completion on the mitigation site. The report will include all
information required by NCEEP monitoring baseline document guidelines (Baseline Monitoring Report
Template and Guidance version 2.0 (10/14/10)), including elevations, photographs and sampling plot
locations, gauge locations, and a description of initial species composition by community type. The report
will also include a list of the species planted and the associated densities. Baseline vegetation monitoring
will follow CVS -NCEEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.0. Level 1 and Level 2 monitoring
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 65 March 2014

will be conducted. The baseline report will follow Baseline Monitoring Report Template and Guidance
version 2.0 (10/14/10).
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology will be assessed to determine the success
of the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for five years or until the final success
criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to NCEEP. The
monitoring reports will include all information, and be in the format required by NCEEP in Version 2.0 of
the NCEEP Monitoring Report Template.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 66 March 2014

10. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP monitoring template. The monitoring report shall
provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
population of EEP databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding
project close -out. The success criteria for the Poplin Ridge Site stream and wetland mitigation will follow
current accepted and approved success criteria presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines,
NCEEP requirements, and subsequent agency guidance. Specific success criteria components are
presented in Table 27. Monitoring reports will be prepared annually and submitted to EEP.
Table 27. Monitoring Requirements
Required
Parameter
uanti
F%e enc
Notes
As per April 2003 USACE
Additional surveys will be performed if monitoring
Pattern
Wilmington District Stream
Baseline
Mitigation Guidelines
indicates instability or significant channel migration.
As per April 2003 USACE
Baseline, Years
Dimension
Wilmington District Stream
1,2,3,5, and 7
Surveyed cross sections and bank pins.
Mitigation Guidelines
As per April 2003 USACE
Profile
Wilmington District Stream
Baseline
Additional surveys will be performed if monitoring
indicates instability.
Mitigation Guidelines
As per April 2003 USACE
Baseline, Years
Substrate data will be collected at cross - section
Substrate
Wilmington District Stream
Mitigation Guidelines
1,2,3,5, and 7
locations.
Crest Gauges and /or Pressure Transducers will be
As per April 2003 USACE
Surface Water
Wilmington District Stream
Annual
installed on site; the devices will be inspected on a
Hydrology
quarterly /semi - annual basis to document the occurrence
Mitigation Guidelines
of bankfull events on the project.
Vegetation will be monitored using the Carolina
Vegetation
Annual
Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocols.
Exotic and
Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be
Nuisance
Annual
mapped.
Vegetation
Locations of fence damage, vegetation damage, boundary
Project Boundary
Semi - annual
encroachments, etc. will be mapped.
Stream Visual
I
Annual
Semi - annual visual assessments.
10.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey will include a complete profile of thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank
to compare with future geomorphic data. As -built drawings will be produced and will conform to the EEP
digital drawings guidance (EEP Baseline Monitoring Template Version 2.0 10/14/10). Longitudinal
profiles will not be required in annual monitoring reports unless requested by NCEEP or USACE. Stream
channel stationing will be marked with stakes placed near the top of bank every 100 feet.
10.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 67 March 2014

easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete streamwalk and
structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record each
monitoring event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring
will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images.
Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should
indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of photos over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
10.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross - sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in pools
and half in shallows. All cross - section measurements will include bank height ratio and entrenchment
ratio. Cross - sections will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as -built cross - sections.
If changes do take place, they should be evaluated to determine if they represent movement toward a less
stable condition (for example down - cutting or erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in
stability (for example settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width /depth
ratio). Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within
restored reaches. Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of two bankfull events
documented in the seven -year monitoring period.
10.4 Bank Pin Arrays
Bank pin arrays will be used as a supplemental method to monitor erosion on selected meander bends
where there is not a cross section. Bank pin arrays will be installed along the outer bend and upstream
third and downstream third of the meander. Bank pins will be installed just above the water surface and
every two feet above the lowest pin. Bank pin exposure will be recorded at each monitoring event, and the
exposed pin will be driven flush with the bank.
10.5 Surface Flow
Headwater valley restoration areas will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow.
This will be accomplished through direct observation, photo documentation of dye tests, and surface flow
gauges.
10.1 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetative monitoring success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will follow
NCEEP Guidance dated 7 November 2011. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres
in size, and cover a minimum of two percent of the planted area. The following data will be recorded for
all trees in the plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur
each year during the monitoring period. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the
survival of at least 320 three -year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 and 260 five -year old trees per
acre at the end of Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 trees per acre at
the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period.
Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the
desired community structure of the site. If necessary, EBX will develop a species - specific control plan.
10.2 Remedial Actions
The Mitigation Plan will include a detailed adaptive management plan that will address how potential
problems are resolved. In the event that the site, or a specific component of the site, fails to achieve the
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 68 March 2014

defined success criteria, EBX will develop necessary adaptive management plans and /or implement
appropriate remedial actions for the site in coordination with NCEEP and the review agencies. Remedial
action required will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and will include
identification of the causes of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring criteria
that will take into account physical and climatic conditions.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 69 March 2014

It. LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
State of North Carolina (State). The State 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 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 70 March 2014

12. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
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 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 71 March 2014

13. 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.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 72 March 2014

14. OTHER INFORMATION
14.1 References
Amoroso, J.L., ed. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species ofNorth Carolina.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Chow, Ven Te. 1959. Open- Channel Hydraulics, McGraw -Hill, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, FWS /OBS-
79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Faber - Langendoen, D., Rocchio, J., Schafale, M., Nordman, C., Pyne, M., Teague, J., Foti, T., Comer, P.
(2006), Ecological Integrity Assessment and Performance Measures for Wetland Mitigation.
NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia.
Fischenich, C. 2001. "Stability thresholds for stream restoration materials." ERDC Technical Note No.
EMRRP- SR -29, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Miss.
Johnson PA. 2006. Assessing stream channel stability at bridges in physiographic regions. U.S.
Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Report Number FHWA- HRT -05 -072.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. and S.P. Hall, eds. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Lindenmayer, D.B., and J.F. Franklin. (2002), Conserving forest biodiversity: A comprehensive
multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH
654), USDA
NCDENR 2008. "Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan." Division of Water Quality.
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /wq//sibpuibasin /. apeedee /2008. (May 2013).
NCDENR 2012a. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water Quality
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /wq/home. (February 2012).
NCDENR 2012b. "2012 North Carolina 303(d) Lists - Category 5." Water Quality Section.
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /wq/home. (August 2012).
NCEEP. 2009. Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities.
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262 -274
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 73 March 2014

Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and F.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities ofNorth Carolina,
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Simon, A., M. Rinaldi. 2006. Disturbance, stream incision, and channel evolution: The roles of excess
transport capacity and boundary materials in controlling channel response. Geomorphology 79: 361-
383.
Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y -87 -1, January 1987.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2002. Regulatory Guidance Letter. RGL No. 02 -2. December
24, 2002.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. April 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 1959. Soil Survey
of Duphn County, North Carolina.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Version 2. 0, ed. J. F. Berkowitz, J. S.
Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, C. V. Noble. ERDC /EL TR -12 -9. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS), Web
Soil Survey; http: / /websoilsurvey.nres.usda._gov. [Accessed 25 October 2011].
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1996. Soil Survey of
Union County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators
of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble (eds.).
USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, (USEPA, 1999) 1999. EPA Manual. Quantifying
Physical Habitat in Wadeable Streams.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "Threatened and Endangered Species in North Carolina." North
Carolina Ecological Services. http: / /www.fxvs.gov /raleigh/. (November 2012).
Young, T.F. and Sanzone, S. (editors). (2002), A framework for assessing and reporting on ecological
condition. Ecological Reporting Panel, Ecological Processes and Effects Committee. EPA Science
Advisory Board. Washington, DC.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 74 March 2014

14.2 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, 2"d 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
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 75 March 2014

14.3 Appendix A — Site Protection Instrument(s)
Conservation Easement Deeds
Draft Plats
Note: This appendix will be updated as the easement deeds and plats become available.
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 76 March 2014

14.4 Appendix B — Baseline Information Data
Poplin Ridge USACE Routine Wetland Data Forms
Poplin Ridge NCDWQ Stream Determination Data Forms
Reference Reach NCDWQ Stream Determination Data Form
Poplin Ridge Stream Forms Summary Table
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet Form
DWQ Stream Habitat Evaluation Form
Aquatic Habitat Assessment Fish Cover Table
Channel Stability Assessment Form
EDR Report
Environmental Screening and Resource Agency Correspondence
Poplin Ridge CE
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating (Form AD 1006)
FEMA Floodplain Checklist
Poplin Ridge Correspondence
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 77 March 2014

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project /Site: Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration City /County: Union Sampling Date: 2/27/13
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: A/B Wet
Investigator(s): B. Hockett Section, Township, Range: Monroe
d lain o 0
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floo p Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (k): 0 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.058077 Long: -80.561590 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chawacla - ChA NWI classification: PUBHh
Are climatic / hydrollo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No LJ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation v , Soil ❑✓ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil g, 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 ❑✓ No ❑
� � Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes Z No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑✓ No ❑
Remarks:
Site is adjacent to cultivated fields and upstream from an in -line pond.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_✓ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
ODrainage Patterns (1310)
Q 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)
F,-/—]Sediment Deposits (132)
= Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
OCrayfish Burrows (C8)
= Drift Deposits (133)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
= Other (Explain in Remarks)
OStunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
= Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
= Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
V Water- Stained Leaves (139)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0
No ❑ Depth (inches): +1
Water Table Present? Yes 0
No ❑ Depth (inches): - 1
Z ❑
Saturation Present? Yes 0
No = Depth (inches): - 1
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes 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: A/B Wet
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 m )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer rubrum
30%
YES FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2 Salix nigra
5%
NO OBL
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67% (A /B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- -
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is < -3.0'
10.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30 m
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Scirpus cyperinus
15%
YES OBL
'Indicators of soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2 Panicum sp. 2% NO FACU
3 Microstegium vimineum 2 % NO FAC
4 Juncus effusus
5%
NO FACW
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 Rubus argutus
5%
YES FACU
Hydrophytic
2.
3.
4.
5.
Vegetation
2
6.
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: A/B 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 -8
10 YR 5/2
95
2.5 YR 6/8 5 C
M
CL
8 -15
10 YR 7/1
85
7.5 YR 6/8 10 C
M
CL
- --
- --
- --
N 2.5 5 C
M
- --
15-25
7.5 YR 6/8
60
10 YR 7/1 35 C
M
CL
- --
- --
- --
N 2.5 5 C
M
- --
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Q Black Histic (A3)
e✓ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Q Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
TVDe:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Q Dark Surface (S7)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes W1 No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project /Site: Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration City /County: Union Sampling Date: 2/27/13
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: A/B Upland
Investigator(s): B. Hockett Section, Township, Range: Monroe
lo a o 0
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hills p Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (k): 1 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.057952 Long: -80.561532 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla - ChA NWI classification: NA
Are climatic / hydrollo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No LJ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation v , Soil ❑✓ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil g, 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 ❑ No ✓
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No ✓❑
Remarks:
Sample area is located within a cultivated ag 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 (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 Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
= Drift Deposits (133)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
= Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
= Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
= Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water- Stained Leaves (139)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
❑
0
Surface Water Present? Yes
❑
No Depth (inches):
0
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
❑ ❑
Saturation Present? Yes ❑
No 0 Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes 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: A/B Upland
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Data Point was located in a harvested 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.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- -
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is < -3.0'
10.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30 m
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Glycine max
75 YES NI
Indicators of hydric 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
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 /
6.
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Data Point was located in a harvested soybean field.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
e
or
Sampling Point: A/B Upland
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0 -18 7.5 YR 4/4 90 10 R 4/8 10 MS M Silt Loam Cobble — 1/2" diameter Dresent
18-
- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- Bedrock
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
0
Histosol (Al)
Q Dark Surface (S7)
0 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
0
Histic Epipedon (A2)
0 Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
0 Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
0
Black Histic (A3)
0 Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
eHydrogen
Sulfide (A4)
0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
0
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
0 Redox Dark Surface (F6)
0 Red Parent Material (TF2)
eDepleted
Below Dark Surface (A11)
0 Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Q Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
0
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
0 Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
0 Sandy Redox (S5)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Bedrock
Depth (inches): 18 inches
Hydric
Soil 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: Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration City /County: Union Sampling Date: 2/27/13
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: A/B Upland 2
Investigator(s): B. Hockett Section, Township, Range: Monroe
lo a o 0
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hills p Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (k): 1 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.057059 Long: -80.562385 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla - ChA NWI classification: NA
Are climatic / hydrollo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No LJ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation v , Soil ❑✓ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil g, 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 ❑ No ✓
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No ✓❑
Remarks:
Data Point was located in a harvested soybean field adjacent to in -line pond.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil 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 Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
= Drift Deposits (133)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
= Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
= Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
= Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water- Stained Leaves (139)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
❑
0
Surface Water Present? Yes
❑
No Depth (inches):
0
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
❑ ❑
Saturation Present? Yes ❑
No 0 Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes 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: A/B Upland 2
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Data Point was located in a harvested 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.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
- -
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is < -3.0'
10.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30 m
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Glycine max
50 YES NI
Indicators of hydric 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
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 /
6.
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Data Point was located in a harvested soybean field.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point: A/B Upland 2
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 -15 5 YR 6/8 90 5 YR 4/6 10 MS M Silt Loam Cobble - 1/4" diameter present
15 -20 7.5 YR 5/6 85 5 YR 4/6 15 C M Silt Loam
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Q Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Q Black Histic (A3)
eHydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Q Sandy Redox (S5)
Q Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
TVDe:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Q Dark Surface (S7)
Q Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Q Depleted Matrix (F3)
Q Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Q Redox Depressions (F8)
Q Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Q Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Q 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Q Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Q Red Parent Material (TF2)
Q Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 1:1 No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

NC DWQ Stream tdeallification Form Version 4.11 LJ I I
lie: t ii 1 7-. I { ProJeWSita: �3
E ff {t J� l alth.de:
v Iua,m: [> kf,it s" rJ '1 rlX l,pngitude:
Total PolrtiS: ;glream 0eterrnlnaflen [clr Otlrar
Sfmam s�xasVieMrarpLrt Ephemeral IMerrnittgN aP CaW htawe=
t;• raff ic30' ,J
A
Weak
hloderete
15lron9
Y ConWW1V o1 chmrml bed and bank
0
1
2
1
2 ordtarlrlel eWwe9
0
1
2
1
3In-tlterrrd=am rdltrpoO,rdepVOO.
0
,
2
3
4. radii ie"of *$am u 4strete
0
1
IS Fmrommcfsnaderr1
3
5. A[*ahcitt 7loedp9ai
0
1
1$Eioded rtplarsO pt�r'Mmsoeambetl
3
8. bersorierrches
0
1
2
9
7. PAM t Owia! dttprsta
9
3
2
3
8 Haedm(%
4
1
1
3
B_ Qa&t 03nttd
0
45
1
05
10_ Moms
d
05
1
15
11 Swwd ar
No- =D
Y =l
- ww"oMMs ra nwa. '93F .ar."
rl L&..I —L-- 16adNn1 = _ rl 5
12 Presmroe or Beedow
0 1
2
3
13L Iran - ids
1
2
3
14 Led No
1
as
0
15. Se&WA 00 pkwu or debris
05
1
1.6
,& Owkia dam Ikros or pies
17 swbaw evuenob of Mir wades la6e,)
D Os
1
1.6
Np =O
Y =]
C. ft Sr Motel
IS Fmrommcfsnaderr1
3
2
1
0
1$Eioded rtplarsO pt�r'Mmsoeambetl
3
2
1
0
211. IAana0ergM5pw�4.a•:rY �a,xvbarcej
3
1
2
3
21- Aaeeec f_A_pll_u9ks_ _
22 Fnh
3
,
2
3
2
05
t
15
23
1
05
1
1-5
24 Amohibl tra
0
D 5
1
1
25 Algae
0
Os
,
1S
26 5 kO" prt O m skeOmbad
FACW = 0 7te
O% =1 -5 Other =
0
'p..-.a a&.— m.v Nu d A. —M or— rWnda 5M P. 35 Is
Notes:
Skelew
idr, Thwn Qr-- I.I...r:1:.:.r inn F.— V-1— A r t
ti-v 1 A
Oale: It /IV I+
PrafectSA1 -. YO }1;t tik
Lamudc
Ewlualor. L
COWty'
U%VLHML
t,k f bf L1
V Sa
2
TotalPoirft
91 rr- IssYartiaYrartl" r.
x"
$beam Oetcrrmlrratlon{ Ircfaanal
Epihmrama Inlerrn:tde�, p
Oprrr
-�
!z Tr Orpowwwsk 30'
erenniai
ay $rsA NanraC
A
Absent
Weak
Moderate
rig
1` d dLenrd bed ors, beat
0
1
2
3
2 %w3wy d dramd
D
3
3
H. Leer MW
3 k>•dtanrreF Seurhre rx ria"Odl, SL5-POM
s
D
1
2
3
4 Pamde sae 01 sl egm subsvm
D
1
3
SL AcOmhew fk adpaxr
D
1.5
2
3
ti tars or bwol s
D
1
2
3
7, pecan eMwist eepnft
0
No t_Dj
2
3
8. Hea kxft
a
1
2
9. Grade co ft
d
OS
1
1
10 Heasat vaky
0
95
1
1.5
11. 5eoDWar *nWctatrtd
0
Yes =3
w..o. umea we noe rerw. res mwusaum n �rw
A 1- hx4riesnv vc,.hrMe l - A. ' h
42 Preswge d BaEefklvr
0
1
2
3
Ta kon Wkwq umawo
0
1
3
H. Leer MW
1.5
1
A
0
,5. Sedrrrerrl on eEU or debris
0
05
1
1.5
W CqWK debrs irtes Of
0
06
1
is
17. Sal -Lewd OmMnoa of hi95 water to W
No t_Dj
Yes = 3
NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms

NC: DWO Stream Identi heat inn Fn rm Versi nn 4.11 [.f I 1 r 7 N!' i1Wf1 Rfr aan [i6a fi fiiraf inn Ian ran Vereinn A.14 iJ T I c-
Data: j 11-2-1 ( +
Prdjec4site: �de ', A a
Latitude.
Evaluator: �, ��nl( d[-r:
County: Veidy,
Longitude:
Total Points:
stream Datennima6on [c a -oq
Dther
stream rsaf 7aesrin[arax7reaf 30
ifz }9w rennial iyz 30'
Ephemeral Intermltten Paranoia
e.g.er Nam@:
A. Geo morphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1e Continuity ofdrannel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosi Of channel along Owmij
0
1
2
3
& In-dlerrrret sVldcture: ea. Mlle -pool. slap-pool,
uenpa
0
1
2
3
4. Particle siza of stream substrate
0
1
2
1.5
5. ACBvslrelicl Rood plain
D
7
C2-')
3
8. Depositional bars or benches
0
V11
1
3
7. Recenlaltuwal deposits
o
0
2
3
0. Foacws
0
FACW - 075; OBL n 1.6 Other = 0
2
3
9. Cxede control
0
0.5
1
1S
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. SecdMl or greater order channel
Nb fO
Yes = 3
Wfli;lel dtdkes are mt raled; see dlswsslom in manual
B. Hvdroloav [Subtotal = S. S 1
12 Presence of Basellow
D
1
2
3
13- Iron wadizing bacteria
0
2
2
3
14. Lea} liner
1.5
1
0.6
0
15. Sediment on ants or debris
0
V
1
1.5
18. vita debris lines or pities
0
0.5
7
1.5
17. Soil based evidence of high water table?
NO fl
yes-3
rsuhtotal= 4.[11
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted u land plants in sheambed
Total Points!
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note dhwsity end ebundanu)
a.g. QuedName:
1
2
3
21. Aqualic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
Yes = 3
1
1.5
24. Anlpflihiana
0
V11
1
1.5
25, Algae
D
0
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
FACW - 075; OBL n 1.6 Other = 0
'perennial abaemre may oleo be Idenagad volnu alter methods. See P.35 of manual.
3
Noses:
0
3
21. o Mollusks
4.5
10. Natural valley
Sketch:
0.5
1
Data: j y +� [)
PryecVSite: d iy 1
Latitude:
Evaluator: L La.Airdt•I
County: Unya
Long,tude:
Total Points!
Stream Oetenninat €on [ci
Other
Steam ;sal reasr vuarmarenr
Ephemeral ]nh rm€ Pere., i
a.g. QuedName:
rfz l9w arannlar ifzX
2
0
A.Geornor hot Subtotal= D
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and hank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of dannel along that wing
0
1
2
0
3. IrF donne! structure ex. rilne -pool. 'Map-pod.
is equence
0
t
C,
3
4. Particle size of sOeam substrate
0
1
2
3
S. A*velrellct floodplain
0
Yes = 3
2•
3
6. Depostional bars or benches
0
1& Fibrous roots in Weambed
3
7. Recant alluvial deposits
01
0
2
3
8. hleadruls
0
1
20. Maorobenthos (rmle d.versty and abundance)
3
t Grade contra,
0
3
21. o Mollusks
4.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1S
11. Second of realerorderchannd
No
6G I
Yes =3
-6dFWal ditches are gat rated; eaa d1a0u5a1ens In manual
B. Hvdroinnv fsuhtatal = :5. S 1
12 presence of Basegow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron coddizing bacteria
1
2
3
U. Leaf lifter
1.5
1
0-5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16.Of a tic debris lines or piles
D
0.5
1
115
17 sod-based evidence of high vrater (able?
No 0
Yes = 3
C. Bbic Subtotal =
1& Fibrous roots in Weambed
Oj
2
1
0
19- Rooed upland plants in sheambed
2
1
0
20. Maorobenthos (rmle d.versty and abundance)
1
2
3
21. o Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1 -5
23. Cra sh
❑
0.5
1
1.5
24. Am bran
D
0
1
1.5
25.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2e. We0and plants In streamhed
FACW = 0.75; OSL = 1.5 OOler = O
'paremlal almama may also be IdenKed using dihw methods. See p.36 of manual.
Notes
Skelch:

LIT 2
NC 1rIWn Stream lidenri li -firm Fnrm Vereinn At -11
Data: 912,`' 11
Project}Sbe: I1%
Latitude:
Evaluator: A,
County: t.+7n ; Cr%
Longitude:
Total Po[nts:
mnernneranr 7 3
e19
Steam Delarminatlon [tint
Other
if p..rr v r
its }!Iw erauef a'x 30' J
Ephemeral Intarmgtant nn
a.a Owd+rema:
A. Gea nor bolo SubtolaI =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stron
1`Continuily of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Slrwasity of channel along Ihalwag
0
1
2
3
3. In channel struclurn. ox, nfile -pod, stop -pool,
d Ia- of s ,ante
p
(y
2
3
4. Particle size of siream substiale
0
1
1
3
5. AdlvelroW Itocdplaln
0
1
Cn
3
6. Depositional bars w benches
0
2
3
7. ReWO aawial da 'Is
0
1
2
Cy
8. HoaticulS
0
1
2
3
9. Grade wnlrol
0
I
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural wall
0
0.6
1
1,
11. Second or greatar order channel
Nome
eyes =
- adlrtial ditrin are rat mm:le00 � rnanuar
(C
pt N�xirnlnn� WOM.l _ l
12. Presence of 6asallow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron wadizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf fitter
15
1
0.5
0
15. Sed+nerd on plarlis or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
W OW-it debris Hnes ar altos
0
.5
1
1.5
17. Soi4basad evidence of hlgh waler table?
No = 0
as = 3
Sketch:
UT2 A
NC DWO Stream identiGcatinn Rnrm Verolnn 4.11
Dela: q 1Z''�1
ProJrcf7Slh:
Laktuda:
Evaluator: R , S ee�e
County: LAy)"0y)
Longitude:
Total Points:
srreemrr arreas xne 11
Strom Dotmminakon (circla one)
Other
a�x raw #t90• '? !
Ephemera} ti Perennidl
a.p. Ouad Nertx:
A. Geomorphology Subtoktl = I Lt
Absent
I WQak
Moderate
Strong
I.. Conlinully of channel bad and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along Ihalweg
0
1
2
3
3- In-091nnel SINCIUre: W. note -Pool, slep•pod,
110-0101pool se ,once
0
4
2
3
4. Panicle sire of stream s,oelrale
0
1
1
3
5. Aclhrehellct Soodplaln
0
7
Cn
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
Q
2
3
7. Recanl alluvial deposits
0
1
3
a. Headculs
5
2
3
9. Grade wnlrol
0
1 C24D
1
1.5
10. Nalural vajley
0
0.5
1
1,
11. Second or realer order Channel
ND = p
Y08-3
rauio; aea wacuranrie n maarei
R. Wvdmloov Isubtolal = 1.5 1
12, Presence W BasellDw
G
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5
1
OB
0
15. Sadimont on plarils on dabnls
0..
0.5
1
115
1 S. Organic debris itnes or plies
0.5
1
1.5
17, Soil-b-ed evidence of high water lahle7
= 0
Yes = a
Sketch:
saeeme m49ebe be

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/Site: Ph t '
Latitude:
Evaluator: �a�
County: r1 s Or1
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circ one
Other
if? 19. or erennialif? 30*
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = :Wd )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
0.5
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool sequence
0
1
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
0.5
3
8, Headcuts
0
1
0
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 11. S )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1 0
1 0.5
1
.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
I No = 0
Yes =
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) '^
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed -
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Poplin Ridge Stream Form Summary Table
Stream Reach
USACE Form
NC DWQ
Stability Assessment
Form
Stream Quality
Assessment Worksheet
DWQ Stream Habitat
Evaluation Form
Score Rating
UT1 -RI (Pres)
41
58
76 Fair
UT1 -RI (Enh)
45
38
66 Good
UT1 -R2
42
52
78 Fair
UT1 -R3
32
40
87 Fair
UT1 -R4
32
27
117 Poor
UT1 -A
41
36
72 Fair
UT1 -B (Pres)
53
67
58 Good
1 -B (Enh)
41
53
82 Fair
—UT
UT1 -C
48
61
62 Good
UT2 -R1
62
56
65 Good
UT2 -R2
25
1
132 Poor
UT2 -R3
31
37
101 Poor
UT2 -R4
31
27
113 Poor
UT2 -A
1 26
1 25
1 86 Fair
Reference Site
1 71
1 83
1 37 Good

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
Applicant's name:
3. Date of
5. Name of stream:
7. Approximate drainage
9. Length of reach evaluated:
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
2. Evaluator's name:
4. Time of evaluation:
6. River basin:
8. Stream order:
10. County:
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Longitude (ex. — 77.556611):
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visi
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use
22. Bankfull width:
% Residential % Commercial
% Forested
% Industrial % Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged % Other ( )
23. Bank height (from bed to top of
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2 %) Gentle (2 to 4 %) Moderate (4 to 10 %) Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
#
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0 - 4
0-5
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 - 4
0-4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0-2
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
F'.
13
Presence of major bank failures
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
H
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0 -5
0 -4
0 -5
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 - 5
0-6
(no riffles /ripples or pools = 0; well - developed = max points)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA
0-4
0 — 4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 - 5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
C
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

3/06 Revision 6
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ OTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent
average stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form,
select the description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two
descriptions, select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream
Date
Location/road: (Road Name )County
CC# Basin
Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Latitude Longitude Ecoregion: ❑ MT ❑ P ❑ Slate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: %Forest %Residential %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial , %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use: ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 901, horizontal is 01. Angles > 901 indicate slope is towards mid - channel, < 90°
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised- steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend El Channel filled in with sediment
• Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
• Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ON ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Flow conditions: ❑High ❑Noimal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear ❑ Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES ONO Details
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water .................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Weather Conditions: Photos: ON ❑Y ❑ Digital 035mm
Remarks
42

I. Channel Modification Score
A. channel natural, frequent bends ......................................................................... .....I......:.................. 5
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old), ..................................................... 4
C. some channelization present ............................................................................... ............................... 3
D, more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted ................................ ............................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ...................... ............................... 0.
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shape /height
Remarks Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common, or Abundant.
Rocks Macrophytes Sticks and leafpacks
Snags and logs
Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION
OR COVER
>70%
40 -70%
20 -40%
<20%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present ................. 20
16
12
8
3 types present ......................... 19
15
11
7
2 types present ......................... 18
14
10
6
1 type present ........................... 17
13
9
5
No types present ....................... 0
2. substrate nearly all sand ......................................................................... ...............................
3
3. substrate nearly all detritus ..................................................................... ...............................
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay .................................................................... ...............................
1
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at
riffle for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders
Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders ) .........................
15
2. embeddedness 20- 40% ............................................................................ ...............................
12
3. embeddedness 40- 80% ........................................................................... ...............................
8
4. embeddedness > 80% .............................................................................. ...............................
3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness < 20% ............................................................................. ...............................
14
2. embeddedness 20- 40% .......................................................................... ...............................
11
3. embeddedness 40 -80% ............................................ ............................... ......
.......................
6
4. embeddedness > 80% ............................................................................. ...............................
2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness < 50% ............................................................................. ...............................
8
2. embeddedness > 50% ............................................................................. ...............................
4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock .................................................................... ...............................
3
2. substrate nearly all sand ......................................................................... ...............................
3
3. substrate nearly all detritus ..................................................................... ...............................
2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay .................................................................... ...............................
1
Remarks
Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water ", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................. ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ....................................................................... ............................... 4
B. Pools absent ............................................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
❑ Pool bottom boulder - cobble =hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk ❑ Silt bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth
Remarks
Page Total
43

V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration -can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent
Score Score
A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... 16 12
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width ..... ............................... 14 7
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 3
D. riffles absent...... ...... ...................................................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep =fast flow ❑Low =like a coastal stream Subtotal
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable
1. little evidence of erosion or bank faiture(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion.. 7 7
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ...... ............................... 6 6
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer.soil binding ................. 3 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ............ ............................... 0 0
Total
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ................................ 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ..... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading .............................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A
break in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as
paths down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: ❑ Trees ❑ Shrubs ❑ Grasses ❑ Weeds /old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
5
2. width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
4
3. width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. width 12 -I8 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
3
c. width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
2
2
d. width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
1
1
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters .................:........................ ...............................
3
3
b. width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
0
0
Remarks
Total
Page Total
❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion - atypical stream.
TOTAL SCORE
44

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
Typical Stream Cross - section
Extreme High Water
Normal High Water
Normal Flow
Stream Width
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
45
Lower
Bank
Upper Bank
This side is 45° bank angle.

Reference Reach
UT1 -R2
UT1 -R4
UT1 -13 Enh.
UT2 -R4
Transect
Total Fish
Cover (ft')
Percent
Coverage
Total Fish
Cover (ft')
Percent
Coverage
Total Fish
Cover (ft')
Percent
Coverage
Total Fish
Cover (ft')
Percent
Coverage
Total Fish
Cover (ft')
Percent
Coverage
1
4.0
7
11.9
22
16.9
21
2.3
12
6.0
10
2
28.0
47
2.6
9
24.5
35
12.5
25
32.0
80
3
6.9
9
8.6
31
9.0
30
1.5
30
22.0
55
4
0.0
0
21.5
86
5.2
13
6.8
15
30.0
60
5
0.0
0
14.7
37
3.6
11
14.0
35
54.0
90
6
2.0
7
28.8
82
5.0
11
12.3
35
27.0
90
7
1.2
1
16.2
68
8.6
17
1.9
11
22.2
74
8
29.0
41
34.1
79
8.8
18
2.5
10
15.0
50
9
5.2
10
26.0
87
10.9
22
8.8
22
40.0
80
10
0.0
0
40.5
90
3.1
6
16.0
40
28.0
80
Overall Fish Coverage
12%
59%
18%
23%
67%
Pool Fish Coverage
17%
56%
14%
18%
90%
Riffle Fish Coverage
2%
20%
11%
30%
78%
Run Fish Coverage
24%
81%
22%
15%
54%
Glide Fish Coverage
9%
- --
- --
35%
- --

CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT FORM
Stability Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 -12) Score
1. Watershed and flood plain
Stable, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor disturbances in the
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual disturbances in the
activity and characteristics
watershed
watershed, including cattle activity
watershed, including cattle activity,
watershed. Significant cattle activity,
(grazing and /or access to stream),
landslides, channel sand or gravel
landslides, channel sand or gravel
construction, logging, or other minor
mining, logging, farming, or
mining, logging, farming, or
deforestation. Limited agricultural
construction of buildings, roads, or
construction of buildings, roads, or
activities
other infrastructure. Urbanization over
other infrastructure. Highly urbanized
significant portion of watershed
or rapidly urbanizing watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or ephemeral first-
Perennial or intermittent stream with
Extremely flashy, flash floods prevalent
behavior
order stream with slightly increased
flashy behavior
mode of discharge, ephemeral stream
rate of flooding
other than first -order stream
3. Channel pattern
Straight to meandering with low
Meandering, moderate radius of
Meandering with some braiding,
Braided, primarily bed load, engineered
radius of curvature, primarily
curvature, mix of suspended and bed
tortuous meandering, primarily bed
channel that is maintained
suspended load
loads, well- maintained engineered
load, poorly maintained engineered
channel
channel
3. Channel pattern (revised)
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously been
Appears to have previously been
Appears to have previously been
Meandering, stable channel or
channelized. Stream is relatively
channelized. Stream is actively
channelized. Stream is actively
straight (step -pool system, narrow
stable. Channel has some meanders
adjusting (meandering), localized
adjusting (laterally and /or vertically)
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and /or erosion
with few bends. Straight, unstable
around bends. Straightened, stable
reach.
channel.
4. Entrenchment/ channel
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain abandoned, but is
Moderate confinement in valley or
Knickpoints visible downstream,
confinement
banks, no sign of undercutting
currently rebuilding, minimal channel
channel walls, some exposure of
exposed water lines or other
infrastructure, no levees
confinement, infrastructure not
infrastructure, terraces exist, flood
infrastructure, channel- width -to- top -of-
exposed, levees are low and set well
plain abandoned, levees are moderate
banks ration small, deeply confined, no
back from the river
in size and have minimal setback from
active flood plain, levees are high and
the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed materia
Assorted sized tightly packed,
Moderately packed with some
Loose assortment with no apparent
Very loose assortment with no packing.
Fs = approximate portion of
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
overlapping. Very small amounts of
overlap. Small to medium amounts of
Large amounts of material < 4 mm. Fs
sand in the bed
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
material < 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
material < 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
> 70
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars are
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bar widths
Bar widths are generally greater than
mature, narrow relative to stream
may have vegetation and /or be
tend to be wide and composed of
1/2 the stream width at low flow. Bars
width at low flow, well - vegetated,
composed of coarse gravel to
newly deposited coarse sand to small
are composed of extensive deposits of
and composed of coarse gravel to
cobbles, but minimal recent growth of
cobbles and /or may be sparsely
fine particles up to coarse gravel with
cobbles. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
bar evident by lack of vegetation
vegetated. Bars forming for S > 0.02
little to no vegetation. No bars for S <
12, no bars are evident
on portions of the bar. For S > 0.02
and w/y < 12
0.02 and w/y > 12
and w/y <12, no bars are evident
7. Obstructions, including
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross currents
Moderately frequent and occasionally
Frequent and often unstable, causing a
bedrock outcrops, armor layer,
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions, cause
continual shift of sediment and flow.
LWD jams, grade control, bridge
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled, causing channel
bed paving, revetments, dikes
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and /or widen
or vanes, riprap
behind obstructions
8. Bank soil texture and
Clay and silty clay, cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay loam, minor
Sandy clay to sandy loam,
Loamy sand to sand, noncohesive
coherence
amounts of noncohesive or
unconsolidated mixtures of glacial or
material, unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures, layers may
other materials, small layers and
glacial or other materials, layers of
exist, but are cohesive materials
lenses of noncohesive or
lenses that include noncohesive sands
unconsolidated mixtures
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle
Bank slopes < 3H:1V (180) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V (270) in
Bank slopes to 1 H:1V (450) in
Bank slopes over 450 in noncohesive
(where 900 is a vertical bank)
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
or unconsolidated materials or over 600
materials to < 1:1 (450) in clays on
materials to 0.8:1 (500) in clays on
materials to 0.6:1 (600) in clays
in clays common on one or both banks
both sides
one or occasionally both banks
common on one or both banks
10. Vegetative or engineered
Wide band of woody vegetation with
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small band of woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
bank protection
at least 90% density and cover.
with 70-90% plant density and cover.
50-70% plant density and cover. A
depending on age and health with less
Primarily hard wood, leafy,
A majority of hard wood, leafy,
majority of softwood, piney,
than 50% plant density and cover.
deciduous trees with mature,
deciduous trees with maturing,
coniferous trees with young or old
Primarily softwood, piney, coniferous
healthy, and diverse vegetation
diverse vegetation located on the
vegetation lacking in diversity located
trees with very young, old and dying,
located on the bank. Woody
bank. Wood vegetation oriented 80-
on or near the top of bank. Woody
and /or monostand vegetation located
vegetation oriented vertically. In
90% from horizontal with minimal
vegetation oriented at 70-80% from
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
absence of vegetation, both banks
root exposure. Partial lining or
horizontal, often with evident root
oriented at less than 70% from
are lined or heavily armored
armoring of one or both banks
exposure. No lining of banks, but
horizontal with extensive root
some armoring may be in place on
exposure. No lining or armoring of
one bank
banks
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw
Some intermittently along channel
Significant and frequent on both
Almost continuous cuts on both banks,
banks, insignificant percentage of
bends and at prominent
banks. Raw banks comprise large
some extending over most of the
total bank
constrictions. Raw banks comprise
portion of bank in vertical direction.
banks. Undercutting and sod -root
minor portion of bank in vertical
Root mat overhangs
overhangs
direction
12. Mass wasting or bank
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent and /or minor
Evidence of frequent and /or significant
Frequent and extensive mass wasting.
failure
very small amounts of mass wasting.
mass wasting. Mostly healed over
occurrences of mass wasting that can
The potential for bank failure, as
Uniform channel width over the
with vegetation. Relatively constant
be aggravated by higher flows, which
evidenced by tension cracks, massive
entire reach
channel width and minimal scalloping
may cause undercutting and mass
undercuttings, and bank slumping is
of banks
wasting of unstable banks. Channel
considerable. Channel width is highly
width quite irregular, and scalloping of
irregular, and banks are scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream distance to bridge
More than 35 m, bridge is well-
20 -35 m, bridge is aligned with flow
10 -20 m, bridge is skewed to flow, or
Less than 10 m, bridge is poorly
from meander impact point and
aligned with river flow
flow alignment is otherwise not
aligned with flow
alignment
centered beneath bridge
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = fraction of sand, S = slope, w/y = width -to -depth ratio
Total Score

EDR REPORT

Poplin Ridge
Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road
Monroe, NC 28110
Inquiry Number: 3337526.10s
June 05, 2012
440 Wheelers Farms Road
® www.edrnet.comt.com Milford, CT 06461
CrEDR Environmental Data Resources Inc Toll Free: 2.0050
FORM - BAT -RIH

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Executive Summary
ES1
Overview Map
2
Detail Map
3
Map Findings Summary
4
Map Findings
7
Orphan Summary
8
Government Records Searched /Data Currency Tracking
GRA
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum
A -1
Physical Setting Source Summary
A -2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map
A -5
Physical Setting Source Map
A -12
Physical Setting Source Map Findings
A -14
Physical Setting Source Records Searched
A -16
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1- 800 - 352 -0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from
other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS ". Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2012 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC3337526.10s Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527 -05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
POPLIN RIDGE /SECREST SHORT CUT ROAD
MONROE, NC 28110
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator:
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
35.0548000 - 35° 3' 17.28"
80.5729000 - 80° 34' 22.44"
Zone 17
538948.6
3879005.8
588 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 35080 -A5 BAKERS, NC
Most Recent Revision: 1987
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 2009, 2010
Source: USDA
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ( "reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
TC3337526.10s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List
CERC -NFRAP CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non- CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA -TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA -LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA -SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA -CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State and tribal landfill and /or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF /LF List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST Regional UST Database
TC3337526.10s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database
LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST AST Database
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill/ Solid Waste Disposal Sites
DEBRIS REGION 9
Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI
Open Dump Inventory
SWRCY
Recycling Center Listing
HIST LF
Solid Waste Facility Listing
INDIAN ODI
Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
US HIST CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA- NonGen RCRA - Non Generators
TC3337526.10s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DOT OPS
Incident and Accident Data
DOD
Department of Defense Sites
FUDS
Formerly Used Defense Sites
CONSENT
Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD
Records Of Decision
UMTRA
Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
MINES
Mines Master Index File
TRIS
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA
Toxic Substances Control Act
FTTS
FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
HIST FTTS
FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
SSTS
Section 7 Tracking Systems
ICIS
Integrated Compliance Information System
PADS
PCB Activity Database System
MLTS
Material Licensing Tracking System
RADINFO
Radiation Information Database
FINDS
Facility Index System /Facility Registry System
RAATS
RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
IMD
Incident Management Database
UIC
Underground Injection Wells Listing
DRYCLEANERS
Drycleaning Sites
NPDES
NPDES Facility Location Listing
INDIAN RESERV
Indian Reservations
SCRD DRYCLEANERS
State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
PCB TRANSFORMER
PCB Transformer Registration Database
COAL ASH EPA
Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
EPA WATCH LIST
EPA WATCH LIST
COAL ASH DOE
Sleam- Electric Plan Operation Data
2020 CORRECTIVE ACTION_ 2020 Corrective Action Program List
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE____
Financial Assurance Information Listing
COAL ASH
Coal Ash Disposal Sites
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
EDR Proprietary Records
Manufactured Gas Plants_____ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC3337526.10s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 40 records.
Site Name
USB RECYCLING.COM
CITY OF MONROE ASPHALT PLANT (FORM
MOUNTAINTOP RV & MARINE
STOUT INTERNATIONAL OF NC, INC
SCOVILL INC /SECURITY PRODUCTS
SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW
COOK GROCERY STORE
WOODS GOODS -DOT
GREY'S GROCERY
YALE NORTON
BOREN BRICK- 5000 H.O.
MONROE MALL
ROY WALTERS PROP ERTY/NCDOT#1 0
BARRY HELMS RESIDENCE
MOUNTAIN TOP RV & MARINE
CHARLOTTE PLASTICS - MONROE
TELEDYNE EAST (FORMER STOUT INTERN
LAKE LEE GROCERY -NCDOT
NEWELL HELMS RESIDENCE
CROWN NC - 632
DALE YOUNTS SERVICE STATION
QUIKTRIP 1054
WILKERSON GROCERY
GREY'S GROCERY
LAKE LEE SERVICE & GROCERY
GIMCO INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CATAWBA OIL COMPANY, INC.
MILLS GULF SERVICE
HELMS PROPERTY
BOREN CLAY PRODUCTS
BOREN CLAY PRODUCTS
601 S TRUCK STOP (DIXIE LAND)
TARGET STORE #2074
M & P BODY SHOP
TIRE KINGDOM #165
COOK GROCERY STORE
GREY'S GROCERY
BOREN BRICK CO.
BOREN BRICK - MONROE
NEWELL HELMS RESIDENCE
Database(s)
SWRCY
IMD,LAST
LAST
HWS
VCP,HWS
IMD,LUST
LUST TRUST,LUST
IMD,LUST
LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
IMD,LUST
LUST
LUST TRUST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
RCRA -LQG
RCRA -N LR
RCRA -CESQG
IMD
IMD
IMD
IMD
IMD
TC3337526.10s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5

OVERVIEW MAP - 3337526.10s
I
I
4
A/
Target Property
1 Miss;
Sites at elevations higher than
Indian Reservations BIA
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
Disposal Sites
the target property
1
Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge CLIENT: WK Dickson
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road CONTACT: George Lankford
Monroe NC 28110 INQUIRY #: 3337526.10s
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / 80.5729 DATE: June 05, 2012 12:07 pm
Copyright a 2012 EDR, Inc. o 2010 Tole Atlas Ral. 07/2009.
0 1/4 1/2
1 Miss;
Indian Reservations BIA
T Hazardous Substance
Power transmission lines
Disposal Sites
Oil & Gas pipelines from USGS
loo -year flood zone
Soo -year flood zone
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and /or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge CLIENT: WK Dickson
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road CONTACT: George Lankford
Monroe NC 28110 INQUIRY #: 3337526.10s
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / 80.5729 DATE: June 05, 2012 12:07 pm
Copyright a 2012 EDR, Inc. o 2010 Tole Atlas Ral. 07/2009.

DETAIL MAP - 3337526.10S
C7 //N
D
2 i
Ot �
,Qg�,o�a Qo 1ob Pd
G
�o
K0
oa
■
•
\I
1111114 it
RI
Target Property
1/2 Miss;
Sites at elevations higher than
Indian Reservations BIA
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
Disposal Sites
the target property
1
Manufactured Gas Plants
t
Sensitive Receptors
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
C7 //N
D
2 i
Ot �
,Qg�,o�a Qo 1ob Pd
G
�o
K0
oa
■
•
\I
1111114 it
RI
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge CLIENT: WK Dickson
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road CONTACT: George Lankford
Monroe NC 28110 INQUIRY #: 3337526.10s
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / 80.5729 DATE: June 05, 2012 12:09 pm
Copyright a 2012 EDR, Inc. o 2010 Tole Atlas Ral. 07/2009.
0 iB 1/4
1/2 Miss;
Indian Reservations BIA
Hazardous Substance
Oil & Gas pipelines from USGS
Disposal Sites
loo -year flood zone
Soo -year flood zone
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and /or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge CLIENT: WK Dickson
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road CONTACT: George Lankford
Monroe NC 28110 INQUIRY #: 3337526.10s
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / 80.5729 DATE: June 05, 2012 12:09 pm
Copyright a 2012 EDR, Inc. o 2010 Tole Atlas Ral. 07/2009.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target
Total
Database (Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2-1
> 1
Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Proposed NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
NPL LIENS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal CERCLIS list
CERCLIS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
FEDERAL FACILITY 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List
CERC -NFRAP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal RCRA non- CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA -TSDF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA -LQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA -SQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA -CESQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
US INST CONTROL 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal ERNS list
ERNS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State and tribal landfill and /or
solid waste disposal site lists
SWF /LF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
OLI 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
TC3337526.10s Page 4

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
0
US BROWNFIELDS
0.500
Local Lists of Landfill/ Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
0
Distance Target
0.500
ODI
0.500
SWRCY
0.500
Total
Database (Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2-1
> 1
Plotted
LUST TRUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
LAST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
INDIAN LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
AST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
INDIAN UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
FEMA UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
State and tribal institutional
control/ engineering control registries
INST CONTROL 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
VCP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
0
US BROWNFIELDS
0.500
Local Lists of Landfill/ Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
0
DEBRIS REGION 9
0.500
ODI
0.500
SWRCY
0.500
HIST LF
0.500
INDIAN ODI
0.500
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
NR 0
US CDL
TP
US HIST CDL
TP
Local Land Records
0
LIENS 2
TP
LUCIS
0.500
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS
TP
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA- NonGen
0.250
DOT OPS
TP
DOD
1.000
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
0
NR 0
TC3337526.10s Page 5

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
EDR Proprietary Records
Manufactured Gas Plants 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC3337526.10s Page 6
Search
Distance Target
Total
Database
(Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2-1
> 1
Plotted
FUDS
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
CONSENT
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
ROD
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
UMTRA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
MINES
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
TRIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
TSCA
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
HIST FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
SSTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
ICIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
PADS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
MLTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
RADINFO
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
FINDS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
RAATS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
IMD
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
UIC
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
DRYCLEANERS
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
NPDES
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
INDIAN RESERV
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
PCB TRANSFORMER
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH EPA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
EPA WATCH LIST
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH DOE
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
2020 CORRECTIVE ACTION0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
EDR Proprietary Records
Manufactured Gas Plants 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC3337526.10s Page 6

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
TC3337526.10s Page 7

Count: 40 records.
ORPHAN SUMMARY
City
EDR ID
Site Name
Site Address
Zip
Database(s)
MONROE
1010323115
TARGET STORE #2074
2901 WEST HWY 74
28110
RCRA -LQG
MONROE
1010565441
M & P BODY SHOP
3213 HWY 74 W
28110
RCRA -NLR
MONROE
1014917385
TIRE KINGDOM #165
3842 W HWY 74
28110
RCRA -CESQG
MONROE
S102089551
BOREN BRICK - MONROE
HWY. 74 EAST
IMD
MONROE
S102089714
LAKE LEE GROCERY -NCDOT
1700 BLOCK PAGELAND HWY
28110
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S102328460
CHARLOTTE PLASTICS - MONROE
4210 OLD CHAR. HWY
28110
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S103554548
SCOVILL INC /SECURITY PRODUCTS
HWY 74 E
VCP,HWS
MONROE
S103718030
BOREN BRICK CO.
HWY 74 E
IMD
MONROE
S104157189
NEWELL HELMS RESIDENCE
US HIGHWAY 601
IMD
MONROE
S104157200
BARRY HELMS RESIDENCE
734 CONCORD HIGHWAY
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S105219283
CROWN NC - 632
1828 OLD CHARLOTTE HIGHWAY
LUST TRUST
MONROE
S105702968
MONROE MALL
HWY 74
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S105702984
YALE NORTON
HWY 74 EAST
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S105764673
COOK GROCERY STORE
3516 HWY. 218 EAST
IMD
MONROE
S105764713
WOODS GOODS -DOT
HWY 601 S. @ WHITE STORE RD
28110
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S105894628
SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW
HWY 200
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S106074734
GREY'S GROCERY
HWY 601 @ OLD STEEL RD
IMD
MONROE
S106204406
BOREN BRICK - 5000 H.O.
HWY 74 EAST
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S106349501
CITY OF MONROE ASPHALT PLANT (FORM
HWY 74 & SUTHERLAND AVE.
28110
IMD,LAST
MONROE
S106495575
COOK GROCERY STORE
3516 HWY. 218 EAST
28110
LUST TRUST,LUST
MONROE
S106799529
TELEDYNE EAST (FORMER STOUT INTERN
2600 HWY 74 EAST
28110
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S106799558
ROY WALTERS PROPERTY /NCDOT #10
5400 BLOCK PAGELAND HWY
IMD,LUST
MONROE
S108631710
STOUT INTERNATIONAL OF NC, INC
HIGHWAY 74 EAST
HWS
MONROE
S109164436
MOUNTAIN TOP RV & MARINE
4000 WEST HWY 74
28110
LUST
MONROE
S109504277
GREY'S GROCERY
HWY 601 @ OLD STILL RD
28110
LUST
MONROE
S109504286
NEWELL HELMS RESIDENCE
APPROX. 2220 US HWY 601
28110
LUST
MONROE
S110629276
MOUNTAINTOP RV & MARINE
4000 HIGHWAY 74 W.
28110
LAST
MONROE
S111445319
USB RECYCLING.COM
3301 HWY 74 EAST
28110
SWRCY
INDIAN TRAIL
0001190948
DALE YOUNTS SERVICE STATION
HIGHWAY 74
28110
UST
MONROE
0001191137
LAKE LEE SERVICE & GROCERY
HWY 601 S.
28110
UST
MONROE
0001191238
BOREN CLAY PRODUCTS
CHARLOTTE HIGHWAY
28110
UST
MONROE
0001191292
CATAWBA OIL COMPANY, INC.
HIGHWAY 74 & WHEELER STREET
28110
UST
MONROE
0001191396
601 S TRUCK STOP (DIXIE LAND)
5003 PAGELAND HIGHWAY US 601 S
28110
UST
MONROE
0001191621
GREY'S GROCERY
HIGHWAY 601 NORTH
28110
UST
MONROE
0001192016
MILLS GULF SERVICE
HWY 74 E
28110
UST
MONROE
0001204225
BOREN CLAY PRODUCTS
BRICK YARK RD HWY 74E POB 5012
28110
UST
MONROE
0003134201
WILKERSON GROCERY
ROUTE 6
28110
UST
MONROE
0003142910
HELMS PROPERTY
HIGHWAY 74 & BAKERS X -ROADS
28110
UST
MONROE
0003295472
GIMCO INTERNATIONAL, INC.
HIGHWAY 74 EAST
28110
UST
INDIAN TRAIL
0004187934
QUIKTRIP 1054
5650 WEST HIGHWAY 174
28110
UST
TC3337526.10s Page 8

Poplin Ridge
Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road
Monroe, NC 28110
Inquiry Number: 3337526.11
June 05, 2012
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, CT 06461
CEDR* Environmental data Resources Inc 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com

EDR Historical Topographic Map Report
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.s (EDR) Historical Topographic Map Report is designed to assist professionals in
evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topographic Map Report
includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the early 1900s.
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1- 800 - 352 -0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO
WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report AS IS. Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they
be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the
information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2012 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or ma
of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks
used herein are the property of their respective owners.

Historical Topographic Map
Unsurveyed Area on the Topographic Map
TARGET QUAD
�►1Nii4
CLIENT: WK Dickson
�
NAME: CHARLOTTE
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut
CONTACT: George Lankford
-a
MAP YEAR: 1942
Road
INQUIRY #: 3337526.11
Monroe, NC 28110
RESEARCH DATE: 06/05/2012
SERIES: 30
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / - 80.5729
SCALE: 1:125000
r •-
,Jr
�
4J
�
'T►��.
Unsurveyed Area on the Topographic Map
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge
CLIENT: WK Dickson
N
NAME: CHARLOTTE
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut
CONTACT: George Lankford
T
MAP YEAR: 1942
Road
INQUIRY #: 3337526.11
Monroe, NC 28110
RESEARCH DATE: 06/05/2012
SERIES: 30
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / - 80.5729
SCALE: 1:125000

Historical Topographic Map
• \ . 1361
Stephenson
1
1 yr.o'
1 � � 1514 (5�� � • 1 � `�}} '��, rJ -� �� ��� • � [�.1 `„v���� � it � � "_. •� I
I '6 d
II
J
• � 1501 ; �!� -` _ I I� � ' _ � — � � •,;i
+} 1 •' I, s .'607
• � � fn4� � 71R1R St., 61
J � ` �r5� �d '1)'. � • _ � _ � �f 1506 r, ^ ���
(isi1;
I c
11
1
,rl
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge
CLIENT: WK Dickson
N
NAME: BAKERS
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut
CONTACT: George Lankford
T
MAP YEAR: 1971
Road
INQUIRY #: 3337526.11
Monroe, NC 28110
RESEARCH DATE: 06/05/2012
SERIES: 7.5
LAT /LONG: 35.0548/- 80.5729
SCALE: 1:24000

Historical Topographic Map
643 5♦ `1 f`�: -y,� " - / t
• • • ] y •/ Iu S ''I ;,` '1 , `` 'ICI • C� ��r,
Stephenson
Oh
�ao�
o
' rv- -
I
t, � r � � • ` 1 ' l �'o _ �I � � I .�-� a ��
e )' .', \ . 15M 'j`/'��5} '�;,\\ `da � ; _ � � l ��� ' •� � � � ~! �f �f - - � rye) •.
,1 OB
v -
J
.1 � � ) il •�I1
i � 18fm
-
50
t • • ��, � � ._- "-`��r � -_ � l � � I � t�> - __- � 5b'7 Roan
z
ewe
1
1
X97
C:�
��Gr�cech
BIN
^N -
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge
CLIENT: WK Dickson
N
NAME: BAKERS
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut
CONTACT: George Lankford
YEAR: 1980
Road
INQUIRY #: 3337526.11
TMAP
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1971
Monroe, NC 28110
RESEARCH DATE: 06/05/2012
SERIES: 7.5
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / - 80.5729
SCALE: 1:24000

Historical Topographic Map
• ,, � � s iii ` � / \ � • 1 '.
II
4
fife ••hen "�
P
• �, ch ��� o� �� f\ U �`J — � � �i ry
I r= 1 I u
6
I. gA o sly_
In
_ } � �. .�1 i . 'If �� • li J�%;
o
,� � �� r_ �_ � ` '',: -� ,� L - - _ - _ � � t ;� � � ' •CSI • �`
1650
Ch
ji
641 ROB
�� r• �� s
6 � 1
. � r • • i• Mormn ' Star 0 {i`
`°� I •L �� t 1� �� a r �, "rye n
1
597 "
� �� ' \� Vii- ,. � � �� I • • - � �s�� J
577._ ._.
�H«
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Poplin Ridge
CLIENT: WK Dickson
N
NAME: BAKERS
ADDRESS: Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut
CONTACT: George Lankford
YEAR: 1987
Road
INQUIRY #: 3337526.11
TMAP
PHOTOREVISED FROM :1971
Monroe, NC 28110
RESEARCH DATE: 06/05/2012
SERIES: 7.5
LAT /LONG: 35.0548 / - 80.5729
SCALE: 1:24000

Poplin Ridge
Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road
Monroe, NC 28110
Inquiry Number: 3337526.12
June 06, 2012
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, CT 06461
CEDR* Environmental data Resources Inc 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com

EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist
environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR's
professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo
per decade.
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE
ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more
information contact your EDR Account Executive.
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1- 800 - 352 -0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO
WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report AS IS. Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they
be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the
information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2012 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or
of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks
used herein are the property of their respective owners.

Date EDR Searched Historical Sources:
Aerial Photography June 06, 2012
Target Property:
Poplin Ridge /Secrest Short Cut Road
Monroe, NC 28110
Year
Scale
Details
Source
1961
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1" =750'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: July 29, 1961
EDR
1961
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1 -750'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: July 29, 1961
EDR
1969
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: March 15, 1969
EDR
1969
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=500'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: March 15, 1969
EDR
1976
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=1000'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: March 24, 1976
EDR
1983
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1"=1000'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: March 02, 1983
EDR
1993
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1 -750'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: January 08, 1993
EDR
1993
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1 -750'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: January 08, 1993
EDR
1998
Aerial Photograph. Scale: 1 -750'
Panel #: 35080 -A5, Bakers, NC; /Flight Date: March 13, 1998
EDR
3337526.12
2

P.
16
JF
400
FF
W.",

INQUIRY M 3337526.12
YEAR: 1961 4 N
= 750'

i�`�+►. _. \mil , 1 �� •y� - � �� ,�� 1 r � ' •
a •r
i � � ,•r
r t•_ �
• f Af
-..-\ i • .fir �° - -- .,�,r.,�� -�•��
Cl
ea
1`
LAM
fit.�
f
s
f
FA
INQUIRY M 3337526.12 4 N
YEAR: 1969
= 500'
P
r
a
i•
h
Lk r
alliIIIIIIIIIII
r
4
i "I
L

ti
_ 0
ox s � .
11 wq, -.-
`, /►• , t
r <
t
INQUIRY M 3337526.12
YEAR: 1969
= 500'
1,
M
l4
l `�k
je
V-1 I bm
.L,
I

' e
IL _
a
4
f
�f
R
INQUIRY M 3337526.12 4 N
YEAR: 1976
�....,_
= 1000'
1
+ ft
c
r
r
v
L
T
s
i

4
r
- 14K t---
ry
r �
i'
y
INQUIRY M 3337526.12 4 N
YEAR: 1983
= 1000'
i It
"�ho
i
' r
y
s
IL

r '
.� f:
lob
r! -
INQUIRY #: 3337526.12 1 N
YEAR: 1993
= 750'

!'- w 'r 1 4
tij � N
w
s
(T-
1F�
1 s
A �
INQUIRY M 3337526.12 4 N
YEAR: 1993
= 750'
wr
.F
r
)►
Ike
N1
-11
�_„
w i I
7
,r
w i I

Pqw-
�F 3"' T w
lbjp t
7
F*
i
ff �3-, 1
+11-�
i'
F
I
.
27, ��
'.r
f
it
�y
A -'
r'
on
1
INQUIRY M 3337526.12
YEAR: 1998
= 750'
1
17
II
i

os stem
PROGRAM
August 14, 2012
Mr. Martin Hovis
Environmental Banc and Exchange
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Subject: Categorical Exclusion Form for
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Site
Yadkin River Basin — CU# 03040105
Union County, North Carolina
Contract No. 004672
Dear Mr. Hovis:
Attached please find the approved Categorical Exclusion Form for the subject full delivery
project. Please include a copy of the Categorical Exclusion Form in your Mitigation Plan.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at any time. I
can be reached at (828) 273 -1673, or email me at paul.wiesner @ncdenr.gov
SincereI ,
Paul Wiesner
Western Project Manager
N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program
www.nceo.net
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
(828)273 -1673 Mobile
[e-mail]
cc. file
Kut7orc.4tt... �t�i ... prof -p t. Sty HCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 11699 -1652 / 919 -115 -0416 / www.nceep.net

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.
Part
1: General Information
Project
Project Name:
Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Project
Count Name:
Union
EEP Number:
Project onsor:
Environmental Banc & Exchange. LLC
Pro ect Contact Name:
Marttn Howls
Project Contact Address:
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100, Raleigh, NC 27606
Project Contact -mars:
MartInQEBXUSA.com
FFP Project Mana er:
• Dpqnrinfion tnitfga[ian projetzf`attFje Popllu'Rt` ge Site vinll /twat styream restoradon along the unnamed tributaries
to Bast Pork Stawads Creek in the Yadkin River basin. Stream buffLs throughout the project; area will be
testored and protected in perpetuity Priority Tavel I restoration is proposed on five reaches, Enhancement TT
is proposed on two rcaches, Enhancement I is proposed on five reaches, and presemdon is proposed on two
reaches, This will result in ecologival improvements, including habitat restoration and ,a decrease in non- point
lAmOSIwIlution from ¢ '_�.�,.
Rev d By:
Date EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding Issues
Final Approval By:
Date Pot Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8118/05

1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes D
Q N
2. Does the project involve ground - disturbing activities within a LAMA Area of
Nos
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑✓ NIA
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
El NIA
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
Nos
Program?
✓ NIA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabilit
RCLAJ
1. Is this a "full - delivery" project?
❑ No
2. Has the zoning /land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ No
❑❑
designated as commercial or industrial?
NIA
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑Yes No
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ NIA
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
[] Nos
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
0 NIA
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
No
waste sites within the project area?
0 NIA
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
Yes
❑ No
`✓1 NIA
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
U No Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHP017HPO concur?
❑ Nos
❑✓ NIA
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
Yes
❑ No
✓ NIA
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Accigisition Policies Act Unifo✓
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
✓ Yes
❑ No
❑ NIA
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ LJ Nos
❑ NIA
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
✓❑ Yes
❑ N/A
prior to making an offer
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
7 Version 1.4, 8/18/05

1, Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians? 0 No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
Yes
❑ No
0 NIA
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
Q NIA
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
Yes
F1 No
Q NIA
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
M NIA
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
El Yes
❑ No
0 NIA
4. Has a permit been obtained?
Yes
❑ No
NIA
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
El Yes
0 No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
LJ Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
571 NIA
4. Has a permit been obtained?
Yes
❑ No
0 NIA
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
Lj Yes
listed for the county?
1 ❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
Yes
0 No
NIA
3. Are T &E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
0 Yes
Habitat?
❑ No
EJ NIA
4. is the `likely to adversely affect" the species and/or "likely to adversely modify"
Yes
project
Designated Critical Habitat?
❑ No
✓ NIA
5. Does the USFWSINOAA- Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
Yes
❑
No
✓❑
NIA
6. Has the USFWSINOAA- Fisheries rendered a `jeopardy' determination?
Yes
❑
No
M
NIA
8 Version 1.4, 8118105

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?
0 No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
❑✓ NIA
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
El Yes
sites?
❑ No
F1 NIA
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
Q Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ NIA
3. Has the completed Form AD -1006 been submitted to NRCS?
✓Yes
El No
❑ NIA
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
❑ NIA
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?
LJ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ NIA
Ma nuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
Yes
[Z] No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH- protected species?
0 Yes
❑ No
✓ NIA
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
El Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
❑ NIA
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓ NIA
5. Has consultation with NOAA - Fisheries occurred?
El Yes
❑ No
❑NIA
Migratory Bird Treaty Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
LJ Yes
❑✓ No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ NIA
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
Yes
No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
NIA
Version 1.4, 8118105

USDA FORM AD -1006

United States Departm ut of Agriculture
%,O�NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service
530 West Innes Street
Salisbury, North Carolina 28144
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
ATTN: Daniel Ingram
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Dear Mr. Ingram;
Kristin May, Resource Soil Scientist
Phone: [phone] x 104
E -mail: [e-mail]
June 18, 2012
The following information is in response to your request for information on Prime, Unique and Statewide Importance
Farmlands related to the proposed Poplin Ridge Site EEP stream mitigation project located in Union County.
Projects are subject to the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requirements if they irreversibly convert farmland,
either directly or indirectly, to a nonagricultural use and are completed or funded by a Federal agency.
For the purpose of FPPA, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and land of statewide or local importance.
Farmland subject to FPPA does not have to be currently in crops. It can be forest land, pastureland, cropland, or other
land. Farmland does not include land previously converted to urban development or water storage. Urban development is
land that has been identified as urbanized area on the Census Bureau Map or as urban- built -up on the USDA Important
Farmland Maps.
The area in question meets one or more of the above criteria for Farmland. Enclosed is the Farmland Conversion Impact
Rating form (AD 1006 / NRCS- CPA -106) with PARTS II, IV and V completed by NRCS.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
J'6�— C
Kristin May
Resource Soil Scientist
CC.
Mark Ferguson, District Conservationist, NRCS, Monroe
Helping People Help the Land
M Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer

Projects and Activities Subject to FPPA
Projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to
nonagricultural use and are completed by a Federal agency or with assistance from a Federal agency.
Assistance from a Federal agency includes:
• Acquiring or disposing of land.
• Providing financing or loans.
• Managing property.
• Providing technical assistance
Activities that may be subject to FPPA include:
• State highway construction projects, (through the Federal Highway Administration)
• Airport expansions
• Electric cooperative construction projects
• Railroad construction projects
• Telephone company construction projects
• Reservoir and hydroelectric projects
• Federal agency projects that convert farmland
• Other projects completed with Federal assistance.
Activities not subject to FPPA include:
• Federal permitting and licensing
• Projects planned and completed without the assistance of a Federal agency
• Projects on land already in urban development or used for water storage
• Construction within an existing right of- -way purchased on or before August 4, 1984
• Construction for national defense purposes
• Construction of on -farm structures needed for farm operations
• Surface mining, where restoration to agricultural use is planned
• Construction of new minor secondary structures such as a garage or storage shed.

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Date Of Land Evaluation Request 5/31/12
Name Of Project Poplin Ridge EEP Stream Mitigation Site
Federal Agency Involved FHWA - EEP
Proposed Land Use Stream Mitigation Site
County And State Union, NC
PART II (To be completed by NRCS)
Date Request Received By NRCS 6/5/12
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional parts of this form). © ❑
Acres Irrigated
none
Average Farm Size
156
Major Crop(s)
Corn
Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: 384,651 % 94
Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: 291, 581 %77
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used
Union - CALES
Name Of Local Site Assessment System
Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
6/18/12
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Alternative Site Rating
Site A
Site B
Site C
Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
25.7
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
4.2
C. Total Acres In Site
29.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
10.7
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
9.1
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
0.0
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
46.3
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
83
0
0
0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b)
Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
15
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
18
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
0
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
15
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
10
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
0
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
0
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
5
10. On -Farm Investments
20
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
0
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
0
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS
160
93
0
0
0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)
100
83
0
0
0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
site assessment)
160
93
0
0
0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2lines)
260
176
0
0
0
Site Selected:
Date Of Selection
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes p No 13
Reason For Selection:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD -1006 (10 -83)
This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff •

r�
Et ii aROS
e e
i- KOGRAM
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 floodplain 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. Edward Curtis), NC Floodplain Mapping Unit
(attn. John Gerber) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project:
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
Name if streams or features:
Unnamed Tributaries to East Fork Stewarts Creek
County:
Union County, NC
Name of river basin:
Yadkin River Basin
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality /county:
Union County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
Firm Panel 5427, 5437
Map Number: 3710542700J, 3710543700)
Effective Date: October 16, 2008
Consultant name:
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
Ward Marotti — Project Manager
Phone number:
(919 782 -0495
Address:
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
FEMA -EEP FEMA_Floodplain Checklist.docx Page 1 of 4

Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph). Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500 ".
WK Dickson is designing the Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project in Union County,
NC to provide stream mitigation units (SMUs) in the Yadkin River Basin for the NC
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). Stream restoration and stream
enhancement activities involving channel and floodplain grading are proposed on
approximately 8,783 linear feet of East Fork Stewarts Creek and East Fork Stewarts
Creek Tributary 1. Preservation is proposed on approximately 1,312 linear feet of
unnamed tributaries. Channel and /or floodplain grading is proposed along two streams
located in a Special Flood Hazard Area.
Typical stream restoration improvements entail constructing a new channel that conveys
the bankfull flow on the floodplain adjacent to the existing channel. The existing stream
crossings located within the SFHA will be removed and replaced at their current
locations. In addition, the pond located 500 feet upstream of FEMA cross section 145
(along East Fork Stewarts Creek) will be permanently removed by lowering the culverts
at the embankment and providing positive drainage through this stream reach.
Stream reaches and are summarized below according to their mitigation type.
Reach
Mitigation Type
Total Length
(LF)
UT1 -1
Preservation and Enhancement Level I
1,258
UT1 -2
Priority 1 Restoration
1,171
UT1 -3
Priority 1 Restoration
901
UT1 4
Enhancement Level I
1,210
UT1 -A
Enhancement Level I
217
UT1 -B
Preservation and Enhancement Level I
1,075
UT1 -C
Enhancement Level I
871
UT2 -1
Enhancement Level II
490
UT2 -2
Priority 1 Restoration
857
UT2 -3
Priority 1 Restoration
521
UT2 -4
Priority 1 Restoration
1061
UT2 -A
Enhancement Level II
463
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
E Yes E No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
r- Redelineation
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
FEMA -EEP FEMA_Floodplain Checklist.docx Page 2 of 4

F Detailed Study
F Limited Detail Study
F Approximate Study
F Don't know
List flood zone designation:
Check if applies:
* AE Zone
Floodway
Non - Encroachment
None
* A Zone
E Local Setbacks Required
E No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet:
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway /non-
encroachment/s etb acks?
E Yes E No
Land Acquisition (Check)
F State owned (fee simple)
F Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
F/7 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 C No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP (attn: Edward Curtis, (919) 715 -8000 x369)
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator: Lee Jenson
Phone Number: (704) 283 -3565
Email: [e-mail]
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
FEMA -EEP FEMA_Floodplain Checklist.docx Page 3 of 4

Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer /applicant following verification with the LFPA
i No Action
W No Rise
r- Letter of Map Revision
r7o Conditional Letter of Map Revision
r- Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name:
Title:
Signature:
Date:
Poplin Ridge Stream Restoration Project
FEMA -EEP FEMA_Floodplain Checklist.docx Page 4 of 4

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
20 June 2012
Mr. Daniel Ingram
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Subject: Project Scoping for Poplin Ridge Site EEP Stream Mitigation Project in Union County.
Dear Mr. Ingram:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
information. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 -667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113 -131 et seq.).
The project site is located on East Fork Stewarts Creek and its unnamed tributaries in the Yadkin -Pee
Dee River basin. According to the information provided, the stream channels have been straightened and
channelized, and several sections are significantly degraded. The site is surrounded by cultivated land and
forest. The purpose of the project is to restore the stream channels to provide in -kind mitigation for unavoidable
stream impacts.
Stream restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat. We recommend
establishing native, forested buffers in riparian areas to protect water quality, improve terrestrial habitat, and
provide a travel corridor for wildlife species. Provided natural channel design methods are used and measures
are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from construction/restoration activities, we do not anticipate
the project to result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can provide further assistance, please
contact our office at (336) 449 -7625 or shari.bryantLncwildlife.org.
Sincerely,
Shari L. Bryant
Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699 -1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

�� rn�� a,n• * .b2C
STAIZ
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
June 18, 2012
Daniel Ingram
WK Dickson & Company, Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
dingram(a%wkdicks on.com
Re: Poplin Ridge Stream Mitigation Project, Union County, ER 12 -0984
Dear Mr. Ingram:
Thank you for your letter of June 7, 2012, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill - Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above - referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
643"Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

NhWK
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
June 7, 2012
Mr. Pete Benjamin
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636 -3726
Subject: Project Scoping for Poplin Ridge Site EEP stream mitigation project in Union County.
Dear Mr. Benjamin,
The Poplin Ridge Site has been identified by NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts. This site is currently cultivated land and
forests surrounding tributaries to Stewarts Creek. The stream channels have been straightened and
channelized.
We have obtained an updated species list for Union County from the FWS web site
( http: / /www.fws.gov /endangered. The threatened or endangered species for this county are the
Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorate), Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). We have determined that no suitable habitat for these species
exists within the proposed project boundary.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered
species, migratory birds, or other trust resources from the construction of a stream restoration project
on the subject property. Maps showing the location and approximate limits of the conservation
easement are enclosed.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the comment to
my attention at the address below. Please feel free to contact me at dingram @wkdickson.com with
any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this
project.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Daniel Ingram

Enclosures
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel. [phone]
c /fe /97084/5 -7asbi I.doc
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com Transportation • Water Resources • Urban Development • Geomatics

14.5 Appendix C — Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
Poplin Ridge Morphological Parameters
Poplin Ridge Existing Conditions Cross Section Charts
Reference Reach Existing Cross Section and Profile Charts
Poplin Ridge Stable Channel Hydraulic Design Output
HEC -RAS Data Output
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 149 March 2014

Poplin Ridge UT1 Morphological Parameters
' Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
Reference Reach
Existing'
Design
UT1 -R1
UT1 -R1
UT1 -R2
UT1 -R3
UT1 -R4
UT1 -A
UT1 -B
UT1 -B
UT1-C
UT1 -R2
UT1 -R3
Pres.
Enh.I
Rest.
Rest.
Enh.I
Enh.I
Pres.
Enh.I
Enh.I
Rest.
Rest.
Feature
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle Pool
Riffle Pool
Drainage Area (ac)
426
1 426
136
136
248
384
728
88
120
120
250
248
384
NC Regional Curve Discharge cfs
69
31
31
47
64
100
22
28
28
47
47
64
Design /Approx. Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
1 50
1 22
22
35
55
65
20
15
30
50
35
52
Dimension
BF Width (ft)
13.7
15.0
7.9
7.5
9.9
12.8
17.5
6.9
11.2
6.0
10.0
11.8 12.8
13.6 14.8
Flood prone Width ft
>50
NA
>50
>50
>50
>50
>50
>50
>50
>50
>40
>50 NA
>50 NA
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)
18.1
23.4
10.1
10.4
14.2
22.2
21.9
6.8
6.1
5.5
10.0
14.5 19.9
20.3 26.9
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1.3
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.7
1.2
1.0
0.5
0.9
1.0
1.2 1.6
1.5 1.8
BF Max Depth (ft)
1.7
2.7
2.0
1.8
2.0
2.4
2.3
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.8 2.4
2.1 2.8
Width /Depth Ratio
10.4
9.7
6.2
5.4
7.0
7.4
14.0
6.9
20.4
6.6
10.0
9.6 8.2
9.1 8.1
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
NA
1 >2.2
1 >2.2
1 >2.2
1 >2.2
>2.2
1 >2.2
>2.2
1 >2.2
>2.2
>2.2 NA
>2.2 NA
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
14.9
16.8
10.4
9.1
11.6
14.5
19.0
8.2
11.8
7.5
11.1
12.6 14
14.7 16.2
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.2
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1 1.4
1.4 1.7
Substrate
D16 (mm)
2.8
0.062
0.062
0.062
2
3
0.062
2
3
2
2
2
D50 (mm)
11.0
0.062
16.0
2
8
25
0.1
29
12
11
8
8
D84 (mm)
16.0
0.062
63.0
7
25
51
0.4
60
27
45
25
25
Pattern
Min
Max
Med
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
26.3
55.5
37.3
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
38
57
44
65
Radius of Curvature ft
13.5
103.3
41.2
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
18
89
20
103
Radius of Curvature Ratio
1.0
7.6
3.0
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
1.5
7.6
1.5
7.6
Meander Wavelength ft
49.4
66.0
59.7
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
38
57
44
65
Meander Width Ratio
1 3.6
4.8
4.4
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
3.2
4.8
3.2
4.8
Profile
Min
Max
Med
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Riffle Length ft
6
18
9
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
5
16
6
18
Riffle Slope ( %)
1.1
3.4
2.3
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
1.1
3.4
1.1
3.4
Run Length ft
7
15
8
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
6
13
7
15
Run Slope ( %)
4.8
11.5
8.2
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4.8
11.5
4.8
11.5
Glide Length ft
5
13
9
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4
11
5
13
Glide Slope ( %)
4.8
9.2
7.0
- --
I - --
I - --
I - --
I - --
I - --
I - --
I - --
I - --
1 4.8
9.2
4.8
9.2
Pool Length ft
5
42
15
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4
36
5
42
Pool Slope ( %)
--
---
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Pool -to -Pool Spacing ft
18.0
64.0
30.0
16
55
18
64
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length ft
279
622
534
1173
731
1294
264
573
434
908
- --
Channel Length (ft)
318
716
541
1197
738
1340
270
618
449
921
- --
---
Sinuosity
1.14
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
Water Surface Slope (ft /ft)
0.0048
NA
NA
NA
0.003
0.004
NA
NA
NA
NA
- --
- --
Channel Slope ft/ft
0.0047
0.0048
0.011
0.007
0.004
0.005
0.012
0.012
0.018
0.008
0.0059
0.0046
Rosgen Classification
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
C4
E4
C4
E4
E4
E4
E4
' Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data

Poplin Ridge UT2 Morphological Parameters
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
Reference Reach
Existing'
Design
UT2 -R1
UT2 -R2
UT2 -R3
UT2 -R4
UT2 -A
UT1 -R2
UT1 -R31R4
Enh.11
Rest.
Rest.
Rest.
Enh.11
Rest.
Rest.
Feature
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
Pond
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle Pool
Riffle Pool
Drainage Area ac
426
1 426
634
723
742
864
51
723
864
NC Regional Curve Discharge cfs
69
100
113
Design/Approx. Bankfull Discharge cfs
50
- --
- --
52
70
Dimension
BF Width ft
13.6
15.0
25.6
- --
16.2
12.1
6.1
17.2 18.6
18.2 19.6
Flood prone Width ft
>50
NA
>50
- --
>50
>50
>50
>50 NA
>50 NA
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft!j
18.1
23.4
19.6
- --
22.4
12.6
3.0
31.5 42
34.8 47.6
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1.3
1.6
0.8
- --
1.4
1.0
0.5
1.8 2.3
1.9 2.4
BF Max Depth ft
1.7
2.7
1.7
- --
2.6
1.6
1.2
2.5 3.5
2.6 3.8
Width /Depth Ratio
10.4
9.7
33.5
- --
11.8
11.6
12.2
9.4 8.2
9.5 8.1
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
NA
>2.2
- --
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2 NA
>2.2 NA
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
14.9
16.8
26.2
- --
17.9
13.1
7.0
18.5 20.3
19.5 21.5
Hydraulic Radius (ftj
1.2
1.4
0.7
- --
1.3
1.0
0.4
1.7 2.1
1.8 2.2
Substrate
D16 mm
2.8
0.062
0.062
1.5
0.062
1.5
1.5
D50 mm
11.0
0.062
0.062
7.8
0.062
7.8
7.8
D84 mm
16.0
0.72
4.8
15.0
0.57
15
15
Pattern
Min
Max
Med
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Channel Beltwidth ft
26
56
37
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
55
83
58
87
Radius of Curvature ft
13
103
41
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
26
131
27
138
Radius of Curvature Ratio
1.0
7.6
3.0
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
1.5
7.6
1.5
7.6
Meander Wavelength ft
49
66
60
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
55
83
58
87
Meander Width Ratio
1.9
4.1
1 2.7
1 - --
- --
- --
- --
- --
3.2
4.8
3.2
4.8
Profile
Min
Max
Med
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Riffle Length ft
6
18
9
8
23
8
24
Riffle Sloe %
1.1
3.4
2.3
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
1.1
3.4
1.1
3.4
Run Length (ftj
7
15
8
9
19
9
20
Run Sloe %
4.8
11.5
8.2
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4.8
11.5
4.8
11.5
Glide Length ft
5
13
9
6
16
7
17
Glide Slope (%1
4.8
9.2
7.0
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4.8
9.2
4.8
9.2
Pool Length ft
5
42
15
6
53
7
56
Pool Sloe %
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
---
---
---
---
---
Pool-to-Pool Spacing ft
18.0
64.0
30.0
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
23
81
24
86
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length ft
279
410
641
779
1015
427
- --
- --
Channel Length ft
318
443
641
781
1032
437
- --
---
Sinuosity
1.14
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
Water Surface Slope (ft/ftj
0.0048
NA
NA
NA
0.0027
NA
- --
- --
Channel Slope ft /ft
0.0047
0.0027
0.001
0.0057
0.0031
0.013
0.0029
0.0028
Ros en Classification
E4
C4c
NA
E4
E4
C4
E4
E4
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R1 Preservation Existing Conditions Cross Section
608
607
606
°— 605
400000"
-
w
604
603
602
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R1 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R1 Enhancement I Existing Conditions Cross Section
607
606
605
604
0
603
w
602
601
600
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R1 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R2 Existing Conditions Riffle Cross Section
598
597.5
597
596.5
596
°— 595.5
Poo
595
w
594.5
594
593.5
593
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R2 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R2 Existing Conditions Pool Cross Section
598
597.5
597
596.5
596
°— 595.5
595
w
594.5
594
593.5
593
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R2 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R3 Existing Conditions Cross Section
588.5
588
587.5
587
Z
C 586.5
0
586
0
w
585.5
585
584.5
584
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R3 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -R4 Existing Conditions Cross Section
583.5
583
582.5
582
581.5
°— 581
580.5
w
580
579.5
579
578.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -R4 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -A Existing Conditions Cross Section
602
601.5
601
600.5
°— 600
599.5
w
599
598.5
598
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -A Approx. Bankfull Flood prone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -13 Preservation Existing Conditions Cross Section
601.5
601
600.5
0
0
600
w
599.5
599
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -B Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -13 Enhancement Existing Conditions Cross Section
593
592.5
592
°— 591.5
w
591
590.5
590
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -B Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT1 -C Existing Conditions Cross Section
593
592.5
592
591.5
°— 591
>
590.5
w
590
589.5
589
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
tUT1 -C Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

586
585.5
585
°— 584.5
w
584
583.5
583
0
Upstream
-. `�a r
Poplin Ridge UT2 -A Existing Conditions Cross Section
5 10 15 20 25
Distance (ft)
tUT2 -A Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Downstream
W&_
30 35
CA
_IiN
Poplin Ridge UT2 -A Existing Conditions Cross Section
5 10 15 20 25
Distance (ft)
tUT2 -A Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Downstream
W&_
30 35

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT2 -R1 Existing Conditions Cross Section
583.5
583
582.5
582
0
581.5
w
581
580.5
580
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
4_UT2 -R1 Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT2 -R3 Existing Conditions Cross Section
579
578
577
576
°— 575
w 574
573
572
571
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
4_UT2 -R3 Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Poplin Ridge UT2 -R4 Existing Conditions Cross Section
575
574.5
574
573.5
573
°— 572.5
572
w
571.5
571
570.5
570
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
tUT2 -R4 Approx.Bankfull FloodproneAre.

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge Reference Cross Section 1 Riffle
102
101
100
0
99
w 98
97
96
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
—40-- Cross Section 1 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge Reference Cross Section 2 Pool
103
102
101
100
0 99
w 98
97
96
95
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
—40-- Cross Section 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge Reference Cross Section 3 Pool
103
102
101
100
0 99
w 98
97
96
MOO
95
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
—40-- Cross Section 3 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Poplin Ridge Reference Cross Section 4 Riffle
102
101
100
0 99
w 98
97
96
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance (ft)
—40-- Cross Section 4 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Poplin Ridge Reach UT1 -2
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 7.1, D50(mm) = 2.3, D16(mm) =.062
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 36
Upstream Channel
Energy
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
234.84
Base Width (ft)
6
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.006
Right
Side Slope
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.5
1.5
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Stable Channel
Energy
Median Channel Width (ft)
12
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
0.008
Width
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.7
1.7
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Computed Stable Channels
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
1
2.6
0.01174
0.0754
1.26
2.47
0.27
1.94
Upper
2
2.5
0.008271
0.0719
1.32
2.25
0.25
1.31
Upper
4
2.2
0.005801
0.0654
1.35
2.12
0.25
0.79
Upper
5
2
0.00508
0.0608
1.32
2.08
0.26
0.65
Upper
6
1.9
0.006392
0.0664
1.28
2.13
0.28
0.74
Lower
7
1.7
0.00603
0.0631
1.24
2.1
0.28
0.65
Lower
8
1.6
0.005825
0.0608
1.19
2.08
0.29
0.58
Lower
10
1.4
0.005499
0.0578
1.12
2.06
0.31
0.48
Lower
11
1.3
0.005415
0.0564
1.08
2.05
0.31
0.45
Lower
12
1.3
0.005335
0.0556
1.05
2.04
0.32
0.42
Lower
13
1.2
0.005331
0.0539
1.01
2.02
0.33
0.39
Lower
14
1.1
0.00532
0.0534
0.98
2.01
0.33
0.37
Lower
16
1
0.005379
0.0509
0.9
1.98
0.35
0.34
Lower
17
1
0.005379
0.0505
0.87
1.97
0.35
0.33
Lower
18
0.9
0.005411
0.0496
0.84
1.96
0.36
0.32
Lower
19
0.9
0.005491
0.0495
0.82
1.95
0.36
0.31
Lower
20
0.9
0.005476
0.0492
0.8
1.94
0.37
0.30
Lower
22
0.8
0.005618
0.0476
0.74
1.91
0.38
0.28
Lower
23
0.8
0.00566
0.0474
0.73
1.9
0.38
0.27
Lower
24
0.8
0.005722
0.0469
0.7
1.89
0.38
0.27
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution for Minimum Stream Power * * * * * **
4.9 2 0.007341 0.0696 1.3 2.17 0.27 0.92 Lower

Poplin Ridge Reach UT1 -3
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 25, D50(mm) = 7.8, D16(mm) = 1.5
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 52
Upstream Channel
0.008
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
13.19
Right
Base Width (ft)
7
Manning
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.005
0.08
n -Value
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.9
1.9
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Stable Channel
Median Channel Width (ft)
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
Side Slope
RoughnessEq
Roughness Value
Computed Stable Channels
14.5
0.008
Comp
Left
Right
1.7
1.7
Manning
Manning
0.08
0.08
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
1
3.4
0.007258
0.077
1.6
2.26
0.22
1.54
Upper
3
3
0.005965
0.0719
1.62
2.2
0.23
1.1
Lower
4
2.7
0.005585
0.069
1.6
2.19
0.23
0.95
Lower
6
2.4
0.004974
0.0643
1.55
2.19
0.25
0.73
Lower
7
2.2
0.004812
0.0617
1.51
2.2
0.26
0.66
Lower
9
1.9
0.004536
0.0574
1.42
2.2
0.28
0.54
Lower
10
1.8
0.00441
0.0558
1.38
2.21
0.29
0.5
Lower
12
1.6
0.004291
0.0522
1.29
2.21
0.31
0.43
Lower
13
1.5
0.004254
0.0507
1.24
2.21
0.32
0.4
Lower
14
1.4
0.004244
0.0494
1.2
2.21
0.32
0.38
Lower
16
1.3
0.004178
0.0467
1.11
2.21
0.34
0.34
Lower
17
1.2
0.004148
0.0457
1.08
2.21
0.35
0.32
Lower
19
1.1
0.004217
0.0441
1.01
2.2
0.36
0.3
Lower
20
1.1
0.004229
0.0434
0.98
2.2
0.37
0.29
Lower
22
1
0.004304
0.042
0.92
2.19
0.38
0.27
Lower
23
1
0.00431
0.0417
0.89
2.18
0.39
0.26
Lower
25
0.9
0.004422
0.0404
0.84
2.17
0.4
0.25
Lower
26
0.9
0.004465
0.04
0.81
2.17
0.41
0.24
Lower
28
0.8
0.004575
0.0394
0.77
2.16
0.42
0.23
Lower
29
0.8
0.004624
0.0391
0.76
2.15
0.43
0.23
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution
for
Minimum Stream
Power
* * * * * **
17.2
1.2
0.004183
0.0456
1.07
2.2
0.35
0.32
Lower

Poplin Ridge Reach UT2 -3
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 15, D50(mm) = 7.8, D16(mm) = 1.5
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 65
Upstream Channel
Energy
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
1.42
Base Width (ft)
8
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.003
Right
Side Slope
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.7
1.7
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Stable Channel
Energy
Median Channel Width (ft)
16
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
0.006
Width
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.7
1.7
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Computed Stable Channels
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
2
3.8
0.004245
0.0754
1.91
1.98
0.18
1.02
Lower
3
3.6
0.004062
0.0728
1.9
1.99
0.19
0.91
Lower
5
3.1
0.003729
0.0682
1.86
2.02
0.2
0.73
Lower
6
2.9
0.003583
0.0661
1.84
2.03
0.21
0.65
Lower
8
2.6
0.003375
0.0614
1.75
2.05
0.23
0.54
Lower
10
2.3
0.003216
0.0575
1.66
2.06
0.24
0.46
Lower
11
2.1
0.00315
0.0557
1.62
2.07
0.25
0.42
Lower
13
1.9
0.003062
0.0525
1.52
2.07
0.26
0.37
Lower
14
1.8
0.003026
0.0512
1.48
2.08
0.27
0.35
Lower
16
1.7
0.003021
0.0481
1.37
2.08
0.28
0.31
Lower
18
1.5
0.003003
0.0462
1.29
2.08
0.3
0.28
Lower
19
1.5
0.002949
0.045
1.26
2.09
0.31
0.27
Lower
21
1.3
0.002947
0.0437
1.19
2.09
0.32
0.25
Lower
22
1.3
0.00297
0.0427
1.15
2.08
0.32
0.24
Lower
24
1.2
0.003007
0.0414
1.09
2.08
0.33
0.23
Lower
26
1.1
0.003084
0.0401
1.02
2.07
0.34
0.22
Lower
27
1.1
0.003086
0.0399
1
2.07
0.35
0.21
Lower
29
1
0.00317
0.0387
0.94
2.06
0.36
0.2
Lower
30
1
0.00317
0.0386
0.93
2.06
0.36
0.2
Lower
32
0.9
0.003239
0.0382
0.89
2.06
0.37
0.19
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution for Minimum Stream Power * * * * * **
20.1 1.4 0.002937 0.0444 1.22 2.09 0.31 0.25 Lower

Poplin Ridge Reach UT2 -4
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 15, D50(mm) = 7.8, D16(mm) = 1.5
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 74
Upstream Channel
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
0
Base Width (ft)
9
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.0025
Left Right
Side Slope
1.8 1.8
Roughness Eq
Manning Manning
Roughness Value
0.08 0.08
Stable Channel
Energy
Median Channel Width (ft)
17
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
0.003
Width
Left
Right
Side Slope
1.7
1.7
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.08
0.08
Computed Stable Channels
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
2
4.1
0.004009
0.0756
2.03
2
0.17
1.03
Lower
3
3.9
0.003824
0.0737
2.03
2.01
0.18
0.92
Lower
5
3.4
0.003545
0.0688
1.99
2.03
0.19
0.75
Lower
7
3
0.003347
0.0638
1.9
2.05
0.21
0.62
Lower
8
2.8
0.003216
0.0624
1.88
2.06
0.22
0.56
Lower
10
2.5
0.003079
0.0583
1.79
2.07
0.23
0.48
Lower
12
2.2
0.002963
0.0549
1.69
2.08
0.25
0.41
Lower
14
2
0.002886
0.052
1.6
2.09
0.26
0.36
Lower
15
1.9
0.002862
0.0507
1.55
2.09
0.27
0.34
Lower
17
1.8
0.002819
0.0484
1.47
2.1
0.28
0.31
Lower
19
1.6
0.002804
0.0466
1.39
2.1
0.29
0.28
Lower
20
1.6
0.002762
0.0454
1.35
2.1
0.3
0.27
Lower
22
1.4
0.002783
0.0435
1.27
2.1
0.31
0.25
Lower
24
1.3
0.002809
0.0424
1.2
2.1
0.32
0.23
Lower
26
1.3
0.002848
0.041
1.14
2.1
0.33
0.22
Lower
27
1.2
0.002873
0.0404
1.1
2.09
0.33
0.22
Lower
29
1.1
0.002916
0.0397
1.05
2.09
0.34
0.21
Lower
31
1.1
0.002969
0.0388
1
2.08
0.35
0.20
Lower
32
1.1
0.002987
0.0386
0.98
2.08
0.36
0.20
Lower
34
1
0.003053
0.0381
0.94
2.08
0.37
0.19
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution
for
Minimum Stream
Power
* * * * * **
20.7
1.5
0.002768
0.0447
1.32
2.1
0.3
0.26
Lower

Poplin Ridge Site UT1 (HEC -RAS Output)
Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft) (ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(lb /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT1 -R2
3524
Design Q
36
593.77
595.57
595.66
0.0061
2.38
16.33
25.40
0.53
0.46
UT1 -R2
3524
2 -Yr Q
85
593.77
596.21
596.34
0.0061
3.12
47.65
76.27
0.42
0.68
UT1 -R2
3524
10 -Yr Q
222
593.77
597.13
597.25
0.0048
3.61
133.25
102.22
0.65
0.80
UT1 -R2
3524
50 -Yr Q
374
593.77
597.81
597.94
0.0045
4.06
207.55
120.31
0.88
0.94
UT1 -R2
3524
100 -Yr Q
442
593.77
598.05
598.19
0.0045
4.23
238.35
128.55
0.96
1.00
UT1 -R2
3380
Design Q
36
592.92
595.17
595.20
0.0018
1.58
34.72
58.31
0.07
0.18
UT1 -R2
3380
2 -Yr Q
85
592.92
595.84
595.88
0.0018
1.97
90.00
94.48
0.10
0.25
UT1 -R2
3380
10 -Yr Q
222
592.92
596.70
596.77
0.0023
2.76
178.21
111.91
0.29
0.45
UT1 -R2
3380
50 -Yr Q
374
592.92
597.35
597.43
0.0027
3.34
256.93
132.75
0.47
0.62
UT1 -R2
3380
100 -Yr Q
442
592.92
597.59
597.67
0.0028
3.53
289.58
139.09
0.54
0.68
UT1 -R2
3255
Design Q
36
592.92
594.74
594.83
0.0058
2.33
16.92
26.91
0.47
0.44
UT1 -R2
3255
2 -Yr Q
85
592.92
595.38
595.50
0.0057
3.06
49.35
77.93
0.39
0.65
UT1 -R2
3255
10 -Yr Q
222
592.92
596.18
596.32
0.0059
3.90
122.83
100.41
0.81
0.95
UT1 -R2
3255
50 -Yr Q
374
592.92
596.78
596.94
0.0059
4.45
187.18
114.54
1.19
1.16
UT1 -R2
3255
100 -Yr Q
442
592.92
597.01
597.18
0.0059
4.66
214.36
122.18
1.32
1.24
UT1 -R2
3094
Design Q
36
591.97
593.76
593.85
0.0064
2.41
16.04
24.62
0.57
0.47
UT1 -R2
3094
2 -Yr Q
85
591.97
594.39
594.53
0.0064
3.18
46.25
74.57
0.45
0.71
UT1 -R2
3094
10 -Yr Q
222
591.97
595.22
595.36
0.0060
3.92
122.10
100.28
0.82
0.96
UT1 -R2
3094
50 -Yr Q
374
591.97
595.83
595.99
0.0059
4.47
186.64
114.39
1.20
1.16
UT1 -R2
3094
100 -Yr Q
442
591.97
596.06
596.23
0.0059
4.67
213.91
122.06
1.32
1.24
UT1 -R2
2899
Design Q
36
590.82
592.71
592.79
0.0047
2.18
19.06
31.81
0.33
0.38
UT1 -R2
2899
2 -Yr Q
85
590.82
593.37
593.47
0.0045
2.81
56.69
84.67
0.28
0.54
UT1 -R2
2899
10 -Yr Q
222
590.82
594.09
594.23
0.0057
3.86
124.29
100.67
0.78
0.92
UT1 -R2
2899
50 -Yr Q
374
590.82
594.68
594.84
0.0059
4.45
187.33
114.58
1.18
1.15
UT1 -R2
2899
100 -Yr Q
442
590.82
594.92
595.09
0.0058
4.63
215.66
122.53
1.29
1.22
UT1 -R2
2712
Design Q
36
589.72
591.26
591.41
0.0130
3.02
11.94
11.74
2.37
0.79
UT1 -R2
2712
2 -Yr Q
85
589.72
591.86
591.47 592.11
0.0132
4.10
29.11
48.61
1.42
1.25
UT1 -R2
2712
10 -Yr Q
222
589.72
592.91
593.07
0.0068
4.11
115.75
99.16
0.94
1.06
UT1 -R2
2712
50 -Yr Q
374
589.72
593.68
593.82
0.0051
4.23
198.07
117.66
1.01
1.03
UT1 -R2
2712
100 -Yr Q
442
589.72
593.96
594.10
0.0048
4.33
232.64
127.06
1.03
1.05
UT1 -R2
2444
Design Q
36
588.14
590.48
590.50
0.0014
1.46
40.05
66.33
0.05
0.15
UT1 -R2
2444
2 -Yr Q
85
588.14
591.19
591.22
0.0013
1.76
102.01
96.69
0.07
0.20
UT1 -R2
2444
10 -Yr Q
222
588.14
592.30
592.34
0.0013
2.26
222.77
124.45
0.15
0.29
UT1 -R2
2444
50 -Yr Q
374
588.14
593.09
593.14
0.0014
2.64
330.62
146.66
0.22
0.37
UT1 -R2
2444
100 -Yr Q
442
588.14
593.38
593.43
0.0014
2.79
373.29
154.14
0.26
0.40
UT1 -R3
2282
Design Q
52
587.98
589.99
590.07
0.0047
2.33
25.38
32.17
0.46
0.41
UT1 -R3
2282
2 -Yr Q
113
587.98
590.69
590.81
0.0046
3.00
58.13
61.59
0.52
0.60
UT1 -R3
2282
10 -Yr Q
290
587.98
591.76
591.93
0.0046
3.93
146.79
100.20
0.83
0.90
UT1 -R3
2282
50 -Yr Q
487
587.98
592.53
592.72
0.0046
4.54
232.12
123.43
1.13
1.12
UT1 -R3
2282
100 -Yr Q
573
587.98
592.80
593.00
0.0046
4.74
266.88
131.70
1.25
1.20
UT1 -R3
2115
Design Q
52
587.21
589.22
589.30
0.0046
2.32
25.50
32.32
0.46
0.41
UT1 -R3
2115
2 -Yr Q
113
587.21
589.91
590.04
0.0046
3.01
57.95
61.46
0.53
0.60
UT1 -R3
2115
10 -Yr Q
290
587.21
590.99
591.16
0.0046
3.93
146.79
100.20
0.83
0.90
UT1 -R3
2115
50 -Yr Q
487
587.21
591.76
591.95
0.0046
4.54
231.98
123.39
1.14
1.12
UT1 -R3
2115
100 -Yr Q
573
587.21
592.03
592.23
0.0046
4.75
266.55
131.62
1.26
1.20
UT1 -R3
1957
Design Q
52
586.48
588.49
588.57
0.0047
2.33
25.34
32.12
0.47
0.41

Poplin Ridge Site UT1 (HEC -RAS Output)
Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(lb /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT1 -R3
1957
2 -Yr Q
113
586.48
589.19
589.31
0.0046
2.99
58.40
61.77
0.52
0.60
UT1 -R3
1957
10 -Yr Q
290
586.48
590.27
590.43
0.0046
3.92
147.36
100.37
0.82
0.90
UT1 -R3
1957
50 -Yr Q
487
586.48
591.02
591.21
0.0047
4.55
231.17
123.19
1.15
1.13
UT1 -R3
1957
100 -Yr Q
573
586.48
591.29
591.49
0.0047
4.77
265.11
131.29
1.28
1.21
UT1 -R3
1782
Design Q
52
585.67
587.77
587.84
0.0037
2.15
28.67
36.21
0.33
0.35
UT1 -R3
1782
2 -Yr Q
113
585.67
588.46
588.57
0.0039
2.83
63.52
65.18
0.42
0.53
UT1 -R3
1782
10 -Yr Q
290
585.67
589.48
589.64
0.0045
3.88
149.16
100.92
0.79
0.88
UT1 -R3
1782
50 -Yr Q
487
585.67
590.17
590.37
0.0049
4.64
226.18
121.96
1.22
1.17
UT1 -R3
1782
100 -Yr Q
573
585.67
590.42
590.63
0.0050
4.89
257.56
129.54
1.38
1.28
UT1 -R3
1621
Design Q
52
584.93
586.32
586.58
0.0264
4.08
12.73
13.79
6.04
1.48
UT1 -R3
1621
2 -Yr Q
113
584.93
586.98
586.71
587.34
0.0199
4.89
26.73
33.88
4.09
1.81
UT1 -R3
1621
10 -Yr Q
290
584.93
588.09
588.48
0.0130
5.71
89.99
79.78
2.93
2.05
UT1 -R3
1621
50 -Yr Q
487
584.93
588.88
589.25
0.01022
6.05
163.74
105.23
2.94
2.1
UT1 -R3
1621
100 -Yr Q
573
584.93
589.17
589.54
0.009431
6.14
196.05
114.19
2.94
2.11
UT1 -R4
1360
Design Q
70
582.15
584.35
584.46
0.004426
2.64
26.66
22.18
0.85
0.36
UT1 -R4
1360
2 -Yr Q
172
582.15
585.28
585.48
0.004311
3.67
60.46
55.59
0.82
0.59
UT1 -R4
1360
10 -Yr Q
431
582.15
586.51
586.8
0.004351
4.92
167.17
109.92
1.06
0.92
UT1 -R4
1360
50 -Yr Q
714
582.15
587.33
587.68
0.004442
5.72
263.39
123.85
1.59
1.16
UT1 -R4
1360
100 -Yr Q
838
582.15
587.63
588.01
0.004478
6
301.43
128.95
1.8
1.25
UT1 -R4
1149
Design Q
70
581.04
583.31
583.45
0.005236
2.91
24.19
19.79
1.09
0.44
UT1 -R4
1149
2 -Yr Q
172
581.04
584.27
584.5
0.004987
3.99
60.82
57.18
0.92
0.7
UT1 -R4
1149
10 -Yr Q
431
581.04
585.67
585.93
0.003873
4.78
199.74
131.45
0.78
0.86
UT1 -R4
1149
50 -Yr Q
714
581.04
586.53
586.8
0.003766
5.39
322.13
155.74
1.07
1.02
UT1 -R4
1149
100 -Yr Q
838
581.04
586.83
587.11
0.003765
5.62
371.06
165.39
1.18
1.09
UT1 -R4
913
Design Q
70
579.69
581.88
582.05
0.006659
3.31
21.5
18.25
1.51
0.57
UT1 -R4
913
2 -Yr Q
172
579.69
582.93
583.22
0.005804
4.43
50.79
37.78
1.6
0.85
UT1 -R4
913
10 -Yr Q
431
579.69
584.41
584.83
0.005447
5.86
152.45
112.54
1.29
1.27
UT1 -R4
913
50 -Yr Q
714
579.69
585.39
585.79
0.004705
6.31
280.38
148.24
1.4
1.36
UT1 -R4
913
100 -Yr Q
838
579.69
585.68
586.1
0.004779
6.6
325.2
159.09
1.56
1.47
UT1 -R4
779
Design Q
70
578.6
581.15
581.3
0.004751
3.17
25.63
20.51
0.96
0.49
UT1 -R4
779
2 -Yr Q
172
578.6
582.22
582.49
0.005018
4.46
57.09
38.51
1.36
0.83
UT1 -R4
779
10 -Yr Q
431
578.6
583.43
583.98
0.007254
6.79
125.09
76.51
2.51
1.7
UT1 -R4
779
50 -Yr Q
714
578.6
584.29
583.52
584.97
0.007904
8.06
222.5
140.6
2.48
2.24
UT1 -R4
779
100 -Yr Q
838
578.6
584.62
584.23
585.28
0.00757
8.24
272.8
159.74
2.46
2.3
UT1 -R4
554
Design Q
70
578.07
580.56
580.61
0.002019
1.73
40.37
31.21
0.28
0.16
UT1 -R4
554
2 -Yr Q
172
578.07
581.81
581.87
0.001465
1.93
89.46
48.09
0.32
0.17
UT1 -R4
554
10 -Yr Q
431
578.07
583.02
583.14
0.001752
2.91
169.5
97.4
0.48
0.33
UT1 -R4
554
50 -Yr Q
714
578.07
583.81
584
0.002068
3.68
265.33
146.14
0.63
0.49
UT1 -R4
554
100 -Yr Q
838
578.07
584.07
584.3
0.002254
4.01
307.24
199.34
0.59
0.58
UT1 -R4
328
Design Q
70
577.04
579.83
579.95
0.004493
2.77
25.26
16.63
1.09
0.39
UT1 -R4
328
2 -Yr Q
172
577.04
581.39
581.49
0.001947
2.66
107.68
90.95
0.23
0.3
UT1 -R4
328
10 -Yr Q
431
577.04
582.52
582.68
0.002441
3.77
247.6
160.29
0.4
0.53
UT1 -R4
328
50 -Yr Q
714
577.04
583.24
583.45
0.002942
4.64
385
216.36
0.6
0.77
UT1 -R4
328
100 -Yr Q
838
577.04
583.5
583.72
0.002977
4.85
442.09
224.52
0.69
0.82
UT1 -R4
188
Design Q
70
576.37
579.33
579.44
0.002987
2.55
27.41
14.81
0.8
0.31
UT1 -R4
188
2 -Yr Q
172
576.37
581.17
581.26
0.001322
2.63
119.84
111.67
0.13
0.27

Poplin Ridge Site UT1 (HEC -RAS Output)
Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(lb /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT1 -R4
188
10 -Yr Q
431
576.37
582.17
582.35
0.002259
4.06
263.41
177.07
0.34
0.59
UT1 -R4
188
50 -Yr Q
714
576.37
582.81
583.04
0.002908
5.02
387.64
210.26
0.61
0.86
UT1 -R4
188
100 -Yr Q
838
576.37
583.04
583.29
0.003093
5.33
437.73
220.17
0.73
0.95
UT1 -R4
112
Design Q
70
575.87
578.98
577.71
579.13
0.004924
3.17
22.08
11.38
1.56
0.49
UT1 -R4
112
2 -Yr Q
172
575.87
581.06
578.94
581.14
0.001854
2.44
110.03
94.01
0.21
0.26
UT1 -R4
112
10 -Yr Q
431
575.87
581.98
580.66
582.15
0.002993
3.81
212.1
134.4
0.63
0.57
UT1 -R4
112
50 -Yr Q
714
575.87
582.47
581.47
582.75
0.00444
5.08
287
156.58
1.24
0.97
UT1 -R4
112
100 -Yr Q
838
575.87
582.64
581.69
582.97
0.005078
5.58
313.03
163.83
1.59
1.16
UT1 -R4
91
Culvert
UT1 -R4
69
Design Q
70
575.85
578.91
577.85
579.05
0.006004
3.05
22.98
15.84
1.48
0.49
UT1 -R4
69
2 -Yr Q
172
575.85
580.08
579.01
580.29
0.006007
3.64
47.19
25.54
2.32
0.64
UT1 -R4
69
10 -Yr Q
431
575.85
581.4
580.33
581.73
0.006005
4.75
122.57
91.88
1.71
0.95
UT1 -R4
69
50 -Yr Q
714
575.85
582.23
581.35
582.61
0.006002
5.36
218.96
138.8
1.89
1.13
UT1 -R4
69
100 -Yr Q
838
575.85
582.5
581.65
582.9
0.006003
5.62
257.61
154.09
2.01
1.22

Poplin Ridge Site UT2 (HEC -RAS Output)
River Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(Ib /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2990.84
Design Q
60.00
581.38
583.38
583.4900
0.00
2.63
24.30
27.96
0.49
0.29
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2990.84
2 -Yr Q
171.00
581.38
584.39
584.5900
0.00
3.83
65.70
52.07
0.73
0.51
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2990.84
10 -Yr Q
430.00
581.38
587.21
587.3200
0.00
3.23
295.83
110.51
0.21
0.28
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2990.84
50 -Yr Q
713.00
581.38
588.07
588.2500
0.00
4.26
397.96
129.41
0.43
0.46
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2990.84
100 -Yr Q
836.00
581.38
588.31
588.5300
0.00
4.72
430.48
136.23
0.55
0.55
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2886.41
Design Q
60.00
580.98
582.93
583.0700
0.00
3.03
22.69
29.58
0.54
0.37
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2886.41
2 -Yr Q
171.00
580.98
583.86
584.1400
0.01
4.60
62.31
54.17
0.99
0.73
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2886.41
10 -Yr Q
430.00
580.98
587.16
587.2300
0.00
2.91
410.42
149.92
0.11
0.22
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2886.41
50 -Yr Q
713.00
580.98
588.01
588.1200
0.00
3.74
543.42
160.97
0.24
0.34
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2886.41
100 -Yr Q
836.00
580.98
588.25
588.3800
0.00
4.10
582.56
162.88
0.32
0.41
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2769.21
Design Q
60.00
580.49
582.59
582.6700
0.00
2.27
29.90
34.61
0.28
0.21
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2769.21
2 -Yr Q
171.00
580.49
583.46
583.6300
0.00
3.58
73.31
65.43
0.54
0.45
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2769.21
10 -Yr Q
430.00
580.49
587.12
587.1700
0.00
2.28
430.48
123.56
0.08
0.13
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2769.21
50 -Yr Q
713.00
580.49
587.94
588.0300
0.00
3.15
535.92
134.91
0.19
0.24
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2769.21
100 -Yr Q
836.00
580.49
588.16
588.2800
0.00
3.52
566.62
138.04
0.26
0.3
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2632.17
Design Q
60.00
579.68
581.85
581.56
582.0800
0.01
4.02
24.66
48.96
0.60
0.66
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2632.17
2 -Yr Q
171.00
579.68
582.73
582.41
583.0000
0.01
5.10
82.86
82.84
0.86
0.91
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2632.17
10 -Yr Q
430.00
579.68
587.10
587.1200
0.00
1.99
650.09
164.80
0.04
0.1
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2632.17
50 -Yr Q
713.00
579.68
587.91
587.9500
0.00
2.76
787.85
176.46
0.10
0.18
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2632.17
100 -Yr Q
836.00
579.68
588.13
588.1800
0.00
3.09
827.07
179.64
0.14
0.22
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2519.11
Design Q
60.00
579.55
580.99
580.71
581.1400
0.01
3.06
21.27
33.41
0.92
0.44
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2519.11
2 -Yr Q
171.00
579.55
581.39
581.39
581.8400
0.02
5.53
43.08
66.84
2.72
1.3
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2519.11
10 -Yr Q
430.00
579.55
587.09
587.1000
0.00
1.40
728.37
161.32
0.02
0.05
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2519.11
50 -Yr Q
713.00
579.55
587.88
587.9100
0.00
2.01
861.06
172.85
0.05
0.09
UT2
-R1
UT -2
2519.11
100 -Yr Q
836.00
579.55
588.09
588.1400
0.00
2.27
898.26
176.13
0.07
0.12
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2417.44
Design Q
60.00
579.20
579.98
580.0800
0.01
2.50
23.97
52.21
0.92
0.37
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2417.44
2 -Yr Q
171.00
579.20
581.32
581.3500
0.00
1.41
121.28
80.69
0.11
0.08
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2417.44
10 -Yr Q
430.00
579.20
587.09
587.1000
0.00
0.70
725.80
137.32
0.00
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2417.44
50 -Yr Q
713.00
579.20
587.88
587.9000
0.00
1.04
841.27
153.13
0.01
0.02
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2417.44
100 -Yr Q
836.00
579.20
588.10
588.1200
0.00
1.19
874.56
157.83
0.02
0.03
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2280.91
Design Q
60.00
578.03
579.38
578.86
579.4100
0.00
1.47
40.78
57.23
0.16
0.11
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2280.91
2 -Yr Q
171.00
578.03
581.29
581.3000
0.00
0.95
185.51
84.02
0.03
0.03
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2280.91
10 -Yr Q
430.00
578.03
587.09
587.0900
0.00
0.67
798.73
132.59
0.00
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2280.91
50 -Yr Q
713.00
578.03
587.88
587.8900
0.00
1.00
907.98
142.78
0.01
0.02
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2280.91
100 -Yr Q
836.00
578.03
588.09
588.1100
0.00
1.14
938.66
145.51
0.02
0.03
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2168.87
Design Q
60.00
577.80
578.53
578.51
578.7300
0.03
3.61
16.61
37.98
2.81
0.78
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2168.87
2 -Yr Q
171.00
577.80
581.28
581.2800
0.00
0.63
274.27
120.51
0.01
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2168.87
10 -Yr Q
430.00
577.80
587.09
587.0900
0.00
0.44
1148.76
197.32
0.00
0
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2168.87
50 -Yr Q
713.00
577.80
587.88
587.8900
0.00
0.66
1312.62
214.51
0.00
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
2168.87
100 -Yr Q
836.00
577.80
588.10
588.1000
0.00
0.75
1358.92
218.59
0.01
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1992.96
Design Q
60.00
576.72
578.54
578.5400
0.00
0.58
103.81
90.81
0.01
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1992.96
2 -Yr Q
171.00
576.72
581.27
581.2700
0.00
0.38
451.82
143.97
0.00
0
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1992.96
10 -Yr Q
430.00
576.72
587.09
587.0900
0.00
0.32
1434.30
202.20
0.00
0
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1992.96
50 -Yr Q
713.00
576.72
587.88
587.8900
0.00
0.48
1599.68
214.09
0.00
0
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1992.96
100 -Yr Q
836.00
576.72
588.10
588.1000
0.00
0.55
1645.84
217.54
0.00
0.01
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1940.74
Design Q
60.00
575.35
578.49
576.54
578.5200
0.00
1.41
42.65
26.80
0.09
0.07
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1940.74
2 -Yr Q
171
575.35
581.2
577.43
581.26
0.000314
1.88
101.29
93.77
0.13
0.09
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1940.74
10 -Yr Q
430
575.35
587.07
578.72
587.08
0.000042
1.13
991.39
174.42
0.01
0.03

Poplin Ridge Site UT2 (HEC -RAS Output)
River
Reach
River Sta
Profile
Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S.
E.G. Elev
E.G. Slope
Vel Chnl Flow Area
Top Width
Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(Ib /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1940.74
50 -Yr Q
713
575.35
587.86
579.87
587.88
0.000083
1.68
1131.83
187.36
0.02
0.06
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1940.74
100 -Yr Q
836
575.35
588.06
580.29
588.09
0.000105
1.91
1171.04
191.78
0.03
0.07
UT2
-R2
UT -2
1914
Culvert
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1887.97
Design Q
60
575.01
577.95
576.2
577.98
0.000634
1.54
39.76
20.11
0.11
0.08
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1887.97
2 -Yr Q
171
575.01
579.29
577.09
579.4
0.001062
2.71
69.24
23.88
0.43
0.22
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1887.97
10 -Yr Q
430
575.01
580.78
578.4
581.11
0.002017
4.71
109.02
57.55
1.75
0.6
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1887.97
50 -Yr Q
713
575.01
581.74
579.47
582.35
0.003017
6.46
135.82
69.9
4.33
1.06
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1887.97
100 -Yr Q
836
575.01
582.05
579.69
582.8
0.00347
7.17
144.62
72.99
5.84
1.28
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1785.35
Design Q
65
575.46
577.76
577.85
0.004286
2.41
26.93
15.64
1.03
0.43
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1785.35
2 -Yr Q
181
575.46
579.06
579.22
0.004285
3.37
75.34
62.56
0.75
0.7
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1785.35
10 -Yr Q
454
575.46
580.62
580.81
0.003624
4.14
207.88
105.35
0.96
0.92
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1785.35
50 -Yr Q
751
575.46
581.65
581.87
0.003583
4.74
331.13
133.47
1.24
1.12
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1785.35
100 -Yr Q
881
575.46
582.01
582.23
0.003558
4.92
380.37
140.01
1.38
1.19
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1661.22
Design Q
65
574.93
577.22
577.31
0.004324
2.42
26.85
15.63
1.04
0.43
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1661.22
2 -Yr Q
181
574.93
578.52
578.68
0.004319
3.38
75.01
62.39
0.76
0.71
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1661.22
10 -Yr Q
454
574.93
580.21
580.38
0.003174
3.95
221.11
108.59
0.81
0.83
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1661.22
50 -Yr Q
751
574.93
581.25
581.44
0.00319
4.54
348
135.75
1.09
1.02
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1661.22
100 -Yr Q
881
574.93
581.61
581.81
0.00319
4.73
398.2
142.31
1.22
1.09
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1552.8
Design Q
65
574.46
576.76
576.85
0.004288
2.41
26.93
15.64
1.03
0.43
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1552.8
2 -Yr Q
181
574.46
578.06
578.22
0.004284
3.37
75.35
62.56
0.75
0.7
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1552.8
10 -Yr Q
454
574.46
579.92
580.06
0.002653
3.7
240.29
113.42
0.65
0.72
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1552.8
50 -Yr Q
751
574.46
580.94
581.11
0.002746
4.29
370.84
138.77
0.91
0.9
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1552.8
100 -Yr Q
881
574.46
581.3
581.48
0.00278
4.5
421.71
145.28
1.04
0.97
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1408.17
Design Q
65
573.84
576.15
576.24
0.004227
2.4
27.06
15.67
1.01
0.42
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1408.17
2 -Yr Q
181
573.84
577.44
577.6
0.004251
3.36
75.68
62.73
0.74
0.7
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1408.17
10 -Yr Q
454
573.84
579.62
579.73
0.001935
3.3
277.81
122.32
0.44
0.56
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1408.17
50 -Yr Q
751
573.84
580.62
580.76
0.002128
3.91
412.66
144.14
0.68
0.74
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1408.17
100 -Yr Q
881
573.84
580.97
581.11
0.002212
4.13
463.91
150.96
0.79
0.81
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1237.66
Design Q
65
573.11
575.44
575.53
0.004061
2.37
27.45
15.74
0.97
0.41
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1237.66
2 -Yr Q
181
573.11
576.73
576.89
0.004147
3.33
76.72
63.25
0.72
0.69
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1237.66
10 -Yr Q
454
573.11
579.38
579.46
0.001214
2.78
342.1
134.96
0.25
0.39
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1237.66
50 -Yr Q
751
573.11
580.35
580.44
0.001479
3.42
480.37
153.23
0.45
0.55
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1237.66
100 -Yr Q
881
573.11
580.68
580.79
0.001591
3.66
532
160.07
0.54
0.62
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1073.14
Design Q
65
572.4
574.84
574.91
0.003438
2.23
29.11
16.06
0.8
0.36
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1073.14
2 -Yr Q
181
572.4
576.1
576.24
0.003687
3.2
81.84
65.76
0.62
0.63
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1073.14
10 -Yr Q
454
572.4
579.25
579.3
0.000734
2.31
422.78
145.41
0.14
0.26
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1073.14
50 -Yr Q
751
572.4
580.17
580.24
0.001
2.96
564.8
164.17
0.28
0.4
UT2
-R3
UT -2
1073.14
100 -Yr Q
881
572.4
580.48
580.56
0.001108
3.21
616.96
170.34
0.35
0.47
UT2
-R4
UT -2
903.34
Design Q
74
571.67
574.21
574.3
0.003801
2.4
30.79
16.37
0.99
0.41
UT2
-R4
UT -2
903.34
2 -Yr Q
192
571.67
575.5
575.63
0.003451
3.18
90.5
70.21
0.57
0.61
UT2
-R4
UT -2
903.34
10 -Yr Q
478
571.67
579.16
579.19
0.000496
2.03
519.7
158.5
0.09
0.19
UT2
-R4
UT -2
903.34
50 -Yr Q
790
571.67
580.03
580.09
0.000736
2.68
666.25
175.6
0.2
0.32
UT2
-R4
UT -2
903.34
100 -Yr Q
926
571.67
580.33
580.39
0.000837
2.93
718.75
181.03
0.26
0.38
UT2
-R4
UT -2
684.02
Design Q
74
570.73
573.57
573.64
0.002407
2.06
37.41
38.36
0.28
0.29
UT2
-R4
UT -2
684.02
2 -Yr Q
192
570.73
574.98
575.07
0.001927
2.59
122.63
81.6
0.28
0.39
UT2
-R4
UT -2
684.02
10 -Yr Q
478
570.73
579.09
579.11
0.00027
1.63
665.37
175.5
0.05
0.12
UT2
-R4
UT -2
684.02
50 -Yr Q
790
570.73
579.93
579.96
0.000439
2.22
818.56
190.93
0.11
0.21

Poplin Ridge Site UT2 (HEC -RAS Output)
River
Reach River Sta
Profile
Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Power Total Shear Chan
(cfs)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft/ft)
(ft /s)
(sq ft)
(ft)
(Ib /ft s)
(Ib /sq ft)
UT2 -R4
UT -2
684.02
100 -Yr Q
926
570.73
580.2
580.24
0.000515
2.46
872.13
196.04
0.15
0.26
UT2 -R4
UT -2
525.85
Design Q
74
570.35
573.19
573.26
0.002406
2.06
37.42
38.37
0.28
0.29
UT2 -R4
UT -2
525.85
2 -Yr Q
192
570.35
574.7
574.78
0.00169
2.47
131.02
84.31
0.23
0.35
UT2 -R4
UT -2
525.85
10 -Yr Q
478
570.35
579.05
579.07
0.000217
1.5
726.9
181.86
0.04
0.1
UT2 -R4
UT -2
525.85
50 -Yr Q
790
570.35
579.87
579.9
0.000365
2.08
880.67
196.84
0.09
0.18
UT2 -R4
UT -2
525.85
100 -Yr Q
926
570.35
580.13
580.17
0.000433
2.31
933.68
201.75
0.12
0.22
UT2 -R4
UT -2
295.58
Design Q
74
569.8
572.63
572.7
0.00244
2.07
37.1
37.9
0.29
0.29
UT2 -R4
UT -2
295.58
2 -Yr Q
192
569.8
574.38
574.44
0.001273
2.23
150.69
90.25
0.17
0.28
UT2 -R4
UT -2
295.58
10 -Yr Q
478
569.8
579.01
579.03
0.000159
1.34
822.09
191.27
0.02
0.08
UT2 -R4
UT -2
295.58
50 -Yr Q
790
569.8
579.8
579.82
0.000281
1.89
977.44
205.71
0.07
0.15
UT2 -R4
UT -2
295.58
100 -Yr Q
926
569.8
580.05
580.08
0.000338
2.11
1029.93
210.37
0.09
0.18
UT2 -R4
UT -2
243.73
Design Q
74
569.68
572.5
570.99
572.57
0.00248
2.08
36.07
37.42
0.42
0.3
UT2 -R4
UT -2
243.73
2 -Yr Q
192
569.68
574.26
571.92
574.36
0.001747
2.62
91.19
90.34
0.62
0.39
UT2 -R4
UT -2
243.73
10 -Yr Q
478
569.68
579.01
573.43
579.02
0.000149
1.31
843.73
193.35
0.02
0.07
UT2 -R4
UT -2
243.73
50 -Yr Q
790
569.68
579.78
574.36
579.81
0.000265
1.85
999.49
207.68
0.06
0.14
UT2 -R4
UT -2
243.73
100 -Yr Q
926
569.68
580.03
574.72
580.06
0.00032
2.07
1051.89
212.29
0.09
0.18
UT2 -R4
UT -2
215.8
Culvert
UT2 -R4
UT -2
187.8
Design Q
74
569.55
572.07
570.86
572.16
0.00391
2.43
30.49
16.31
1.02
0.42
UT2 -R4
UT -2
187.8
2 -Yr Q
192
569.55
573.3
571.79
573.48
0.004374
3.53
64.69
67.34
1.55
0.76
UT2 -R4
UT -2
187.8
10 -Yr Q
478
569.55
574.65
573.3
575.08
0.006726
5.59
107.79
103.72
5.95
1.68
UT2 -R4
UT -2
187.8
50 -Yr Q
790
569.55
575.51
574.21
576.25
0.009365
7.44
135.48
127.57
13.68
2.81
UT2 -R4
UT -2
187.8
100 -Yr Q
926
569.55
575.8
574.59
576.69
0.010603
8.2
144.47
134.43
18.16
3.35
UT2 -R4
UT -2
88.95
Design Q
74
569.31
571.56
570.61
571.68
0.006008
2.82
26.2
15.5
1.66
0.59
UT2 -R4
UT -2
88.95
2 -Yr Q
192
569.31
572.76
571.54
572.98
0.006007
3.85
66.62
57.96
1.2
0.94
UT2 -R4
UT -2
88.95
10 -Yr Q
478
569.31
574.11
573.13
574.41
0.006001
5.04
171.96
96.07
1.83
1.4
UT2 -R4
UT -2
88.95
50 -Yr Q
790
569.31
575.06
573.92
575.4
0.006001
5.79
274.77
121.62
2.39
1.73
UT2 -R4
UT -2
88.95
100 -Yr Q
926
569.31
575.4
574.19
575.75
0.006005
6.05
317.19
130.93
2.61
1.84

14.6 Appendix D — Poplin Ridge Design Plan Sheets (11 "x17 ")
Poplin Ridge Final Mitigation Plan 179 March 2014

0
Poplin Ridge Stream
Mitigation Site
VICINITY MAP
NTS
POPLIN RIDGE STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
NCEEP PROJECT # 95359
FEBRUARY 2014
LOCATION: UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL BANC & EXCHANGE, LLC
909 CAPABILITY DRIVE, SUITE 3100
RALEIGH, NC 27606
EEx
.i
i
NOW OR FORMERLY
CHERYL L OWNBY
PID 083030150 /
D.B. 1646, PG 247 \ \ \\\ NOW OR FORMERLY , NOW OR FORMERLY l
HEIRS OF THOMAS E GRIFFIN , i I
TERRY L. PRICE
NOW OR FORMERLY - - \�\ PID 083030156
FOREST HILLS BAPTIST CHURCH \\\
PID OBJOa015B \
NOW OR FORMERLY
' E?t BILLY F. AYCOTH, TRb
ib PID OBM3014
D.B. 5304, PC &60
NOW OR FORMERLY
/ RONALD COLIN HOUGH
(\ AND MME
PEGGY C. HOUGH
PID 08303012C \
D.B. 333 PG 741
V � 11r
\ 1 NOW OR FORMERLY
' FRANK PHUNG
AND WIFE
/ I SKWA PHUNG
J PID 08303014C
D.B. 4187, PC 241
\ 1 I
\ / I
I
v
SHEET LIST TABLE
Sheet
Number
SheetTitle
1
COVER
2
EXISTING CONDITIONS UT1
3
EXISTING CONDITIONS UT2
4
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -1
5
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -1
6
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -2
7
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -2
8
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -2
9
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -3
10
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -3
11
PLAN AND PROFILE UT14
12
PLAN AND PROFILE UT14
13
PLAN AND PROFILE UT14
14
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -A
15
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -B
16
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -B
17
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -C
18
PLAN AND PROFILE UT1 -C
19
PLAN AND PROFILE UT2 -1
20
PLAN AND PROFILE UT2 -2
21
PLAN AND PROFILE UT2 -2
22
PLAN AND PROFILE UT2 -3
23
PLAN AND PROFILE UT24
24
PLAN AND PROFILE UT2 -A
25
PLANTING PLAN UT1
26
PLANTING PLAN UT2
27
MONITORING LOCATIONS
28
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - UT1
29
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN - UT2
30
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES
31
DETAIL 1
32
DETAIL 2
33
DETAIL 3
34
DETAIL 4
35
DETAIL 5
AND NFE NOW OR FORMERLY
I I JUDITH K. PRICE /JAMEY B. PRICE/
PID 08270017 PID 0627J0040
D.B. 684, PG 588 / D.B. 1581, PC 130'
TEE ' - --
NOW OR FORMERLY �+
DON SCOTT SI07
� PID 08277007 � l
/ 0.8 4959, PG 42 /
NOW OR FORMERLY /
z 'lam I DON SCOTT SIMPSON
A PID 08273007 /
D.B. 4959, PC 42 /
/
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
T l JUDY H. POPLIN
l ♦ PID 0627JO01 /
�♦ D.B. 2079, PG 625 \ NOW OR FORMERLY Y /
/ \\ KAREN S. HAMI LTON �a
l \ , PID 082730066
l , D.B. 4959, PC 38 NOW OR FORMERLY
TAMMY RENEE S.
BAUCOM /
PID 08273006B /
D.B. 4959, PG 48 /
/ NOW OR FORMERLY `\ \ NOW -FORMERLY
'CHARLES ATLAS BROADWA / L� MFE ELLAABROADWAY !,� \ CHARLES n D MFE BROADWAY PRELIMINARY
.0.PD NB7JO 66o > f ;� ELL D L7300 BROADWAY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NOW OR FORMERLY
DARRIN J FITCH DESIGN CONSULTANT
AND WIFE � J NOW OR FORMERLY / \
SUSAN D. FITCH FRANCES HELMS
PID 092570726' �'- PID 092530570
WK
B. 751, PG 860 /
O.
' D.B. 178, PG 746
- DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
720 CORPORATE CENTER DR
RALEIGH, NC 27607
(919) 782 -0495
HORIZ. L torn = 400ft. NC LICENSE NO. F -0374

\ BREAK
I Ir
/ REACH UT1-2 `\\
\ / NDW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
\ PID 08303074
\ D.R. 5304, PG 860
NOW DR FORMERLY
FRANK FLUNG
AND WIFE
1 SYLVIA PHUNG
1 PID 083030740
D.R. 087, 01 C
\ _ \
04
/ I
I /
/ \ I
\
/
\ 1
/ \ I
REACH UT1 -13
11 +41.35
I `
REACH
l NOW OR FORMERLY
/ THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
o.e. 2079, Pc 825
I
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
O.B 2079, PG 825
REACH UT1 -3
REACH
BREAK
IX
III Ir
'10 +13.78
'.EACH UTi –C
REACH UT1 -4-
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
D.B. 2079, PG 825
11
1 1
1 1
I I
1 1
1 1
I I \ \
II ��
II
I i I
I
I I \ \
I I I \
I I II
I
I I \ \
I \
I I I \
II ��
I I
I 1 l
\ \ m 1 1
I
I
u In
I
I
\F.,
NOW OR FORMERLY
"A Y� THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND MEE
'I "Illnl, �� r'
li li \o� 1 JUDY H. POPLIN 1 1
PID 0827300 1
0.8. 2079, PG 825 1
nl'i II,II r, 1:
IIn„i�r T,
11 Ililllll \\
i
�ii illl ii it i��li Ir I � �I\
II I
I
EXISTING FEMA
FLOOD ZONE i
48 +27.98 \ \ \
1 `
I
/ NOW OR FORMERLY
\ DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WEE
SUSAN D. FITCH
/ PID 751, 0925JO72A 86
D.B. 757, PG 860
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE — — — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — — —
- - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — —
- --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ------- - -re - --
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE — —
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
A
FULL SCALE: V =200
0 200
2" =
FULLS
HALF SCAL
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
G.G. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
2
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
O
a a
Z
O
U
z
0
v
0 0
a LL
tUil ~
O
o Z
O �
a
p Z � Z
¢a j W
� W W M
w �
M z
m
Z
O Q
�z
O LLI
� Z � LU 0
" >� Z
Z Z J 0
Q Q � F
��Q Z
oao O
Q �-% W � H
= Z
v~i Oz � o
X �
� LLI � � 11J 2
z 0 Z � N
Oda Z ¢�ui
w Z� � Z¢ z m
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_
NOW OR FORMERLY C
NOW OR FORMERLY \
\ N
NOW OR FORMERLY
/ FOREST HILLS BAPTIST P
PID 08303015C \
\
HEIRS OF THOMAS E GRIFFIN
PID 083030158
— — P
— \
NOW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
PID 08303014
0' N
NOW OR FORMERLY D
D.B. 5304, PG 860
BILLY E AYCOTH, TRUSTEE +p'
PID 08303014 �I�� W
\ D.B. 5304, PG 860 �\y
REACH UT1 –A >
>
_
NOW OR FORMERLY 2
2 +82.32
AND WIFE
PEG
GY C. HOUGH
PID 083030120
D.B. 333, PG 741
/ \
\
REACH UT1 -1
\ R
REACH
/ \
\ / NDW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
\ PID 08303074
\ D.R. 5304, PG 860
NOW DR FORMERLY
FRANK FLUNG
AND WIFE
1 SYLVIA PHUNG
1 PID 083030740
D.R. 087, 01 C
\ _ \
04
/ I
I /
/ \ I
\
/
\ 1
/ \ I
REACH UT1 -13
11 +41.35
I `
REACH
l NOW OR FORMERLY
/ THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
o.e. 2079, Pc 825
I
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
O.B 2079, PG 825
REACH UT1 -3
REACH
BREAK
IX
III Ir
'10 +13.78
'.EACH UTi –C
REACH UT1 -4-
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
D.B. 2079, PG 825
11
1 1
1 1
I I
1 1
1 1
I I \ \
II ��
II
I i I
I
I I \ \
I I I \
I I II
I
I I \ \
I \
I I I \
II ��
I I
I 1 l
\ \ m 1 1
I
I
u In
I
I
\F.,
NOW OR FORMERLY
"A Y� THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND MEE
'I "Illnl, �� r'
li li \o� 1 JUDY H. POPLIN 1 1
PID 0827300 1
0.8. 2079, PG 825 1
nl'i II,II r, 1:
IIn„i�r T,
11 Ililllll \\
i
�ii illl ii it i��li Ir I � �I\
II I
I
EXISTING FEMA
FLOOD ZONE i
48 +27.98 \ \ \
1 `
I
/ NOW OR FORMERLY
\ DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WEE
SUSAN D. FITCH
/ PID 751, 0925JO72A 86
D.B. 757, PG 860
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE — — — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — — —
- - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — —
- --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ------- - -re - --
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE — —
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
A
FULL SCALE: V =200
0 200
2" =
FULLS
HALF SCAL
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
G.G. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
2
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
O
a a
Z
O
U
z
0
v
0 0
a LL
tUil ~
O
o Z
O �
a
p Z � Z
¢a j W
� W W M
w �
M z
m
Z
O Q
�z
O LLI
� Z � LU 0
" >� Z
Z Z J 0
Q Q � F
��Q Z
oao O
Q �-% W � H
= Z
v~i Oz � o
X �
� LLI � � 11J 2
z 0 Z � N
Oda Z ¢�ui
w Z� � Z¢ z m
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_
w �
M z
m
Z
O Q
�z
O LLI
� Z � LU 0
" >� Z
Z Z J 0
Q Q � F
��Q Z
oao O
Q �-% W � H
= Z
v~i Oz � o
X �
� LLI � � 11J 2
z 0 Z � N
Oda Z ¢�ui
w Z� � Z¢ z m
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_

I
I NOW OR FORMERLY
I
; I
I
I
TERRY L. PRICE
\
PID 08273006A
D.B. 4959, PG 38
AND W FE
REACH
Oa �
JUDITH K PRICE
PID 08270013
FEMA FLOW
LINE
UNOWN RIGHT OF F - WAY
KN
\
D.B. 684, PG 588
NOW OR FORMERLY I
�
1
JAMEY B. PRICE
Pro 082730040 I
I I
I
O.B. 1581, PG 130
I I
r I.
t NOW OR FORMERLY
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
PID 08273007
\ D.B 4959, PG 42
\ REACH UT2-A
\
t\
NOW OR FORMERLY \
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
/
AND WIFE J
ELLA BROADWAY ,
PID IV827JO08
� D.B. 274, PG 660
UNKNOWN RIGHT OF WAY / I
CLAIMED BY UNION
� E
' POWER CDDPERATII/E
K
1,
I llry)// r, /
Y'
d lH
IV" I �,
+r:
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS III
PID 092530670
OR, 178, PG 345 %
30 +09.10 Ir
I
i
FEMA FLOW
ZONE LINE
I
lllilu II/ `
% REACH UT2 -1
/i /i�lNII /I :• iii // /
I
EXISTING
. / _: /
ii ii/i /r WETLAND
\� /l� r'r�ii
/ 1 i/ / REACH
BREAK /
REACH UT2 -2 /
I I
��•E� >d� � — ' i ill ° Jilin`
r II I� NOW OR FORMERLY
Ill Ir" DON SCOTT SIMPSON l
REACH l Il�t�tt I III r l I
BREAK I III 1p ill I ti PID 08273007 /
/ r
I i /// I D.B. 4959 PG 42
VIII iI
4��I
1H�IILn ri dd -
ry/ ROR
EXISTING
%� I V IllllTl' WETLAND
REACH '!ir /'i i lilill�ll��rl�rl //
BREAK �� iii �'r i r��l�ii %Ill�lrli'l,
),/ill I 1p� I iil��lj l�l
iM1 II i \V lil�lrj
ill I I tl %illli llll
/l�li�l /
lI NOW OR FORMERLY /
(no", TAMMY RENEE S. BAUCOM
PID 082730063 / ✓��/ UIL 4959, PG 48
REACH UT2 -3 /
l,
lrl
\ NOW OR FORMERLY
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
\ AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PID L8273008
-REACH UT2 -4 \ //
U
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE — — — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re--- - -re - --
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE — —
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE: V =200
0 200
2" =FULLS CALE
HALF SCALE
NOW OR FORMERLY
\
KAREN S. HAMILTON
\
PID 08273006A
D.B. 4959, PG 38
\
REACH
Oa �
B REAK
\
\
FEMA FLOW
LINE
UNOWN RIGHT OF F - WAY
KN
\
CLAIMED BY UNION
POWER CODPERARK
t\
NOW OR FORMERLY \
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
/
AND WIFE J
ELLA BROADWAY ,
PID IV827JO08
� D.B. 274, PG 660
UNKNOWN RIGHT OF WAY / I
CLAIMED BY UNION
� E
' POWER CDDPERATII/E
K
1,
I llry)// r, /
Y'
d lH
IV" I �,
+r:
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS III
PID 092530670
OR, 178, PG 345 %
30 +09.10 Ir
I
i
FEMA FLOW
ZONE LINE
I
lllilu II/ `
% REACH UT2 -1
/i /i�lNII /I :• iii // /
I
EXISTING
. / _: /
ii ii/i /r WETLAND
\� /l� r'r�ii
/ 1 i/ / REACH
BREAK /
REACH UT2 -2 /
I I
��•E� >d� � — ' i ill ° Jilin`
r II I� NOW OR FORMERLY
Ill Ir" DON SCOTT SIMPSON l
REACH l Il�t�tt I III r l I
BREAK I III 1p ill I ti PID 08273007 /
/ r
I i /// I D.B. 4959 PG 42
VIII iI
4��I
1H�IILn ri dd -
ry/ ROR
EXISTING
%� I V IllllTl' WETLAND
REACH '!ir /'i i lilill�ll��rl�rl //
BREAK �� iii �'r i r��l�ii %Ill�lrli'l,
),/ill I 1p� I iil��lj l�l
iM1 II i \V lil�lrj
ill I I tl %illli llll
/l�li�l /
lI NOW OR FORMERLY /
(no", TAMMY RENEE S. BAUCOM
PID 082730063 / ✓��/ UIL 4959, PG 48
REACH UT2 -3 /
l,
lrl
\ NOW OR FORMERLY
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
\ AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PID L8273008
-REACH UT2 -4 \ //
U
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE — — — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re--- - -re - --
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE — —
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE: V =200
0 200
2" =FULLS CALE
HALF SCALE
° r°Y z a o p ¢a � � � X i
O U U � LL ~ � J � a n Z O O O
O Z Z W
v
ui
Q v
a
Oa �
Q
�
v
a
Q
�
F
�
O �
Wa

/
BEGIN REACH
NOTES:
NDW OR FORMERLY 1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
BILLY F. OR FORMERLY
TRUSTEE FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
PID COTH,14 2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
D.B. 5304, PC 860 301 DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
/30, 301 -3011 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
/ 30l RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
3j7 4. MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
STABILIZED BY THE ENO OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR T(
3'J1 RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
SEGMENTS.
/30, 30 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
7 OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
X30 TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
3 CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
301— ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
/ ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
t.. \ `�60s _ - Uj GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
S+�, W 35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
I1�I� ;� \ T 7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
1' 0 '6_06) / �t \ \ 608- - _ - _ - - - _ 1 FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
////�� PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
�1 608_ i 'lam U) ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
607 J/ \ \� DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
g +QQ - - 607 - - - B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
- _ EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
.606 -- - - - - -- W SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ICI --,V2 \�q ��.�.��$l= - 606 - - - -' ENGINEER.
A) ice °� =_ .617,7- ,gyp ,60_4 \� -- ` 9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
`_
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
_ \s� - 605 - �Y ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
06 . 6
LEGEND
/ REACH UTI -I / EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$0 - - --
END PRESERVATION, /
REACH UTI -1 ILCE —LIE BEGIN ENHANCEMENT I // EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
nF BEGIN 1- —LCE — (STA 6 +92) / PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
NOW OF F0.4MERLY /L0 / LCE Q PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
RONALD COLIN HOUGH NOW OR FORMERLY —LCE
AND WIFE C 2980
BILLY F. AYCOIH, TRUSTEE L PROPOSED SPOT SHOT • 1.64
PEGGY C. HOUGH OE PID 06303014 —LCE BERM
DPa 333, PG1741 D.a 5304, PG 860 —LCE EXISTING (BOTTOM OF BANK -� -�
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE — - - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - - - - - - - -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL 0020OLCCID
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
WD CKSON
munity infrastructure consultants
T an sportation +Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.c.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
4
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
o
O
a �
O
F
U
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z w
F
U
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�z
Z
� Z �
W
U)
>
w
W J
W
w �
J
� �
� a
F
U
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�z
� Z �
W
¢ Q UJ
LD
J
F Z
W � Z
O
D_
�MU
¢ U w
z
� O
Q
p
.. F Z
w (�
J
w d
U
�
� W �
H
2
z � Z
Una
0
z_
N
wZ 7
�
��..
Z¢zm
aaC=),
o
O¢a�
O
IL

NOW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
PID 08303014
D.B. 5304, PG 860
CO
Uj
30
W W
W 30"1
301—
= 30l 301 301— 3C1� 301 / / ` ^
�/� - - -- 9- / / / v/
W 608 W
/ 1
W
6 9.00
W _ _ _
Z e - — — — _ _p0 LJ
- 605 - i°"- T
607- _ 1
Vii== -
B1 / H
REACH UTI -1
EN_HANC€MENT_I
/ REACH UTI -i
END PRESERVATION,
/ BEGIN ENHANCEMENT 1 —LCE
/ (STA 6 +92)
LCE
LCE —LCE -
-LCE
NOW OR FORMERLY
BILLY E AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
PID 08303014
D.B. 5304, PG 860 ,
610
608
606
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
591
6 +80 7 +00
8 +00
EACH UTI -1 -
EN ANCEMENTI
XISTING GRA E
9 +00
10 +00
6 +80 7 +00 8 +00 9 +00 10 +00
610
608
606
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
591
REACH UT1 -1 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK LEFT
BANK FROM STATION 6 +90 TO
APPROXIMATELY 8 +75.
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
5.
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK —
-------- ie - --
EXIST] NG BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
�z
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM -
— — — — — — -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
0
¢ U w
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Q
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
.. F Z
w U)
PROPOSED FILL AREA
U
�
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
z 0 Z
Una
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
aa�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
O¢a�
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
c
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCID
WD CKSON
munity infrastructure consultants
T an sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
v 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
5
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
O
~
U-
0
o Z
O �
a
p z w
F
U
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�z
Z
� Z �
W
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
�
a
F
U
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�z
� Z �
W
¢ Q W
J
�z�
W � Z
O
MU
d
0
¢ U w
z
� O
Q
p
.. F Z
w U)
J
w d
U
�
� W �
H
2
z 0 Z
Una
�
z_
N
wZ 7
�
��..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

07H, IK
BIL{ -1'-E AYCOTH, 7RUSEE
AD WiVO14
F ) R/E �N REACH UTi -A ��\ 4 \ _ ` - ^ D.B. 5304, PG`SfiQ \ 11.80 NOTES:
TO UT7-1. SEE g _ 1. FIR GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
/ ) l SHEET 14. 2 /�� - 598 - n 3J'%_ 2 00 3.90 �I FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
TOP OF BANK/ 2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
` \ - - - - -I BANKFULL STAGE DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
\ \ DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
���,°` �' =�1 �� �J� 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
REACH UT1 -2 SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
11 Pi RESTORA77ON �` RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
Y! ' // // �� 0.45 4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
^^
/ STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR T(
I \ 597 - �� - - _ RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
W ]1
REACH UT1 -1 / \ = Bl r0 SEGMENTS.
i �\ S \ _ 4- 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
6p'� ENHANCEMEj'f'f I �Y ` END REACH UTi -1 \ �� OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
ENHANCEMENT I; \ - - - -- TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
W / p 11 j/ BEGIN UT7 -2 �� - - - TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
-� / 6 Pi RESTORATLON. �' SECTION SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
2 �G !% _ STA 12 +58 - \ PROPOSED 40 LF CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
A / 59� /� ( T - -- 12.80
��//�� _ OF 48° HOPE S 6. THE PROPOSED CROSSM SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
VJ / !�_ / - - - - - -\ \�_5EE DETAIL , EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF SH:1 V. FOR
/ / \ SHEEi3Z \ •yam/• �� 4.50 3.80 4.50 ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
W / /�' / / / / - _ _ (�� \ �\3� ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
/ i` .�S /� / va \\ �i �\ \• TOP OF BANK/ GRADE, A BANKROLL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
W v - iC\ - - - - - - _�_ - - BANKFULL STAGE SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
/ E4 W 35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
W \ \\ \\ \'S \\ �� \�\ //� 240 PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
y J ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
/ �,.� ' / \ \ •� DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
' \ W EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
/- / \ \ \\ W SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
_ 00' -- - - - - -- _ - -- / \ \ ENGINEER.
i' �,GE \\\ s \ \ '� %C� [L 9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
U - - -- = ' _ _ _ 9e ss CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
/ '/ \\ \ �6 �C�e. '� ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
_ W TYPICAL POOL CROSS
sal — _— — — - --
/'i SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
12 80
'so3 \ \\ ' <Ci \ 59d - -�
= 9OF 1. o LEGEND
sax \ 99_ \� TOP OF BANK/ EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$0 - - --
\ BANKFULL STAGE
\'60•� s `/ - - - EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
O��.� LL
AGE NOW OR FORMILY 6p , -"C \ ` r PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
/ \ \� \ z� \ PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
BILLY F. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
s�3 \ � 2.50 2®
P/D 06303014 \ C PROPOSED SPOT SHOT • 1.64
D.B. 5304, PG 860 � � sox _ � � � � \ \ \ C
\6p5 � � � \ EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- BERM -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
\ \ \ \ \ PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
\ \ TI- CHANNEL
\ \\ \\ TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS EEIXSTNGFTREELINE WY1
\ SECTION
12.80 PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM
-- - - - - --
1.70 9.60 PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
9.00 LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
TOP OF BANK/ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
1.50 3.00— -- BANKFULL STAGE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
BANKFU LL STAG
TOP BANK/ (SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
E
2.50 LOG STRUCTURE
1.00 (SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
I LOG GRADE CONTROL
____z 0.30
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
IL IL EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION PROPOSED FILL AREA
FROM STA 11 +40 TO STA 11 +95 TYP. SECTIONS STA 13 +15 TO 24 +89
REACH U T1 — 2 PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
10 +00 11+00 12 +00 13 +00 14 +00 15 +00
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
606 606 SM LL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
604 604 LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
UT7 C1 UTi 2 EXISTING TREE
602 602
FLOODPLAIN SILL
PROPOSE TOP (SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
OF BANK
600 600 DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
EXISTI G GRADE (SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
PROP SED CHANNE
596 \ � BOTTCW CENTERLINE 596
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
596 — 596{S}�
ROCK CROSS VANE G
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
594 594
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
PROPOSE 40 LF (SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
592 592
ROCK GRADE CONTROL CIOODOLCCC)
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
590 590
588 588
587 587
10 +00
11+00
12 +00
13 +00
14 +00
15 +00
WD CKSON
cmunity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.D —: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
6
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
Z
O
CJ
7
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
a LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p Z w
F
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
�z
w
Z
N
� � CJ
Z
� � J
Z �
7
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
F
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
�z
w
Z
N
� � CJ
� � J
Z �
7
Q LLI LL!
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
M
d
� CJ
Q
¢ U w
z
2 F
Q
Q
�o
z
o
W U)
� W �
w d
�
2
� 0 Z
H
�
N
�Ma
z
Z 7
�
�w..w
Z Q z m
aa�
o
3:
n_ O
IL

TF
■-E
TF
9
SO7
wi
_---- - - - - -_ NOW OR FORMERLY /// / 30� // // / 11.80
-Bttt i-F. AYCOIFI, TRUSTEE 08 2,00 s3.90 o
303014 _
D.B. 5304, PO 860 30 59 / i TOP OF BANK/
HD
-- __ - - -- ��T = - -- i I_BANKFULL STAGE
X301 1_ �� 301= 331�301---� i 1.30
i— — — — — — /
--- - -__ —__ //
19,00 / /
REACH UT1 -2 / hc' /�/ / 2L
Pi RESTORA77ON / / / // / W TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
16% �s ®® �/ W SECTION
17y.0 h / /^ 1280
/ v, 4.50 3.80 4.50
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE }E
597__--- - - - - -- -591�
- - - - - -- 598 -- ---- _ - - - -- -- //' 6GO'� // �i TYPICAL POOL CROSS
-- __ - - -_ �cE /, .601 _ SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
\� - - - -_ —_ DE SWALE.
LICE ��LCE 6p2 i _ C
- - -- 601- _ - - - -\ �\\\ \ -- �E- �� -LCE �LCE L\ �LGSTA 1,; CI COIR /// / / G �O.ANKFULF 60 12.80 1.70
MATRNG/ / / / / / � // // / —__
- - -- 602 - - - -_ \\�_� - -- �' I I_�� / / / / y0r` / / // , OF BANK/
603 �� ������ - - - -\ �� // / / / / '0y/ STAGE - -- —
F, / T,
6warF Bay / / /
B1LLYI D TRUST E ,/ /"
o4, PCe6D/ / / /
F, TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
12.80
1.70 9.60
- -- TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
585
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
18 +00
19 +00
20 +00
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
18 +00
19 +00
20 +00
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
ST7
RE:
SE(
5. co
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKROLL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2.50
LOG STRUCTURE
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
a
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - —
— — — — — -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
EASEMENT
LICE
0
O =
M
REACH U T1 — 2
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
z
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Q
Q
�o
LEAF PACK
y
U-1 U)
� W �
w d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
604
N
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z¢zm
aa�
o
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
O
o_
602
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
OF BANK
EXISTING TREE
600
EXISTI
IG GRADE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
PR
BO
POSED CHANNEL
71111 CENTER
NE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
594
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
592
C
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
590
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
00ODOLCCU
588
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
18 +00
19 +00
20 +00
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
ST7
RE:
SE(
5. co
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKROLL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2.50
LOG STRUCTURE
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
a
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - —
— — — — — -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
EASEMENT
LICE
586
585
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
LOU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
QC: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
7
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
LOG TOE PROTECTION
1
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
O
a �
2.50
LOG STRUCTURE
Z
O
O Q
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
z
O
CJ
STRUCTURE
°
a
�
O
LL
Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
O
Z
� � CJ
o
a z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
0 > J
Z �
7
Lq
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
PROPOSED FILL AREA
J
LL
TYP. SECTIONS STA 13 +15 TO 24 +89
0
O =
M
REACH U T1 — 2
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
z
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Q
Q
�o
LEAF PACK
y
U-1 U)
� W �
w d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
604
N
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z¢zm
aa�
o
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
O
o_
602
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
600
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
594
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
592
C
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
590
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
00ODOLCCU
588
586
585
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
LOU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
QC: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
7
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
CJ
w
Qv
M z
O
a �
Z m
Z
O
O Q
CJ
F
z
O
CJ
�z
w
°
a
�
O
LL
Z
N
O
Z
� � CJ
o
a z
O �
� Z
0 > J
Z �
7
Lq
p
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
F
CJ
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
w
Z
N
� � CJ
0 > J
Z �
7
Lq
Q LLI LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
O =
M
C C
d
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
z
H
� F
Q
Q
�o
z
o
U-1 U)
� W �
w d
�
2
� � Z
H
�
N
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a0
O
o_

/ I III I
i
i
i I Ym 1,1.1
------- - - - - -- _596 - - -- - - -- �� IfVP
NOW OR FORMERLY'
BILLY F. AYCO774, TRUSTEE
PID 08303014
—L-a 5304, PC 860
301�301���T� 301—'�301T�3
/ Ifii 1I
------- - - - - -- 5e4 - - -- - - - - -- Fi DITCH/ / II 111
LU — — REACH UTi -2
W /
g3_ —P1 RE5TDRADO -'
Uj
Uj
') _
LCE
tC LCE — LCE °LCE LCE -
\� CE —LCE __ - -- \\�� -P
NOW OR FORM 1 -_-
- 'FRANK-PHUNG - ss9
_ AND INFE
- - - - - SYLWVPHUNG- -
_ - - - Pro-De3aiDL4c
�_ - - - -- 1)74187, PG 141— -
\ _ - - -- - -__ - -- -602 = - - -- —
\ — - -_ _— _- -603_—
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
55882
588 -
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
/
UTI -B. SEE
SHEET 16.
\ 00 \
I
I SyQ \
/ I \ \I 0)
W
-'s-00 \ \ 2
� � W
/W�
\\ VJ
\ \\ \ W
\ ' U
\ H
j�LCE LCE r (STA 24 +893 \\ 5Q
N
\ NOW OR FORME4LY�
\ THOMAS RAY POPLIN,
\ AND 61FE \ CF
\ JUDY H. POPLIN \ \
PID 08273001 \
D.B. 2079, PC 825 \
\
N REACH �TfrB�
ENHANCEMENT 116
REACH UT1 -2 P1 \
RESTORATION AT STA \
11 +46. SEE SHEET 16. \
24 +00
25 +00
EXISTING RADE L -2 UT7 3
PROI OSED TOP 59
OF BANK
PRO F OSED CHANN L
59
L , — — 59
5E
56
L v 58
58
558f
5i
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
24 +00
25 +00
11.80 NOTES:
2 00 3.90 �I 1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
TOP OF BANK/ 2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
_I BANKFULL STAGE DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
1.30 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
0.45 4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR TC
RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
IL SEGMENTS.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
TYPICAL_ SHALLOW CROSS OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
SECTION SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
12.80 CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED,
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
4.50 3.80 4.50 ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
TOP OF BANK/ GRADE, A BANKROLL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
BANKFULL STAGE SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
2.40 PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES ES
POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS VI S THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED ED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
CL 9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
TYPICAL_ POOL_ CROSS ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
12.80
9.60 1.70
T
LEGEND
OF OF BANK/ EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$O - - --
BANKFULL STAGE EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
2.50 PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- -ie - --
EXIST] NG BOTTOM OF BANK
IL PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
CHANNEL
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS EXISTING FENCELINE — X--- >F --K-
SECTION EXISTING TREELINE - rYlYY1 -
12. I PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
1.70 9.60
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
— TOP OF BANK/ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BANKFULL STAGE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
I (SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
2.50 LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
L 7 LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
IL EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION PROPOSED FILL AREA
TYP. SECTIONS STA 13 +15 TO 24 +89
REACH U T1 — 2 PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
s
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
I (SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE c
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL OOLCCID
` ( �
SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
■
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
8
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
Z
O
CJ
7
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
a LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z � Z
U) W J
> W
F
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
� Z
W
Z N
�
LU 0 CJ 7
� � J
Z �
Q LLI UJ J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
O = C C
0 � CJ CL
Q
Q W z H
a' O z O
wvJ w a x
� w O � x
� 0 Z � N
wxa z_ x�..
7
w � Z¢zm
aaC=),
o O¢a0
O
o_
58
ACH R
REA
�R1 A
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
24 +00
25 +00
11.80 NOTES:
2 00 3.90 �I 1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
TOP OF BANK/ 2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
_I BANKFULL STAGE DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
1.30 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
0.45 4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR TC
RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
IL SEGMENTS.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
TYPICAL_ SHALLOW CROSS OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
SECTION SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
12.80 CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED,
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
4.50 3.80 4.50 ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
TOP OF BANK/ GRADE, A BANKROLL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
BANKFULL STAGE SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
2.40 PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES ES
POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS VI S THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED ED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
CL 9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
TYPICAL_ POOL_ CROSS ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
12.80
9.60 1.70
T
LEGEND
OF OF BANK/ EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$O - - --
BANKFULL STAGE EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
2.50 PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- -ie - --
EXIST] NG BOTTOM OF BANK
IL PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
CHANNEL
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS EXISTING FENCELINE — X--- >F --K-
SECTION EXISTING TREELINE - rYlYY1 -
12. I PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
1.70 9.60
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
— TOP OF BANK/ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BANKFULL STAGE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
I (SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
2.50 LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
L 7 LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
IL EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION PROPOSED FILL AREA
TYP. SECTIONS STA 13 +15 TO 24 +89
REACH U T1 — 2 PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
s
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
I (SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE c
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL OOLCCID
` ( �
SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
■
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
8
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
Z
O
CJ
7
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
a LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z � Z
U) W J
> W
F
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
� Z
W
Z N
�
LU 0 CJ 7
� � J
Z �
Q LLI UJ J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
O = C C
0 � CJ CL
Q
Q W z H
a' O z O
wvJ w a x
� w O � x
� 0 Z � N
wxa z_ x�..
7
w � Z¢zm
aaC=),
o O¢a0
O
o_
F
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
� Z
W
Z N
�
LU 0 CJ 7
� � J
Z �
Q LLI UJ J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
O = C C
0 � CJ CL
Q
Q W z H
a' O z O
wvJ w a x
� w O � x
� 0 Z � N
wxa z_ x�..
7
w � Z¢zm
aaC=),
o O¢a0
O
o_

596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
577
25 +00 26 +00 27 +00 28 +00 29 +00 30 +00
EXIS7IN GRADE
/—PROPOSED TOP
OF B _INK
FPR SED CHANNEL
BOTT M
CENTERLINE
I'll"
PRO OSED 40 LF
OF TWN 42" HOP
25 +00 26 +00 27 +00 28 +00 29 +00 30 +00
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
577
13.60
30 4.50
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
1.55 -- - - --
IL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
14.80
5.20 4.40 5.20
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
7 .80
0
q-
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
14.80
11.00 zoo
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
q-
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
q-
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
TYP. SECTIONS STA 24 +89 TO 34 +50
REACH UT1 -3
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
D
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
STP
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
— —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$0 - - --
NOW OR FORMERLY
- - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
_ — — -
_ —
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
BERM
— — - - - -
-_ — —
AND LgFE--- - - - -_—
_ — JUDY H. POPLIN ' — _ — ,
� � -595
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
0
—
— - -- _ 5
— �-- --------- - --`\\
� �� 30l
- -_
PID 08273001—
D.B. 2079, PG B25
� �
5y a
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _
— — — — — — _
.
— 301
J
LL
— — — — —__
--
\�\\
\\
--
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
J
-301
- --�—
---
_.—_ -- - - --
-� -ss3 —�
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
- - - --
PROPOSED 40 LF ,-591
\��� - 301 -301
-----
-- 592 - - -�\
O
M
w d
OF TWIN 42`
HOPE - SEC -33. -- -
- - - - --
-
_ ---- - - -�_-
-- -3-
- -��
- -- 591 - - - --
r
Lw
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
DETAIL SHEET 33. - -- -- --
-
30l
L
r
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
/�59�I
----- - - - -_-
\\
- 9
�3J'slo-- --
W��
—_�
EXISTING TREE
_
-
-- ------------- -------
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
- - - -' - 5189 - - --
11r1
W
ROCK STEP POOL
��O ®.00
'L% ® --� P/ RESTORATION - --
- - - - --
- --
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
���
/
- -
- - -- _-
588_
- -�
0020OLCCID
VJ
Sag
-------
- - -
—
VJ
W---
-- - - -- - -- —
_-- -- — ��------
- - - - --
7
W
ELL
_
- --
//)
v _ .
4--
+46—
W
W
Z
— — 589 — —
— _ _ _
- -
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
- --
_
__
Z
\
_
590-
r�\\\
m
--
U-
- - - - - _ _ _ _ - - -
- \
- - -
` \
\
- - - 589- - - - - - - _ _
QLCE-
�� -��_�
'- --
Q
- ssl - - -
- LCE
-.
- -- - -- - - - - -�
LCE ��
� - --
�� -- 590 —_ --
NOW OR FORMERLY
-LCE
- - - - - - -
- -
THOMAS RAY POPLIN \
—LCE
AND WFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
—LCE �, —LCE LCE
LCE —LeE
PID 08273001
D.B. 2079, PG 825
—
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
577
25 +00 26 +00 27 +00 28 +00 29 +00 30 +00
EXIS7IN GRADE
/—PROPOSED TOP
OF B _INK
FPR SED CHANNEL
BOTT M
CENTERLINE
I'll"
PRO OSED 40 LF
OF TWN 42" HOP
25 +00 26 +00 27 +00 28 +00 29 +00 30 +00
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
577
13.60
30 4.50
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
1.55 -- - - --
IL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
14.80
5.20 4.40 5.20
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
7 .80
0
q-
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
14.80
11.00 zoo
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
q-
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
q-
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
TYP. SECTIONS STA 24 +89 TO 34 +50
REACH UT1 -3
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
D
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
STP
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK —
-------- ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K —
EXISTING TREELINE
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _
— — — — — — _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
� CJ
Q
Q (-% W
LOG STRUCTURE
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
a' O
STRUCTURE
O
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
w d
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
z D Z
PROPOSED FILL AREA
N
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
wZ
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
o_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
C
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCID
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
9
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
CJ
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z w
F
CJ
M Z
Z m
O Q
Z
� W
Z
M
LU
� 0 CJ
Z
0 > J
Z �
7
N
>
W J
W
J
LL
W � Z
0
F
CJ
M Z
Z m
O Q
Z
� W
Z
M
LU
� 0 CJ
0 > J
Z �
7
Q LLI LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
M
d
� CJ
Q
Q (-% W
z
H
� F
Q
Q
a' O
z
O
W (D
� W �
w d
�
2
z D Z
H
�
N
U � d
Z
�
wZ
�
¢ ..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_

88 - - -- ------------ - - - - -- - __587-- - - - - -- ----------- - - - - -/
-� -- -- - -81 -- --
W -- _ - - - -- _ -- 586
Z.587 .--- -- - - -- ��_- _-= - -1= -32}00 - _ — -- — -_ -- i/; c= ffi=
_--- 91�= _ =BL= =-
-
_ - - - - - -PREACH 7-RESiORUTiAT3 10N-
/ END REACH UT1 -3 \` _ - - --
\ P7 RESTORATION
/ BEGIN REACH U7I -4; - -586 - --
ENHANCEMENTI LCE
LCE
(STA 34 +50)
—
Sol TIE IN U71-C ' - -- _587--- - - - -L(
NOW OR FORMERLY I I ENHANCEMENTI - - - - - 588 - - - '
THOMAS RAY POPLIN bF1� I 1 To UTi -3 el = '
AND WIFE III ` RESTORATON AT STA _ - -
- JUDY H. POPLIN II 9 +1, SEE SHEET,B: - - - 589
PID 08273001 /� ___ -�� _
- - - - - - - _ D.B. 2079, PG 825 II I I ENHANCEMENT J. �' -590' '
_ _588� \\ I� I SEES /4LET 18.1 �� - - - -� 5g1
LCE �L'eE +� LCE LCE a LCE LCE a � LCE �T LC III I ( I I _ - _ -' y92
- -589
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
13.60
30 4.507
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.40
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
14.80
r
5.20 4.40 5.20
W TOP OF BANK/
W - - - - - - __ - - --BAN FULL STAGE
2 7 f) 2.80
rrW^
VJ
W TYPICAL POOL CROSS
Z SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
J � 14.60
0o zoo
U TOP OF BANK/ - - - -
BANKFULL STAGE
CQ �0
C
30 +00 31+00 32 +00 33 +00 34 +00 35 +00
EXISTING GRADE REACH REACH
UT7 -3 UTI -4
PRO DSEO TOP
OF
BANK
PROPOSED CHANNEL
BO OM CENTER E
I
30 +00 31+00 32 +00 33 +00 34 +00 35 +00
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
0
q_
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
q_
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
TYP. SECTIONS STA 24 +89 TO 34 +50
REACH UT1 -3
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK - --------
ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE c
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL 0020OLCCID
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.c.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
10
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z � Z
N W J
> W
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
� Z
U-1
Z M
0 > J
Z �
¢ LLI LLI J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
o�() d
¢ U w z
2 F Q Q
�o z o
w 0) w d �
� W � H 2
z 0 Z � N
7
wZ � Z¢zm
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
i
- -
08277001 5
__ - -_� _
��� �� -
.597- -
-- - -
_�' �
�� �
`\593 \
----------- -
-- _
- -- -- �
���� �
�'�/ ��'� _ 5
//���� .
\�- _
_ _
- - -__- -
- -
- '�-�5g1 -
00) `
_ _ -
_� -
_- _ -
T— 3
r \
\----- --- -
- - -- ---5g4 -
_--- __-- -
- - - - -_ �'' •0'j��3�Li�589-- - - - - -
W----59j-- -
---- -
_ 593 - -
--- _
3'J l �
- � 588 - - --
\
\
-- 3�
c
557 - - - - -
- -- -
_ - -
-- -� _
-'- -
-- _
2 _
_ -
-30,-- 59r -
----- -
----- -
_ -
_ ----- 586 - - --
U) -
-_ -- -
_59p - - E
- -
-- /
// '
W 3
3J1� 33 ----- - - -
- - -- -
_------ -
- - - - -� �
i
35 +00
W �
��- 589 -_- _ _
- -
---- _
���� 3
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
13.60
30 4.507
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.40
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
14.80
r
5.20 4.40 5.20
W TOP OF BANK/
W - - - - - - __ - - --BAN FULL STAGE
2 7 f) 2.80
rrW^
VJ
W TYPICAL POOL CROSS
Z SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
J � 14.60
0o zoo
U TOP OF BANK/ - - - -
BANKFULL STAGE
CQ �0
C
30 +00 31+00 32 +00 33 +00 34 +00 35 +00
EXISTING GRADE REACH REACH
UT7 -3 UTI -4
PRO DSEO TOP
OF
BANK
PROPOSED CHANNEL
BO OM CENTER E
I
30 +00 31+00 32 +00 33 +00 34 +00 35 +00
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
0
q_
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
q_
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
TYP. SECTIONS STA 24 +89 TO 34 +50
REACH UT1 -3
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK - --------
ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE c
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL 0020OLCCID
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.c.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
10
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z � Z
N W J
> W
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
� Z
U-1
Z M
0 > J
Z �
¢ LLI LLI J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
o�() d
¢ U w z
2 F Q Q
�o z o
w 0) w d �
� W � H 2
z 0 Z � N
7
wZ � Z¢zm
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.c.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
10
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z � Z
N W J
> W
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
� Z
U-1
Z M
0 > J
Z �
¢ LLI LLI J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
o�() d
¢ U w z
2 F Q Q
�o z o
w 0) w d �
� W � H 2
z 0 Z � N
7
wZ � Z¢zm
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
� Z
U-1
Z M
0 > J
Z �
¢ LLI LLI J
F Z CD LL
W � Z 0
o�() d
¢ U w z
2 F Q Q
�o z o
w 0) w d �
� W � H 2
z 0 Z � N
7
wZ � Z¢zm
aa� o O¢a�
O
o_

590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
N
T1_
W
/�W
VJ
W
W
W
J
U
5Q
G
35 +00 36 +00 37 +00 38 +00 39 +00 40 +00
EXISTING RADE
35 +00 36 +00 37 +00 38 +00 39 +00 40 +00
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
REACH UT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
D
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
FLOOD ZONE LINE ­,�Ft00D ZONE X
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
FLOOD ZONE AE- -
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
NOW OR FgRMERLY
THOMAS RAY PDPLIN e`O
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --------
-1e - --
AN WIFE
DY H. POPLIN /
/ �Po�IYAY LIMIT OF FLOOD \
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�Z
CHANNEL
PIO i
D.B. 2079, PG 625
HAZARD STUDY
- - --K -
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - -
/
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
130-1
30 301
301 �(- 301
/ \
30 l 30l 30l
O =
oM()
C C
d
¢ U w
LU
W
� F
-
It 1D\
\\ /
� O
Z
--
/ - - - --
REACH UTI
, \\ SWALE \
J \ \\ \ SEE \
\\ AND STABIL
_
J d
-4
ENHANCEMENT I
/ n \ \\ \\ \ WITH COIR- \ \
MATTING.
- -- \�A
LU.58
5
_ - 38 +00__- _
- - - - -- 37 +00 ��
-_ /V' \�4\ \� - \
LU
' yg4
..
Z¢zm
aa�
O0 I
W
580=... -/'
- -- ------ - - - - -- - - -_- =rtB --
BL_____BL____ �1- --< - - - -- 1 A 582 -
-------- - - - - --
- - - ---
X11 I _
II Saa I--------
-'-- -583-
- - - - -- \/\ \TB ��
\\
F_
------------------
LIMIT OF FLOOD \
- ----- - -- - -
\
� _ - - - - - -585
- _- - - _ _ _ - - - - - � HAZARD STUDY
\ \
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
�'�e LCE:��LCE_ LfE��LE _
-- - -- ECG----------- /-se7_ ��'`z0�.
,E
118 -587 ,,
- -- 588 - - - --
'� , - -- - - -
- - - - -- - - -__
/
-_589 - - - - - -
_---
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-�
--
8 - - '
- - - ' -
-- __ - -- _590---- - -
- - - - - -
- - ---------- -- -- ---
- - - - - -
589 -' i -'
- 1HOMAS RAY POPLN- -
- _ - - - _591
- - - - - - 593_ - - - - --
- - - - - - _ _ - _ - LCE�
S
- --- -- -- - -- - -\ �, \ \
�
590
__
BNB -NifE
—JUDY H. POPLIN— --
- --- - - - - -- 594_--- - - -
-- - -- --595—
- - -
- -- ��
93 \
g1'
PID 08, PG B
D. &1079. PG 825
_----------- -S9Q
� \ SCE
i 592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
N
T1_
W
/�W
VJ
W
W
W
J
U
5Q
G
35 +00 36 +00 37 +00 38 +00 39 +00 40 +00
EXISTING RADE
35 +00 36 +00 37 +00 38 +00 39 +00 40 +00
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
REACH UT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
D
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --------
-1e - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
~
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K -
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - -
- - - - - -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
T
6
I
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
11
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
CJ
w
Qv
M z
O
a �
zm
O
O Q
F
CJ
0_
Z
z
O
CJ
� w
°
~
�
O
LL
�Z
v
O
Z
� � CJ
o
a z
O �
� Z
� > J
Z �
7
p
U)
>
W J
W
J
LL
W � Z
0
CJ
M z
zm
O Q
Z
� w
�Z
v
� � CJ
� > J
Z �
7
Q W LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
O =
oM()
C C
d
¢ U w
z
� F
Q
Q
� O
Z
oz
w UJ
W �
J d
�
2
¢
z 0 Z
H
�
N
v
z_
�
o_
wZ 7
�
..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

TF
;E
TF
WE
7
�i
NE X t
PAD ZO' /P /-585-��'
N
Li ZO
FL000 / FLOOD ZONE LINE / \
/ 5B4 _
/
J
ENHANCEMENT I Ii-� 42N
41tA0-
- - - -- -
582 - -- -- 1- - - --
. - - -_
_ -
_ - - - -_5 Z
vim T _ _ - -_ _- --- - - - - -- -583 - --
- -
-(TB ____ ---- - - - - -- 583 -
\`)-�
( --- - - - - -- / -- - s84 - --_ -- ------- - - - - -- -- .584. - -- LCE
— �------- -- -- - - - - — — — —
-- — — \ — - I�LCE -
. FLOaD70NE�� - -
/ - - -- - -� _ _ _ - - - - - - -_
_ _ - - - - - - - - - -
- - -- LCE _586--- -_
.s'
- ODD
_ - - - -� 'c -- LCE _ -
_ - -- 88
FLO�ZONE# - _ _ _ _ --- ------- - - - - -- - -5 _--- - - - -__
_ _ ----- - - - - -- 587 NOWORFORMERLY - --
6 -� FLOOD 70NE-X _ - - _ THOMAS RAY POPLIN _ = - - - - - - - - - - -
-LGE - - -- 588 -- - __ - -__ - 589 - - - - -- ----------------
s7 " - - - - OE - JUDY H. POPLIN _
- - - P1D 0827JO01 -590- - - _
38- --- - - - - -- 589__- __-- __ --0A.- 2078.- P0�25_------------ - -- - -_
FLOOD ZONE_LINE- - - - LG - _
89 - -- - - _591-- - - - - - --
yGE--- ----- --- _-
--- -- __- 590.____------ - - - - -- - -_ __. ___
_ - -- - 591------- ---- - - - - -- 59
591 - - - - -- - - - - - - -__
I /
30
- 3030-1 \ \
REGRADE,,S
m /
SW EED,
M IUL LI AND
STABILIZE ZE WITH
CO}R MATTING.
58
'WO\ � $
a_ —_
_ f�'�
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
40 +00
41 +00
42 +00
43 +00
44 +00
M
r
W
//W
vJ
W
W
W
Z
U
CQ
C
45 +00
40 +00
41 +00
42 +00
43 +00
44 +00
45 +00
REACH UT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LEAF PACK
y
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
¢ U w
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
2 F
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Q
5$6
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
o
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
584
EXISTING
RAGE
z 0 Z
FLOODPLAIN SILL
N
wxa
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
5$2
�
x�..
Z¢zm
aa�
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
O¢a�
O
IL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
57$
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
576
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
574
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCC,
572
40 +00
41 +00
42 +00
43 +00
44 +00
45 +00
REACH UT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
570
568
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` or
LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
12
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
LOG TOE PROTECTION
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Qv
o
M z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
Z m
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
CJ
0_
STRUCTURE
O
CJ
xz
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
O
LL
�Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
O
Z
LU
� 0 CJ
PROPOSED FILL AREA
O �
� Z
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
� x
LEAF PACK
y
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
¢ U w
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
2 F
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Q
5$6
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
o
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
584
EXISTING TREE
�•���•(((�ILL.ayyJ��J
z 0 Z
FLOODPLAIN SILL
N
wxa
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
5$2
�
x�..
Z¢zm
aa�
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
O¢a�
O
IL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
57$
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
576
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
574
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCC,
572
570
568
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` or
LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
12
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
CJ
w
Qv
o
M z
O
a �
Z m
O
O Q
F
CJ
0_
z
O
CJ
xz
w
°
~
�
O
LL
�Z
v
O
Z
LU
� 0 CJ
o
a z
O �
� Z
0 > J
Z �
7
p
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
� x
x o_
CJ
M z
Z m
O Q
xz
w
�Z
v
LU
� 0 CJ
0 > J
Z �
7
Q W LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
� 0=
0 x CJ
Q
EE
d
¢ U w
z
2 F
Q
Q
�O
z
o
w(n
� w O
w ax
�
x
z 0 Z
�
N
wxa
z_
wZ 7
�
x�..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

N
r
W
,W
vJ
W
/W�
V/�
J
W
Z
J
U
C�
C
47+ EXISTING IPK
TB —� �"T&\-- -`5J9, _= 578__ —
48.00
NOW OR FORMERLY
DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WFE
SUSAN D. FITCH
PID 09253072A
D.B. 751, PG 860
FLOOD ZONE AE
—582 - - - ii �i -
_ I(,/ ` 1 FLOOD ZONE X
FLOOD ZONE AE ' / PROPOSED- 40''LF'
OF 7WIV -54"
LCE ��- -LCE — 583 — — jl DPEI SEE
_— — — — — i DETAIL SHEEr33. / FLOOD ZONE LINE
---- -� -- -� _ LCE Tm
— FLOOD ZONE X --1 - -0
FLOOD ZONE AE — — —
— — —
— '
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
582 - - \
-
- --
-
—\'-
----- —
—
- -NOW OR FORMLRLr
\
---- - - - - --
—
— - - -
- --
30l
�
—301
�
\\
-- 588 - -- _
—
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
.--------- ---
CHANNEL
O
Z
\\
—_�-
\
\ ` \\ REACH
ENHANCEMENT
�) �
48 /^ — 46 +DO
31
END REACH UT;-4 5
ENHANCEMENT I
47+ EXISTING IPK
TB —� �"T&\-- -`5J9, _= 578__ —
48.00
NOW OR FORMERLY
DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WFE
SUSAN D. FITCH
PID 09253072A
D.B. 751, PG 860
FLOOD ZONE AE
—582 - - - ii �i -
_ I(,/ ` 1 FLOOD ZONE X
FLOOD ZONE AE ' / PROPOSED- 40''LF'
OF 7WIV -54"
LCE ��- -LCE — 583 — — jl DPEI SEE
_— — — — — i DETAIL SHEEr33. / FLOOD ZONE LINE
---- -� -- -� _ LCE Tm
— FLOOD ZONE X --1 - -0
,�
�'
_/
_--- _ - -__ -- FLOOD ZONE LINE
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
—\'-
----- —
—
- -NOW OR FORMLRLr
- - --
— —
— — — —
- - - - - -_ -- _587 —___
—
THOMAS- RAYPDPLIN
_
- - - - -- —_
- -- -- - - -- -
—W AND WFE
-- - -- JUDY}'. — POPLIN
re---- -ie - --
-- 588 - -- _
�F70 OR273001
D.B. 20�.- PD'8151_
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
.--------- ---
CHANNEL
O
Z
- - - - --� —_
—_�-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
569
45 +00
46 +00
47 +00
48 +00 48 +25
45 +00
46 +00
47 +00
48 +00 48 +25
REACH JT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
L
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
D
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS — SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
C3
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LEAF PACK
y
o�c3
Q
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
588
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
H
2F
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
¢
�O
CUTTINGS LIVE BUNDLE
o
586
(S E DETAIL H 33)
w�
� W �
EXISTING TREE
2
564
H
�
N
FLOODPLAIN SILL
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
�XISTNG
GRA
E
O¢a�
582
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
R S7
578
I7
PRO
OSED CHANN
L
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
574
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
572
PROPOS
OF TWIN
D 40 LF
54" HOPE
45 +00
46 +00
47 +00
48 +00 48 +25
REACH JT1 -4 NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 2
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 34 +50 TO APPROXIMATELY
47 +09.
L
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
D
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS — SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
C3
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
570
569
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
V 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
13
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
LOG TOE PROTECTION
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Qv
M z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
C3
0_
STRUCTURE
O
C3
�z
W
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
O
LL
Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
O
Z
PROPOSED FILL AREA
O �
� Z
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
LEAF PACK
y
o�c3
Q
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
588
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
H
2F
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
¢
�O
CUTTINGS LIVE BUNDLE
o
586
(S E DETAIL H 33)
w�
� W �
EXISTING TREE
2
564
H
�
N
FLOODPLAIN SILL
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Z¢zm
aaC=),
o
O¢a�
582
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
R S7
578
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
576
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
574
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
572
570
569
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
V 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
13
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
v
w
Qv
M z
O
a �
zm
O
O Q
F
C3
0_
z
O
C3
�z
W
°
~
�
O
LL
Z
V
O
Z
o
a z
O �
� Z
� > J
Z �
p
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
v
M z
zm
O Q
�z
W
Z
V
� > J
Z �
Q W LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
o�c3
Q
a
Q (-% W
z
H
2F
Q
¢
�O
z
o
Z
g
w�
� W �
Jam
2
z 0 Z
H
�
N
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aaC=),
o
O¢a�
O
IL

604
602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
585
BEGIN
REACH
UTi —A
0 +00
NOW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F. AYCOTH, 77?US7EE
PID 0830.3014
D.B. 5304, PC 860
- - - -- 602" ,
601
301 �301--
—603 -/ - X301 — 3�G3 600' / gg
� — 602
7 BEGIN REACH UT =A
Q+00 / ENHANCEMENT 1 _ 601
STA 0,65_ — - - -- i'
— —i —'60 — — 12 "CMP /— '�
+ N.W. INV.=59773'
S.E. INV.= 59709' SEE SHEET 6.
1520 LF OF 2­,00
\\ \ \
-600- = �g _ g7, -- .. \j 8z 178
\IAUS�AI,L FORD 81— \�
\ �RL ING PER
�. OETA(L T�,33
\ TIE IN REACH UT7 —A
EiJHANCEMENT I TO
\ ` UT1 -1 ENHANCEMENT
I I AT STA 2 +82. Y
SEE SHEIP6.
E \ ,
1 \ �'1• l7
UTI. SEE '� _ - -_� wo
\ \CE \ SHEET 6. /
1+00
2 +00
2 +82
0 +00
1+00
2 +00
2 +82
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
585
REACH UT1 -A NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +65 TO APPROXIMATELY
2 +82.
8.00
1.30 2.70 �
TOP OF BANK/
I RANKFULL STAGE
0.2i
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
STA 1 +06 TO 2 +15
REACH UT1 —A
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS— SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
PROPOSED
FORD
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
~
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�2
� Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM
p
N
>
w
E
ISTING GRAD
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
P
B
OPOSED CHANNEL
TTOM CENTERLINE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
DC
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
U w
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
wv~i
� W �
PROPOSED FILL AREA
2
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
H
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
aa�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
O¢a�
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
c
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
0 +00
1+00
2 +00
2 +82
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
585
REACH UT1 -A NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +65 TO APPROXIMATELY
2 +82.
8.00
1.30 2.70 �
TOP OF BANK/
I RANKFULL STAGE
0.2i
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
STA 1 +06 TO 2 +15
REACH UT1 —A
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS— SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
CJ
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
~
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�2
� Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM
p
N
>
w
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
DC
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
U w
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
wv~i
� W �
PROPOSED FILL AREA
2
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
H
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
aa�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
O¢a�
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
c
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
WD CKSON
munity infrastructure consultants
T a Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
v 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` or
LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
14
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
CJ
w
Qv
M z
O
a �
Z m
O
O Q
F
CJ
0_
Z
z
O
CJ
�
O W
°
~
�
O
LL
�2
� Z
Q
O
Z
W O
0_ 0_ (�
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
p
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
F
CJ
M z
Z m
O Q
Z
�
O W
�2
� Z
Q
W O
0_ 0_ (�
F
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
CD
J
LL
F Z
W � Z
0
� 0=
� Q O
DC
d
U w
z
=
F
Q
Q
Z
� O
Z
0
wv~i
� W �
J a�
2
z 0 Z
H
�
N
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

�Lc
yT
NOTES:
�D CKSON
munity infrastructure consultants
T an sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
v 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
15
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA THE TREES TO SAVED.
NOW OR FORMERLY
O
a �
Z CO
O
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS — SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
TI T
HEIRS OF THOMAS��
F
U
CL
z
O
U
�z
O w
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
E. GRIFFIN
\
m
O
Z
5
o
a z
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
PIO 06303015A
W
p
N
>
W J
W
6ypp — _
/ 7� / &
W
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
0
� 0=
0 Q O
DC
d
U w
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
=
Q
Q
Im
W
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
� O
Z
Q
REACH U71 —B
wv~i
� W 0
J a�
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
z 0 Z
H
�
PRESERVA77ON
�� i
'� �- -�
�/�
VJ
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
�
V
aa�
�0
O¢a�
III
"'�'
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
_
_ _
w
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
60 "\\; �,� _ _6 ='=
— °@1-'
�/.J
9. F BIEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
4th iy9$' (�
— - - - -- n
w
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
91.i �/' /_i X599- i
J
_
LEGEND
—�
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -$O - - --
—30A
—
U
rQ
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR --- - ® - - --
— I_ - - - - -
— - - — �
so
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z®
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
/
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- -ie - --
NOW OR FORMERLY
30'I 3Cl
�� / /
3O�TT�
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
BILLY F. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
y05 / / — — ---
- - - - --
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
!'1D 08303014
D.6. 5304, PC 860
J /// //
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE —-- 1� --K-
Y
EXISTING TREELINE
-
_iWY1
- - - - - -_
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ — — — — — — _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33) T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE c
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
OOLCCID
( �
SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
�D CKSON
munity infrastructure consultants
T an sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
v 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
15
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
U
w
v
M z
O
a �
Z CO
O
O Q
F
U
CL
z
O
U
�z
O w
°
~
�
O
LL
�2
� Z
m
O
Z
W O
CL CL (�
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
p
N
>
W J
W
J
LL
FZC7
W � Z
0
F
U
M z
Z CO
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
m
W O
CL CL (�
F
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
J
LL
FZC7
W � Z
0
� 0=
0 Q O
DC
d
U w
z
=
Q
Q
Im
� O
Z
Q
p
wv~i
� W 0
J a�
2
z 0 Z
H
�
N
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
r.i
/
lonl
/y00----- - - -�\\ 607 / iy9y
- 602
602
- 599 - - _ _ - - - - - - - 607 - - - �/ / NOW QFF/RMERLY / / / / / 3C1 y9y TIE IN REACH UTi 9 /
m / I I6, ASS RAY POPLIN / 99 l ENHANCEMENT - PI /
J*+c��+ , 5
A-IMFE REACH/UTi -2 Pi
L _ _
PR OSED ao LF- _ - - -ggJ- - -JUDY H. POPLIN
/' / RESTORATION AT STA
r 598 - - - - - - - - SEE DE AIL- 7 PID OB273001 / / +46. /SEE SHEET 8.
/
W END REACH UTI -11 SEE DETAIL- /
596' D.B. 2079` 6C 825 / y9^
PRESERVATION SHEET 33. ------ - - - - -- 5 / 0j ` �i y� // / i
W STA 6 +29 - - - - F / END REACH AT1-2
_ / BEGIN E HAh - Nr - - - - - _ 9 IN RESTORATION; li t
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT I 96. // / / / BEGIN REACH UT1 -3 / 11/+/46
y9P 9 = - -_(STA 6 +91) - - - / / 5 _ _ / / / Pi RESTORATION 9O
/ — / (STA 24 +89 L -5 /
) � /
w- -__- - - - - - --
5 �- �� ` �< � BREACH UTi -B
REMOVE 20 LF\ Bl - �'� ?�` ENHANCEMENT I
// gt c� °`� OF EXISTING PIPS =�.�w �`\ -594
UJ
REACH UTi -2.�
-91 _ BL___ - -81%� SEE SHEET 8 MCI
INV=595.08' \ ?B - _� - `_ - - - -
0
ily
\\ \ o /
599
\\ —LCE
LCE
-594
\\ -- - - LCE LCE —' LC
_`sue _E
E'.
NOW OR FORMERLY \ \ \ \ \ \
BILLY F. AYC07H, 7)?US7EE \ \ \ \ I
\ \ \ PID 08303014
D.B. 5304, PG 860 \
6 +25
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
\ 1 1
11+00 11+46
6 +25
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
11+00 11+46
UT1 —B NOTE:
LEGEND
NOTES:
REGRADE CHANNEL WITH DIMENSIONS
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
PROVIDED IN TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
BELOW, FROM STA 6 +30 TO STA 9 +42,
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
AND STA 11 +00 TO CONFLUENCE WITH
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
REACH UT1 -2.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
8.00
STABILIZED BY THE ENO OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR T(
RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
•1.64
SEGMENTS.
1.30 2.70—
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
- - - - - -
SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
0.90
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
W J
W
w 0_
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
0.20
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
� 0=
� Q O
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
CL
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
=
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
� O
Z
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
LCE
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
z o Z
ENGINEER.
N
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
wZ 7
LOG STRUCTURE
Z¢zm
a��
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O¢a0
O
o_
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
EXISTING C
RADE
APPROXIMA
TOP OF BAN
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
602
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
- 600
EXISTING TREE
���.. ....,���•••(((,�lll...aaaJJJJJJ
FLOODPLAIN SILL
598
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
EXISTING
GRADE
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
594
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
592
ROCK CROSS VANE
DETAIL SHEET 32)
p��{S�}�
(SEE
y
- 590
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
PROPOSED
OF 45" HDP
0 LF
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCID
PRO
BOT7w
OSED CHANN
CENTERLI
L RE I
E EXISTING
TO
GRADE
_
\
PR
B077DM
OSED CHANN
CENTERLI
L
E
6 +25
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
11+00 11+46
UT1 —B NOTE:
LEGEND
NOTES:
REGRADE CHANNEL WITH DIMENSIONS
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
PROVIDED IN TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
BELOW, FROM STA 6 +30 TO STA 9 +42,
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
AND STA 11 +00 TO CONFLUENCE WITH
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
REACH UT1 -2.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
8.00
STABILIZED BY THE ENO OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR T(
RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
•1.64
SEGMENTS.
1.30 2.70—
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
- - - - - -
SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
0.90
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
W J
W
w 0_
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
0.20
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
� 0=
� Q O
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
CL
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
=
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
� O
Z
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
LCE
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
z o Z
ENGINEER.
N
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
586
- ill
WD CKSON
cmunity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.c.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
16
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
CJ
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
~
U-
0
o Z
O �
a
p z w
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -SO - - --
M z
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
Z m
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
O Q
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
2980
�z
O w
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
�2
� Z
m
BERM
W O
��v
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
Z J
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�
CHANNEL
� 0=
� Q O
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
U w
EXISTING TREELINE
rYYY1
=
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
� O
Z
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
LCE
wv~i
� W 0
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
2
z o Z
LOG TOE PROTECTION
N
U � d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
wZ 7
LOG STRUCTURE
Z¢zm
a��
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O¢a0
O
o_
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
602
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
- 600
EXISTING TREE
���.. ....,���•••(((,�lll...aaaJJJJJJ
FLOODPLAIN SILL
598
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
596
594
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
592
ROCK CROSS VANE
DETAIL SHEET 32)
p��{S�}�
(SEE
y
- 590
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCID
586
- ill
WD CKSON
cmunity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.c.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
16
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
CJ
0_
O
CJ
z �
° O
~
U-
0
o Z
O �
a
p z w
F
CJ
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
m
W O
��v
r
Z
Z J
W
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
F
CJ
M z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
m
W O
��v
r
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
CD
J
LL
F Z
W � Z
0
� 0=
� Q O
DC
d
U w
z
=
Q
Q
� O
Z
Q
p
wv~i
� W 0
J a0
2
z o Z
H
�
N
U � d
Z
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
a��
o
O¢a0
O
o_

600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
040
0 +00
-602
_ v vv
X59 �- \� \64 NOW OR FGRMiRLY
- - - -- _ -5g6' ��\ �\ \\ `\ THOMAS- IA A Y POPLIN
- - -- _ 59'/'
18" CMP- - -0 \ \ 603"' AND'F
/ 5 6 \ \ \ JUDY N. POPLIN
- - - - - - - 9 V.= 589.50' \\ \ PID 08273001
E INV ='-I!- 2079�F825 � i / /' / � � i � / / � ` 595 /
(B
594' REMOVE 20 LF OF \ \ r i i /' / / / / yg2 /
93 _ EXISTING PIPS \ \ \ \ �J 60
\ \
\ \ \ D'-
92. i'00 \�\ \\ \ X60
T,
/ PR SED 20 L6' \ ` 6,
Sff E6ETT33. /
EXISTING iPIPE. OF
I /
18, CMP
93 - W_JNV.= 589.69'
BEGIN REACH F _5g5.
ENHANCEMENT; �\ \ \.x\\ \\ \ _5g4
—�_ - / STA 1 +21 \ \\\
�_ / 594.--- - - - -_`
i .- -___ Q ' �- \ \ \yam \\ \ - -- 4+00
-59 5_ _ \ \\ `a \. \� __597- _---- - - - -��
_596--
597----- - - - -__
// - -- 598 - -- \ �00 /
REACHiFU_C
ENHANCEMENT -1- ��� �� _.591
/50�--- -._��`
/ NOW OR FORMERL>i
/THOMAS RAY,POPLIN
/ AND'NiFE \�
�JffDY 0 POPLIN
/ PID 0 8 2 73 0111 i' ��� ��� �� �� LCE� - -- 595--- _ - - -_/
D.B. 2079. -PG 825 �' \ \ - - -
LSE -596-
597._- - - - - -- /
598_ -_ - -/ //- /
1+00
2 +00
3 +00
4 +00
W
r
W
/W
V)
W
W
W
J
U
5Q
L
5 +00
0 +00
1+00
2 +00
3 +00
4 +00
5 +00
JT1 -C NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +36 TO APPROXIMATELY
9 +42.
10.40
1.70 3.50 a
TOP OF BANK/
-- I RANKFULL STAGE
0.3.
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
STA 0 +40 TO 1 +65 AND STA
9 +42 TO 9 +71
REACH UT1 —C
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
U
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�2
� Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
Z J
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
PR C
-OSED TOP
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LEAF PACK
y
� 0=
� Q U
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
600
z
H
=
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
Q
W O
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
o
598
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
U
ui
� W �
PROPOSED CIM.
V�
596
EXISTING TREE
N
Una
FLOODPLAIN SILL
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
��..
Z¢zm
594
o
O¢a�
O
IL
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
592
OTTOM CEN
RLINE
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
5$$
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
c
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
586
-
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
\
584
EXISTING
GRADE
PR
POSED 20 L
0 +00
1+00
2 +00
3 +00
4 +00
5 +00
JT1 -C NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +36 TO APPROXIMATELY
9 +42.
10.40
1.70 3.50 a
TOP OF BANK/
-- I RANKFULL STAGE
0.3.
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
STA 0 +40 TO 1 +65 AND STA
9 +42 TO 9 +71
REACH UT1 —C
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
LOG TOE PROTECTION
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
LOG STRUCTURE
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
F
U
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
�2
� Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
Z J
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
582
580
�D CKSON
'ty infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
17
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
LOG TOE PROTECTION
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Qv
M z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
U
0_
STRUCTURE
O
U
�z
O w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
O
LL
�2
� Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
O
Z
W O
0_ 0_ (�
PROPOSED FILL AREA
O �
� Z
Z J
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
N
>
W J
W
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
F Z
W � Z
LEAF PACK
y
� 0=
� Q U
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
600
z
H
=
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
Q
W O
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
o
598
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
U
ui
� W �
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
V�
596
EXISTING TREE
N
Una
FLOODPLAIN SILL
wZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
��..
Z¢zm
594
o
O¢a�
O
IL
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
592
.590
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
5$$
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
c
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
586
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0020OLCCID
584
582
580
�D CKSON
'ty infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
7�
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
17
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
U
w
Qv
M z
O
a �
zm
O
O Q
F
U
0_
z
O
U
�z
O w
°
~
�
O
LL
�2
� Z
U
O
Z
W O
0_ 0_ (�
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
p
N
>
W J
W
J
F Z
W � Z
LL
0
F
U
M z
zm
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
U
W O
0_ 0_ (�
F
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
�
J
F Z
W � Z
LL
0
� 0=
� Q U
CC
d
Q (-% W
z
H
=
Q
Q
W O
Q
o
� Z
J
U
ui
� W �
iii CL
¢
2
z C1 Z
H
�
N
Una
z_
wZ 7
�
��..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

TF
TF
9
I'
—599
598
596.— i / i /y
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
575
i
UT1 —C NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +36 TO APPROXIMATELY
9 +42.
10.40
1.70 3,50y
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
0.30
I
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
STA 0 +40 TO 1 +65 AND STA
9 +42 TO 9 +71
REACH UT1 —C
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS— SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
1' \ \4 LEGEND
1( I Ii EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -SO - - --
I I I EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT • 1.640
BERM
� I EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- -ie - --
Il EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
I EXISTING FENCELINE — -- --K—
I I ) EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
1 I II I PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
5 +00 6 +00 7 +00 8 +00 9 +00 9 +92
P POSED CHA NEL
S TTOM CENTER LINE
E ISTING GRAD
TI —IN TO
REAC UT1 -3
(ST 9 +92)
5 +00 6 +00 7 +00 8 +00 9 +00 9 +92
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
575
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
T
6
I
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
A
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
18
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
NOW OR FORMERLY I
30-1 THOMAS RAY POPLIN J
--
Qv
J AND NiFE
----- -- -s91 -
- --�� 01T // /g9
/ JUDY H. POPLIN
O
O Q
PID 08273001
Z
z
\`\ —�\ \���_ //
/ D.B. 1079, PG 825
/
°
~
_ — ___590 —_
—_ —� //
gb
O
Z
w O
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
-- REACH UTI —C
W J
W
-
-� 589
�—
ENHANCEMENT I—
LL
0
2i O=
0 M U
Q
6^
/
— --
_�V. -
U w
_587
=T, — 7+04 — 9a� IN REACH UTI —C \
=
F
Q
Q
— _ `
TB= `�-
'�
\ ENHANCEMENT I TO
'/� �' — — —R ACH UTi -3
O
I-- Z
9
586 — —
_ _ —
— — — - — — — Pi 'ES RATION AT
— °�—�,i — i STA 9+92. SEE
\
¢
2
81
,Bl —
/ SHEET 10.
i
U
=_ - -�_ - -_�/1%
9 +92
o_
wZ 7
587
Z¢zm
aa�
� -- -590
�\ �\
\\
\
— — —
\� \� —sad _-----
—ice
- - - -- \
\
UTi. SEE
\ SHEET 10.
— — — — 591-
\��` —___�_
- - - - -- - -_— \
_--- - - - -_— �\ \ \
LCE =— 592.`
\� \� - - - -- -� - -- - -589 ---
— —
- -'/ ------- - --- -� \ \ \
— \ \ \�
/I
END REACH UT7
— _ _ _ _
— - �a591 — — —_ — — _ _590— _
—
-- - -591_— ---- - -
— —
i' _ i.CE \ n I Pi RESTORAT
- - -- - -- �LCE� \ \ m BEGIN REACH UTI
--595—
— — —�
_ _
_� — \ _`L _ _ — — — _
f =LCE \ \ \ \ \
LCE - - - -�\
ENHANCEMEA
I
992— �—
/ /�— -----
— — \ I I
—
STA 344
— _
\ \\\\
NOW OR Y —595 —
- - - - - - -_— —___
m
600.
— __— _— __—
—
-�/
_ - I I I
— \
—
60,
N 596 - -- __---
I I
\ \ I
—' - - -
'VDYRPPW — 597- -
- -_ I
\ \ m
- P1D-09J0QI - - --
OB- 207% _PG 623 -- _--598—
N
, \ \ \ \
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
575
i
UT1 —C NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +36 TO APPROXIMATELY
9 +42.
10.40
1.70 3,50y
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
0.30
I
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
STA 0 +40 TO 1 +65 AND STA
9 +42 TO 9 +71
REACH UT1 —C
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS— SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
1' \ \4 LEGEND
1( I Ii EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - - - -SO - - --
I I I EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT • 1.640
BERM
� I EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- re---- -ie - --
Il EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
I EXISTING FENCELINE — -- --K—
I I ) EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
1 I II I PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
5 +00 6 +00 7 +00 8 +00 9 +00 9 +92
P POSED CHA NEL
S TTOM CENTER LINE
E ISTING GRAD
TI —IN TO
REAC UT1 -3
(ST 9 +92)
5 +00 6 +00 7 +00 8 +00 9 +00 9 +92
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
575
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
T
6
I
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com
A
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
18
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
U
w
Qv
a z
O
a �
Z m
O
O Q
F
U
0_
Z
z
O
U
�
O w
°
~
�
O
LL
�2
� Z
U
O
Z
w O
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
p
N
>
W J
W
J
F Z
W � Z
LL
0
F
U
a z
Z m
O Q
Z
�
O w
�2
� Z
U
w O
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
�
J
F Z
W � Z
LL
0
2i O=
0 M U
Q
CC
d
U w
z
=
F
Q
Q
0_
W O
Q
O
I-- Z
J
U
ui
W �
CL
¢
2
� 0 Z
H
U
z_
o_
wZ 7
:
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
NOW OR FORMERLY
TERRY L. PRICE
ANDMFE
JUDITH K. PRICE
PID 08270013
D.B. 684, PC 588
_592 — \ - - -- - -___
�_ 593 = - - - -_ \\ \ - - - - -- --
\ \
X594 \ �\ �� ----
1 NOW OR FORMERLY —
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
PID 08273007 ��
D.B. 4959, PC 42 -
/
�
NOW OR FORMERLY
- -SO - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
59 - - - - - - -
z - �
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
PID 08273007
D.B. 4959, PC 41
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
FLOOD ZONE \ �\\
�
-� �� \� - - - -- -- _
1+00 2 +00
3 +00 4 +00
5 +00
J
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
NOW OR FORMERLY I ( \ �� FLOOD ZONE AE \ \
^ \ X59 -' -' - -
°'"�
- - - -
-
EXISTING FENCELINE -
JAMEY B. PRICE \ \ 5e� ----- - -
PID 08273004D - \ \ \\ FLOOD ZONE LINE
D.B. 1581, PG 130
- -- -_ .. \ \� �� -
-
- - - - - -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
--
LCE
EXISTING TREE
301 301
J
301 301\���
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
oMU
¢ U w
1301
-3�
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
/
-- -
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
- 585 -'/
.. F Z
w (D
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
U
�
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
-584
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
�
z_
N
_ /
-` \`_�-
�_-
590
DID= BEGIN REACH U72 -1 -- - -__ �'
-
83 W _ ^��___
_ \
_ -
W
ENHANCEMENT II
-� STA 0 +00
1
WE - - - - _ W W �+(LO W1) I
W W W 1 W
W W
-
>' -
W
{�
C say} _ _ _ _
` ``�58 ���
58�
///
581'W
\�
- -W—
�y/)
.581
TB-
�__ - - -_— ��` �_�
— �lo= _
=� —TBW — W = fsa4 --��Y �V(�}SB2W —V✓ —S' �W W BI .W \ =�1[\ W _V[_ --V.� W WI
'
/ /—
W
\may\
-�;�� -�\\
#V_�YI
)I W W W W W
W
- -- () .y` W W
W W W W ✓, W W ✓, W W `('\ W J �� W
/l
W_ W Y -W
i�
CA
VJ
-
W
- _ - 587 - - - - - ,' .
- _ -- {J- --
-- ------ ----- - - -
J\ W \ W W �i$
W W �w TB W-\ W\ J�
/
Z
-C FLOOD PONE AE
-- _ - - - -
- -- -584 - -\
\
-.--_� -�-
- _ - -
-- \ - - -�' _ - - --
- 585----
- , - _ - - - - - - - - - - � \ w W
- -\ _ - -. -- _ --
-W
JD REACH UT's I/
W W W d}IANCF�ENT Il,t,
BEGIP ACH UT2 -2
\
/
I \
- _ 59 - - --
- --- --
_
- -LCD_ 6� - \ \ \ 1• - -w-
J2
- +P - -� P1 YtESTORAADN
STA 4 +90
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
NOW OR FORMERLY
TERRY L. PRICE
ANDMFE
JUDITH K. PRICE
PID 08270013
D.B. 684, PC 588
_592 — \ - - -- - -___
�_ 593 = - - - -_ \\ \ - - - - -- --
\ \
X594 \ �\ �� ----
1 NOW OR FORMERLY —
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
PID 08273007 ��
D.B. 4959, PC 42 -
/
�
�`vS \ \� W W W W\ W \ W
_ - - - -_\ S90 _ -
s _ \ \ �`'�
- - - - -� s� \ �CZ
— — — — — — — — 5g2
�ssj \ _
---- - - -- -5 \� (`\ i�r\.� - -- CE -- - - - - -- -
- - - - -- s° \� �\ ��_� `y`7(-���_ -�r
\\NOIL'L W17#1--LF F OEP.
- - - 59s
_ -SEE-DETAIL SHEET 35:
- - - -
-597\ \�� -- \�' - --
-
- -SO - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
0 +00
2980
1+00 2 +00
3 +00 4 +00
5 +00
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
F Z
CHANNEL
y
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - -
- - - - - -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
oMU
¢ U w
z
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
.. F Z
w (D
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
U
�
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
�
z_
N
wZ 7
�
��..
Z¢zm
590
o
O¢a�
O
o_
588
REACH
REA
H
UT2 -1
UT2
2
586
EXISTING
RADE
584
/ —
—
582
580
578
ROPOSED CH
NNEL
576
BOTTOM
CEN
RUNE
574
—r
572
t
570
0 +00
1+00 2 +00
3 +00 4 +00
5 +00
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SIR
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -SO - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
zm
STRUCTURE
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
F Z
CHANNEL
y
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - -
- - - - - -
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
zm
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
Q ~
Z
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
F Z
LEAF PACK
y
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
� Z �
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
N
>
w
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
J
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
�
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
oMU
¢ U w
z
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
.. F Z
w (D
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
U
�
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
H
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCU
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
■
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" =
FULLS
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
19
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p z w
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
Z
�
O W
2
F Z
N
Z
� Z �
W
N
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
�
O
v
M z
zm
O Q
Q ~
Z
�
O W
2
F Z
N
� Z �
W
¢ Q W
�
J
F Z
W � Z
O
d
oMU
¢ U w
z
T
¢
O
Q
�
p
.. F Z
w (D
J
w d
U
�
� W �
H
2
z CJ Z
Una
�
z_
N
wZ 7
�
��..
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_

588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
LOG TOE PROTECTION
592 - -__ ___
/ ✓ I 1
.. 1 �� i '� 'b
Qv
a z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
CJ
0_
- -
-_ - - -- NOW OR FORMEar - - -_
- -- -DON --
` -_ -� ��' �/ a / i
I I /
'✓ ///
/��
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
NOTES:
Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
590 - - -- SCOTT SIMPSON
_ - - _ _ PID 08273007- - - _
_ - - -
�' �' / /
_ i' �' i y8g /
/
` `
I /l
/ / \
I/ I
O �
� Z
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED
FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
O_
�
>
w
- - 0.B 4959, PG 42
- - 58g - - -
- - �' 56' i /
-' i i 5 - -
/ _
i - - ��
�
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN
y
- \�-
_ _ -
-- - -__ -- - - - - --
`�_ �' -� i� �/ 5b7 �'
`\��
�r -
/ I >i��__ = - - -�` �,"
z
DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
� F
`_�
_
58 - - - --
- -� 8' -_ ---
`` - - -'� i -- ice/ - y8b _ /�J_ -- - - - -�` �_ -`
�� �� '>81 �/ _ =� — —_- ���
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT
T�
V,
-_ - - - - --
- -58�_. - - --
3Clr�Cl- 30/13a -1
-'
___ -_i ==
�`� -- ' ' ___-
31�- 391'��1�3 59,E _
-_-___ _
i - - -���
_ - \ l�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SHALL BE MODIFIED AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO
RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
EXISTING TREE
586 - - - _
_
_ - _ - _ _ - - y : 584 �� �� -
- - \
Z¢zm
4. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
`
_ - -
- - _ _ _
` -585 _ ` - ` - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-�' =58 - - - FLOOD ZONE /CE -
_ TNO "� x'583 , _ --
` - - - - n_?N� -� -- - / g2 �'_�_ - - -
G _
-_ -_- - - - =�- - _ � - ' 5' %'
TIE IN REACH UT2 -A \
ENHANCEMENT 11 TO ' ` - - -
REACH UT2 -7yPY
582
STABILIZED BY THE ENO OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR T(
RESTORING FLOW TO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL
SEGMENTS.
W
_- _
- _ 54!--` ---- -- - - -- - - - --
` 8#J `�
_
��� -- _-- - - --fir '!�i ��' Q58j� --
��-- RESTORATWN- AT STA
r
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS
580
_- _ - �_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X56 _ - -
7 J8_z ��� �� '
5 +28. SEE SHEET 24.
/ - - - -
N
OR TREES TO REMAIN, AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH
TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER MATERIAL
576
`�'
/ - �- - - _ —�_ _ =- gJ, _ °--`
---
- - - - - - - - - c _� - y79'
- �
SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
N•
- - _ - - - - - - - -
-_
- - - - - - -. _�� - - -
/ / gt00
574
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
Cn,^
�j
_ . -
- -- 580
- - _ --
_ - - -
\
- 5'ry ��
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
572
/ - - -- - --
- - -
-
_ f�
- - - - -- 8+0x15- - - - - - --
/
10+
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
W
/u'
/ - --
/ -8+� -
- - - - - 7 +00 - - - - -
/
)
W
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
W
7
-
�'
-
/
/
2
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
Cn////��
\ �\ ��
--
- -- / ��"\
- /
\/ '�
'^
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
J
i \
- - - - - - \
\ \
VJ
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
__
// \
-
/ 575
\
w
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
Z
\ W
\ ' _ - - - -
1 REACH UT2 -2
- - _ - - - - - -
\
-
- - - - -
\
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
,y
1 END REACH U�2 -1 P1 RESTORATION
/ /
_, \
- - - _
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
ENHANCEMENT Yl.
- - - - - - - 57g
\
` `
OPOSED CHA
SHALL BE
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
J
w
�� \ EGIN REACH UTA�
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF�ROPOSEB - CHANNEL - _ _ _ �'
\
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
Pi R STORA70N \
��� 90
CENTERLINE. AFTER LOCATION SHALL BE
DETERMINED FTER POND IS DRAINED, DAM IS
ENGINEER.
=
\ \ - - -- `��
\ \
BR2ACHED,�VND�EXISTING3DN4 BDJTOM�;z
- - -
XISTING PON
NMENT SHA
UCTION OF
9
DMAY RBEGRELOCATED
U
.-
` - 58l _ .. — .. — .. — .. — _�
\_� `` `---- - --
—, — `
siaRU 8: - 1NGMFIEIOT3HALI -BE FINALIZED- - -- -' -580'_ - _
-
_ -- \
\
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
- - - - --- -
582 \
/ - - - -_- - -�_ - - - --
- ---- PRIOR-TO-CON_STR0 ➢0N O PliOP75ED _ - -__ - -�
- EHANNEC
-_ -- ------ - -___- _ - -581 - -_ -- \��
_ -582-
_
J
------
-\\83_ ----------------- - -
_58B �`
- - -- - - -- _ -583 -- _ _
_"f8.'.'_�- 91 -_ -c81 -- e.^5'B4 __ - -81'= \ \'r
�-
- �_____�LCE
\
- - -\
2
C
C
—
_ _ - - - \
585- - -� - -_ _ -TB -'�
Fri ^10ET� �_ - - -1 '�TkG2 ' B� , \ /
— —� = —. - - \ \ Yh
t. - _
�. �.;..
U
LEGEND
_-
-
_see — —
-- -- __ --
--- -.587' - - -- - --
/ -
_ — —_— _ -- \
_ -_ - -586- \ \ ( 1�1 /lI ���
- ___ _ - -� \ I /'1- _
-- -FLOOD -ZONE X - - SB) � \ \�, /
— — —..— . —..—
�- - - - - -- ----- - - - - --
-���__ _ - - - - --
-TB -- -- - - - - -_�
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR ---- $0 - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - -46 - - --
--
- - - -- ��_ -
_ _' 58 -
\
FLOOD ZONE LINE `� \ m� 1
X88\
___ i
\
�' i =_��_
`_
5
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
-589 - -__ -'�� - -�
���_ `� \ \ ) (
_ --
�
L
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
\���_
- _ -
-' - -I
_
-� JBg� K I
�(-
- - -
/
2980
-
_ -� INSTALL 1741 LF OF
- - - -590 - - - - - - - WOVEN WIRE FENCE.
\ \ - - - - _SEE DETAIL SHEET 35.
NOW OR FU4M LY ) (
DON SCOTT SIMPSON I / )
- _ - -PYQ 08273007 -590 \ \ ) / /� 5
��'�/
W - - -- -
- -
r i -' - _
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT •1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- �--- - -� - --
\ --- 591--- - -.- -- ` --. - --
_ \ 1 9t
D.B. 4959,�PG_¢2 \ \ / 5
\ ( (
/ � �� %'
REACH UT2 ;'T
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
��
- -592 - - - -_
\\ -
{/
``�� \ \ /rI(l / a�i SEEASuC�EMEN411. � �� ��'
�) \
`sy� \ \ n 1 ( / / 5 i
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
��
-__
\ - 593 - -_- --
-- --
\ (
���� \ \m ) I l m /
�` � ` ) �~
// / �''
Y�
�� �
EXISTING FENCELINE - �- -� --K-
\`_ �'
�� - -
\ \ I �
``�� \ F x )
85i i( //i
/
\�
-'�
- 594 - - -_ - - -_
\\ -'- -
( ) �I
s9 \. \� \. 11 ) III �/
/5 �� /' �'�
I
EXISTING TREELINE1
- - --
- - -
■ I . 'f
�h' :`!/i ./ _�� -
-- - - - - -_
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM - - - - - - - _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED LCE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
LOG TOE PROTECTION
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Qv
a z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
CJ
0_
STRUCTURE
O
CJ
�z
w
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
O
LL
Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
~
O
Z
� � CJ
PROPOSED FILL AREA
O �
� Z
� � J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
O_
�
>
w
<n �
W J
W
w 0_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
LEAF PACK
y
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
588
z
� F
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
Q
� O
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
oz
566
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
�
2
� � Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
N
EXISTING TREE
584
�
Z¢zm
aa�
FLOODPLAIN SILL
O¢a�
O
o_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
582
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
EXISTIN
GRADE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
R � S7
576
576
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
ROPOSED C
OTTOM CEN
ANNE'
RUNE
574
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCID
572
APP
CEN
OXIMATE LO
RUNE. FIN
ATION OF P
L LOCATION
OPOSED CHA
SHALL BE
NEL
BRE
STA
PRI
CHA
CHED, AND
ILIZED. ALI
R TO CONS
NEL.
XISTING PON
NMENT SHA
UCTION OF
BOTTOM IS
BE FINALIZ
ROPOSED
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
570
568
WD CKSON
ry frastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
20
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
LOG TOE PROTECTION
w
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
Qv
a z
LOG STRUCTURE
O
a �
zm
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
O
O Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
F
CJ
0_
STRUCTURE
O
CJ
�z
w
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
O
LL
Z
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
~
O
Z
� � CJ
PROPOSED FILL AREA
O �
� Z
� � J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
p
O_
�
>
w
<n �
W J
W
w 0_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
�
LEAF PACK
y
�
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
T
588
z
� F
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
Q
� O
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
oz
566
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
�
2
� � Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
N
EXISTING TREE
584
�
Z¢zm
aa�
FLOODPLAIN SILL
O¢a�
O
o_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
582
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
580
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
R � S7
576
576
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
574
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI�OLCCID
572
570
568
WD CKSON
ry frastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
20
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
v
w
Qv
a z
O
a �
zm
O
O Q
F
CJ
0_
z
O
CJ
�z
w
�
°
~
�
O
LL
Z
r°i�
~
O
Z
� � CJ
o
a z
O �
� Z
� � J
Z �
7
p
O_
�
>
w
<n �
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
�
v
a z
zm
O Q
�z
w
�
Z
N
� � CJ
� � J
Z �
7
¢ LLI LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
�
�
d
� CJ
¢ U w
z
� F
Q
Q
� O
Z
oz
w (0
� W �
w 0_
�
2
� � Z
H
�
N
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_

580
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
571
- - --
\
\\ \\ \ \ \ �_\ � NAOf,ML-SY \ A- 592
584_
\ kOW OR FORMEf�Y� i \ -� _-591 BAUL064 -
'DON SC0 SIMP�SON` APPROXIMATE LOC\A�TION s F PROPOSED CFfANNEL5g0 - _ _ 3Dl �_ 3C1 39l - -
\ PIO 08813Q07 \ CENTERLINE. FYryAL LOCATION SHALL BE g9 , D.B. 4959- PG-48- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l- _ - - - - - _ - - - - 582 -
\ QB.'4959� PG`42\ \ DETERM/NEQ, AFfER,45OND IS" DRAINEp/D7(M�- 5 e , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.- 587
\ BR €A'L�HED, AND EXISTJNG/ P -_ 0�1 fYBbbTTOM -FS 50 - -_- - - _- _- _
\ \ \ \ STABILIZED. ALIGNMEFNT LL $E- FINALIjEB" y87 ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - �- - / -580
RIOR TO CONSTRUG'RO OF PROPOSED-
C) -� - - - - - - - ,579
\ __�-- -/- - --
N �G3Dl �_� --- - - - - -- - - --
\7 ~ \ \ \\ v \ 1f �/ - - - -- -LINE - __ - -- / ��� _- END REACH-UT2 -2
I REEM0 -:59 LF 584 - - - - FLOOD ZONE
PF- EXISTWO -PIPE - - - _ - - '- -' _P R- S 0RA TION - - - - - 57 N
Y`7 /� ' - 583 - - - - - - - - - - - BEGIN REACH-02 -3
W \ v\ \ \ - FOOD ZONE. - - i . / - - - - - - _ - Y4+9� S -RE SfOiA TION -
W \ \ ✓l e�582 . - -- - - -- -- ®® --
\\ `RROPOS�� 40 1F 1 /./1 - - 587 - FLOOD ZONE AE- 15 +00 (y
_ \pF EE HOPE. - - - - - -- - -- /�
11 SEE DETAIL (I % / - 580 - L - - - - - - _
\SHEET 33.I 1 '/ /f / /�""� 579- - - - - -- - -- -REACT UT2 -2 - ) H
V1 �
\ \ JAI / /•`� -5/�8� W
\ , �Zp� Pi RESTORATION -_ -_
577 \
� W \ /
/�
LL] \ J \ Q \Q \3- �� 13 +00 - - - - - -- ____TB /�
VJ - - - - - -- -/l l - ' -� �' = VJ
W 10 +00 �v �v /�v� - TB- -- _ = -= _TB_-- __�e-- 1_ /_ =?e -. = W
- -_
U) -T6 -- TB� -=ice° 1
_ \ REACH UT2 -2/ J I )A\ \ \ -_ 5 - - _ 5i- W
P7 RESTORATION Y (I�F120POSEd LF � 7
EXISTING �� --- ------- - - - - -- ��k-CE - - -- `_
U 1) l l J OQDPLA(N y II I/' - 1 WEi1�ANOS ��C�
REMOVE 30.tF I I l YULVERT. LL515E i \ \ \ J
OF EXISTINj �pIPE 1/)) ^ T IL SH4I�$. \ \ \ \\ 1 \ - --
v� lw AIIII 1 I(ol(xv2 @��LCE -x- -- ----- - - - - -- - -�,
/ �:IIII l I VII\ III I Z. �GE I, _-- - - - - -- ., LU
0 III III 1580- - - - -
/ 4011111 II I II All J III( // 581 - -- NSTALL 1091 LFOF - - - - -- -580 -v
- - - - -- .I// �I )� \I PI7 /11111(/ //_ . -- - ��`_ - -- 7IN07IlWTIREFETJCE-- - - - - -_
- -- - - - - - - - - - - _ SEE DETAIL SHEET 35.
582 - -- - -__- - `- - - - - -- NOW OR FORMERLY
583---- - - - - -- -__ ___ - - -- _
- -- KAREN S_H9611L7"BA' - -ss�\
_ �- - - - _ - _ - - - // iLY I \ \ - - / - - - - FLQDD -ZONE AE _ _ - - - 0pB-495$ PG J8. -
_- ___ - - - //: U\ \ _- 584----- - - - - -- \ cFLOOD ZONEX - - - - - -_
��f- / �LC..r \v -'<-- \ - - - - -- __585---- _ - -___ ____ - --
- - - -'N -_ -_- -��\\\ � FL QD ZONE LINE -\.Sew
- - - - -DON SCOTS 37S�J �)
r1v\ 587 - -_ -_
\� - - - --
- \ � I - - - - - - - - 588 -
10 +00 11+00 12 +00 13 +00 14 +00 15 +00
10 +00
11+00
12 +00
13 +00
14 +00
15 +00
17.20
2.90 5.70+{
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.50
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.60
6.60 5.40 6.60
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
18.60
13.90 2.50
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
/10
rL
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
18.60
2.5 0 13.90
- -- TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
SV
RE,
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
3.60
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -SO - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
I
LOG STRUCTURE
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
>8---- -re - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
t
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE - 1�--
X- --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
�
TYPICAL SECTIONS STA
PROPOSED FILL AREA
0 U
Q
Q (-% W
z
11 +17 TO 19 +18
2 F
Q
Q
Im
� O
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
O
.. F-Z
w U)
� W �
\
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
� C] Z
H
�
N
LEAF PACK
WZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z¢zm
REACH
REACH
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
o_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
UVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
1
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33))1
EXISTING TREE
586
U72 -2
U72 -3
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
584
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
582
ROCK STEP POOL
I1
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
_, ^
560
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
576
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
PROP
SED 40 LF
576
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI000CICC n
574
OF 6
HOPE AND
40 LF
OF 36"
HDPE FLOCOPLAIN
I
CULVERT
(NOT SH
WN) PROP
SED TOP OF
BANK
ANKFULL S
AGE
PROPOSED
BOTTOM CE
HANNEL
TERLINE
EXISTIN
APPROI
IMATE LOCH
ON OF PROPOSED
CHANN
L
CENTS
INS FINAL
LOCATION SHALL
BE
DETERMINED
AFTER
BOND IS DRAINED,
DAM IS
BREACHED,
AND EXISTING
POND
OTTOM IS
PRIOR
O CONSTRUCTION
OF PRO
OSED
CHANNI
L.
10 +00
11+00
12 +00
13 +00
14 +00
15 +00
17.20
2.90 5.70+{
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.50
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.60
6.60 5.40 6.60
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
18.60
13.90 2.50
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
/10
rL
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
18.60
2.5 0 13.90
- -- TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE!
DR
3. ALL
SW
RE!
4. NO
SV
RE,
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
8. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
3.60
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -SO - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
I
LOG STRUCTURE
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
>8---- -re - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
t
CHANNEL
EXISTING FENCELINE - 1�--
X- --K-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
� > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
572
571
�D CKSON
cmunity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
21
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p Z w
3.60
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
I
LOG STRUCTURE
O Q
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Q ~
Z
LOG GRADE CONTROL
t
STRUCTURE
� � CJ
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
� > J
Z �
7
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
W J
W
J
LL
CROSS SECTION
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
�
TYPICAL SECTIONS STA
PROPOSED FILL AREA
0 U
Q
Q (-% W
z
11 +17 TO 19 +18
2 F
Q
Q
Im
� O
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
O
.. F-Z
w U)
� W �
w d
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
� C] Z
H
�
N
LEAF PACK
WZ 7
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z¢zm
590
o
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
o_
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
UVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
j5
588
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33))1
EXISTING TREE
586
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
584
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
582
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
_, ^
560
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
576
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
576
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
CI000CICC n
574
572
571
�D CKSON
cmunity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
1" = HALF SCALE I`
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
21
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~ LL
O
o Z
O �
a
p Z w
U
M z
Z m
O Q
Q ~
Z
� w
�
Z
N
� � CJ
Z
� > J
Z �
7
U)
>
W J
W
J
LL
W � Z
0
U
M z
Z m
O Q
Q ~
Z
� w
�
Z
N
� � CJ
� > J
Z �
7
Q LLI W
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
�
d
0 U
Q
Q (-% W
z
H
2 F
Q
Q
Im
� O
z
g
O
.. F-Z
w U)
� W �
w d
�
2
� C] Z
H
�
N
WZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_

584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
565
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
NOW OR FORMERLY
KAREN 5 HAMILTON INSTALL 1091 LF OF
0827JOG WOVEN WIRE FENCE.
DO. J B. 4959, PG fi SEE DETAIL SHEET 35.
18 +00
19 +00
M
N
w
W
2
W
U)
W
Z
J
2
G
17.20
2.90 5,70-1
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.5
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.70
6.60 5.50 6.60
BANKFULL STAGE
0
8.50 ---7
14.20 2.50
BANKFULL STAGE NOTES:
- -- - 1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
0 DE!
SIR
3. ALL
SIR
R
4. NO
4 EA
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSC co(i
SECTION THE
- 18.50- SIR
2.50 14.20
- BANKFULL STAGE
I
TYPICAL POOL CROSS IL
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
CROSS SECTION
STA 11 +17 TO 19 +18
18.20
3.10 6.00 �{
� II BANKFULL STAGE
2 1T0 -- - -- -
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.70
7.00 5.90 7.00
- - - - BANKFULL STAGE
3.75
I
CL
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
20 +00 SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
J
581 -- - -
1-
-- 3C1�
- - -_� _
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
. -581- - -
- 580--- - - -
_ _ - -� _ /
- -- ------ -y`L__ - \\ S83
/ \ -
\
- - -46 - - --
- 579----- -
- - ---
O
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
- 578------------
-
- - - - -- �\ \ �. \ - -
\ -_�`�
- - -
\
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
- 577-----
--
NDW OR FO, MEALY _`-
I TAMMY RENEE�S. -
- - - -- - - -�� --- - - - - ---
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
5+00
I I 16 +00 AUCOM \ _ 30�
/
`
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
BANKFULL STAGE
; i
I wD 730D6B \ - - -
PG 48
- - - - - FhoDa -ZQNE Y- - - - - -
Wyo.
7
p
U)
j
)1 REACH UT2 -3 _`` -- - -
- -- �3'J
-
w
W � Z
\ \ PI RESTORATION - -__-
- --
--FmDazoNE2TNE-------
_ - - -- -
w
0- 576 - --
- s7e -
_ I _ _�_�_ _ _ ` - - - ----
-- ----- ------ - -- - --
/�
i
"`�'_-
77±QO _
-_
_ - - - - -
VJ
.5_.- _'--
77
_
- - -
-TB� - -_ - -�_��
- - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - -
w
� 0 Z
T
°-� ` -_ ie�� _ -- 576 - -_
N
O� a
z_
--
wZ 7
�
U)
+
-_
- - -_\� \ ���\ \19400
REACH
UT2 -3
578 -_
_- _-
-
W
-- LCEX- ----IXCE
J9
--
LCE
IS
R-
-
OPOSED -
NK/BANKFUL
OF
STAGE
_
\
-- -_-
U�\(
// "�- 558ag� `` \\ \\ \ \\
- - - -- --575 -
2.70
__
\
\ \\
571 E, `- - -
\ \ \
- - -- --
-575
\ / / -574 ` \ \
- --
END REACH UT2 -3
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
-� \�
573, \ \ \ \ \ \ \
- -_-
Pi RESTORATION -_\
-- BEGIN -REACH U'T2- 4-- -
BANKFULL STAGE
LOG GRADE CONTROL
- - - --
Pi RESTORATION - 'S77_
ROPOSED CH
CEN
NNEL
RLINE
/ / /// / I -
11
1_
---- S7A'F9*18
- - - -�_ -S78-
STRUCTURE
FLOOD ACNE Lit E �-
_
�- / l 1 -i
EXISTING
GR
DE
T /
/ /// / jr / / -- = �'FL60B'ZOfJ!`AE
5✓ / / _ _ _
3.90
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
565
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
NOW OR FORMERLY
KAREN 5 HAMILTON INSTALL 1091 LF OF
0827JOG WOVEN WIRE FENCE.
DO. J B. 4959, PG fi SEE DETAIL SHEET 35.
18 +00
19 +00
M
N
w
W
2
W
U)
W
Z
J
2
G
17.20
2.90 5,70-1
I BANKFULL STAGE
0.5
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.70
6.60 5.50 6.60
BANKFULL STAGE
0
8.50 ---7
14.20 2.50
BANKFULL STAGE NOTES:
- -- - 1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
0 DE!
SIR
3. ALL
SIR
R
4. NO
4 EA
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSC co(i
SECTION THE
- 18.50- SIR
2.50 14.20
- BANKFULL STAGE
I
TYPICAL POOL CROSS IL
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
CROSS SECTION
STA 11 +17 TO 19 +18
18.20
3.10 6.00 �{
� II BANKFULL STAGE
2 1T0 -- - -- -
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
18.70
7.00 5.90 7.00
- - - - BANKFULL STAGE
3.75
I
CL
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
20 +00 SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
18 +00
19 +00
20 +00
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
565
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$0 - - --
FLOODPLAIN SILL
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
Z m
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
O
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
19.50
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z
O
�
15.00
2.70
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
Z
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
2®
•1.64
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
BANKFULL STAGE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0032c CU
7
p
U)
j
BERM
J
LL
-
W � Z
-
TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
�EXISTING
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
2 F
Q
¢
� O
Z
PROPOSED CENTER NE OF
Oz
wv~i
� W �
J a�
3 90
� 0 Z
H
�
N
O� a
z_
EXISTING F
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aaC=),
REACH
UT2 -3
EACH
T2 -4
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM -
- - - - - - -
fE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
P
B
OPOSED -
NK/BANKFUL
OF
STAGE
19.50
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
2.70
15.00
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
-
BANKFULL STAGE
LOG GRADE CONTROL
BOTTOM
ROPOSED CH
CEN
NNEL
RLINE
- - -
- - - - -
STRUCTURE
}
EXISTING
GR
DE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
3.90
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)'
CROSS SECTION
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
15 +00
16 +00
17 +00
18 +00
19 +00
20 +00
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
565
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
STA 19 +18 TO 30 +20
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
LEGEND
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
- - -$0 - - --
FLOODPLAIN SILL
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -
- - -46 - - --
Z m
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
O
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
19.50
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z
O
�
15.00
2.70
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
Z
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
2®
•1.64
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
BANKFULL STAGE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0032c CU
7
p
U)
j
BERM
J
LL
-
W � Z
-
TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
�EXISTING
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
2 F
Q
¢
� O
Z
PROPOSED CENTER NE OF
Oz
wv~i
� W �
J a�
3 90
� 0 Z
H
�
N
O� a
z_
EXISTING F
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aaC=),
XISTING
E TREELINE
rYYY1
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM -
- - - - - - -
fE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
SECTION
19.50
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
2.70
15.00
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
BANKFULL STAGE
LOG GRADE CONTROL
r
-
- - -
- - - - -
STRUCTURE
}
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
3.90
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)'
CROSS SECTION
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
STA 19 +18 TO 30 +20
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
Qv
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
Z m
O
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
Z
O
�
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
°
~
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
O
Z
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
o
Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
0032c CU
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NO 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
LU
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
22
P ROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
CJ
ui
Qv
a z
O
a �
Z m
O
O Q
F
CJ
0_
z
Z
O
�
�z
W
�
°
~
O
LL
Z
M
O
Z
� � CJ
o
Z
O �
� Z
� > J
Z �
7
p
U)
j
W J
W
J
LL
W � Z
0
CJ
a z
Z m
O Q
�z
W
�
Z
M
� � CJ
� > J
Z �
7
Q LLI LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
M
d
� CJ
Q
Q (-) W
z
H
2 F
Q
¢
� O
Z
Z
Oz
wv~i
� W �
J a�
2
� 0 Z
H
�
N
O� a
z_
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aaC=),
o
O¢a�
O
o_

/ FLOOD ZONE LINE
- - - - - - - - - _ 83 - I \ 1 N�I}s��ppRR_ F0.4MERLY
5 7 �I�I A I 1 CH TILES AIl�bROVADWAY _ _ 58., -- - --
/ i % AND WIFE \\ - - -i
\ v I III ELLA BROADWAYL -
- PID N827MO \ ZO E - -
-=33T. O.B. 2I4. PC 660 \- __ - - -- = FLOOD - - -- 579_ -�
I \ - _ _ - FLOOD ZONE_AE - -
- _ -__- 580 - -'lY ���' ��/ 4V11 - - - - - -- - 578_ - -- -
��
579 - - - -� : -- - - -- -
N ---- - - - - -- _578 - - -- -- --�- ' - - - - -- . IIII I
--_ -- _ _ --- - -_
-_-_ - -_- 5756 75 -
_ - - - - -- - - _
N --- - - - - -- _.577 _ _
-
-
- -- = _ - - -- 574
7&- - - - --
W __-576 - - - - - -- \ - 57e- - --
WB,
/ REACH U72 -4 --- - -_S ui
U) -- -- ✓/ I y/ \
W P1 RESTORATION / / II IX /.5� \ -0 25 B �__
ui - 574 A( / �tl W
* I I END REACH
0 RESTORATION.
Pi RESTORATION
W -- I I (sra 22+07) / / __ - _ 572 j��B
_ - -5573 �-
+00 = Ti 15g _ - - W
_ - 574
74 J - - - -_ 1 -�. I x_5--- TB_ ----- TB - =\�. T��s� :. -FLO9Q ZONE-575- . - - - -_ Z
s73
U \ \ \ \ \ O' RIGHT OF WAY
r CLAIMED BY UNION POWER a
QoOPERAn VE
Q
_ Ay I 1 __576
rCHARIESATIAS / -- - -____ -TIE IN TO L / EN BARN - -- EXISTING FENCE. 1 / / / / / 8.36' �_ -- 577- 1All / / / L /h - �C I I l / R FOR.IIERLY I - FRAS BROADWAY
I I ND WIFE 57a - Af / / / / BROADWAY -NOW�7 FORMERLY I x / / / l / / N8273008 INCLUDE 30' BREAK INSTALL 1091/17 OF WOVEN KAREN S HAMILTON _ _ _ _ 579 - - - - // / / / I4, PG 660 IN CONSERVATION WIRE FENCE SEE DETAIL PID 082730064- J
\ EASEMENT FOR SHEET 35. - - - - - -D.-R 4959, PG 38 I J / / / / / /
ExisnNC unLITY /
L/-
562
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
5664
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
24 +00
25 +00
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
24 +00
25 +00
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
564
18.20
3.10 6.00y
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
2 11
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
19.60
6.90 5.80 6.90
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE - - - - - - - - }L
I
3.75
q_
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
1960 .
14.60 2.70
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE - - - -
I
3.80
I
q_
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
9.60
2.70 14.50
TOP OF BANK/
}r - BANKFULL STAGE
3.80
I
4-
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
CROSS SECTION
TYPICAL SECTIONS STA
19 +18 TO 30 +20
NOTES:
1. IN
FRC
2. ALL
DEE
DIRT
3. ALL
SHF
REf
4. NO
STA
REf
SE(
5. cot
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - -
-46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2®
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
U
7
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK - --------
ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
~
PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --%-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
0
O =
� M U
Q
C C
d
Q (-) W
z
H
Q ~
Q
H
� O
Z
0
w (n
� W �
EXISTIN
GRADE
� 0 Z
END REACH
P1 RESTORA
T2 -4
ON
O M d
Z
wZ
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL
PR OS
BANK/B
D TOP OF
NKFULL STA
E
PROPOSED C
4ANNEL
(STA 22 +07
BOTTOM CEN
RLINE
_
-
-
20 +00
21 +00
22 +00
23 +00
24 +00
25 +00
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
564
18.20
3.10 6.00y
TOP OF BANK/
I BANKFULL STAGE
2 11
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
19.60
6.90 5.80 6.90
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE - - - - - - - - }L
I
3.75
q_
TYPICAL POOL CROSS
SECTION STRAIGHT REACH
1960 .
14.60 2.70
TOP OF BANK/
BANKFULL STAGE - - - -
I
3.80
I
q_
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
9.60
2.70 14.50
TOP OF BANK/
}r - BANKFULL STAGE
3.80
I
4-
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER
CROSS SECTION
TYPICAL SECTIONS STA
19 +18 TO 30 +20
NOTES:
1. IN
FRC
2. ALL
DEE
DIRT
3. ALL
SHF
REf
4. NO
STA
REf
SE(
5. cot
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - -
-46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2®
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
U
7
0_
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK - --------
ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
°
~
PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
Z
CHANNEL
O
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE -
- - --%-
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
0 > J
Z �
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
T
Q
I
1� • 19
•♦ 11
i��i►
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(1) 919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
LU
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
23
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
U
w
Qv
M Z
O
a �
Z m
Z
O
O Q
U
7
0_
Z
Z
Z
O
�
� W
�
°
~
O
LL
Z
V
O
Z
� � CJ
o
a� z
O �
°w z
0 > J
Z �
7
U)
>
w
W J
W
w 0_
J
LL
�
0
F
U
M Z
Z m
O Q
Z
� W
�
Z
V
� � CJ
0 > J
Z �
7
Q LLI LLI
F Z CD
J
LL
W � Z
0
O =
� M U
Q
C C
d
Q (-) W
z
H
Q ~
Q
H
� O
Z
0
w (n
� W �
J d
�
2
� 0 Z
H
�
N
O M d
Z
wZ
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
IL

592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
NOW OR FORMERLY
597 — - DON SCOTT SIMPSON
1 ";2 \ \
/ !
- - -- 596--- - - - - -- D.B'D49597P0G 42
\ \ x \\ \
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
- -- 595_---- - -_ - --
TEA
`
\ \\
594
- -. - - - - -- �/��
S E
-- — — —
—_ -- -_593 ------ - - - - — ---- _- - -
.
--
\ .\\
1 \ \ II
592------- - - - - --
Z
X301— �C1 .f�3Cl - - - -- 301
3�1�t301�
-- _ - -_ _
— —_ I
------ s91 - -- _ _
—_ X _
- - - -_— .590------------ - = ---X =_�_�
% 9
x
X
— — \
--- - - - -5e ------------- --- ------ --
BEGIN UT2 -A
\ \
\
ENHANCEMFY,' 11 — F100D- 79N�X_ — — — — — —
STA 0+65 — —
— —
\ • \ �In
/ — — FLOOD ZONE AE
-------
- - - - -- i
1 \
V A
PE IN R CH UT2 -A
ENHAN EMENT II TO l
-587 -- FLOOD ZONE LINE
RE CH UT2 -2 P1 /
RESTORATION AT STA
5 +28.' SEE SHEET 20. /
\
-
IB 2+pp---- - -- --�
I
\ I
/
1
1
Z
_7B__ --
0
Q
w
W �
J d
- FLOOD,
H
�
•rte \
— \
REACH UT2 -A -
�' ENHANCEMENT II
- _ 11
I
FLOOD ZOAE4ILJE
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_
= LCELCE-
LE
�/ --- - - - - --
�� NOW OR FORMERLY - -� �— \ \ _ — �4�
\ \ — — wov> \
X
�E7
"es- \ L E I 1 )
—
— — — — — —
DON SCOTT SIMPSON — INSTALL 1741 LF-OF =N� \
PID 08273007 \ \ \ — — _ WIRE FENCE\ SEE D�iitlL�
--SHEET
\ \
\ S \ \ \ \ \ 1 I 1 II
D.B. 4959, PG 42 35.\\
v
s A v v V A .A V 111 II
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00 3 +00 4 +00 5 +00 5 +28
E ISTING GRAD
PROPOSED C IiANNEL \
BOTTOM CENTERLINE
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00 3 +00 4 +00 5 +00 5 +28
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
UT2 -A NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +00 TO APPROXIMATELY
3 +90.
5.80
1 00 1.90
I BAN KFU LL STAGE
0.i
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
1 ";2 \ \
\��V�V v A
Q
HEST 20. \
\ \ x \\ \
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
\ \\
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
\
\ )
\ .\\
1 \ \ II
CHANNEL
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
Z J
I
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
\ \
\ ( \
I I I
0
� O =
� M U
Q
I
1 \
V A
PE IN R CH UT2 -A
ENHAN EMENT II TO l
I
\
\
RE CH UT2 -2 P1 /
RESTORATION AT STA
5 +28.' SEE SHEET 20. /
\
\
\
i \
I
\ I
/
1
1
Z
� O
Z
�
0
Q
w
W �
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00 3 +00 4 +00 5 +00 5 +28
E ISTING GRAD
PROPOSED C IiANNEL \
BOTTOM CENTERLINE
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00 3 +00 4 +00 5 +00 5 +28
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
UT2 -A NOTE:
PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT GRADING SHALL
FOLLOW TYPICAL BANK GRADING OPTION 1
DETAIL ON SHEET 35. LAY BACK BANKS
FROM STATION 0 +00 TO APPROXIMATELY
3 +90.
5.80
1 00 1.90
I BAN KFU LL STAGE
0.i
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS
SECTION
NOTES:
1. IN
FR(
2. ALL
DE:
DIR
3. ALL
SW
RE:
4. NO
STA
RE:
SE(
5. CO
6. THE PROPOSED CROSS - SECTIONS SHALL TIE INTO
EXISTING GRADE AT A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 5H:1V. FOR
ALL AREAS WHERE THE PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER THAN 0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE, A BANKFULL BENCH MUST BE CONSTRUCTED.
SEE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION GRADING DETAIL ON SHEET
35 FOR DIMENSIONS.
7. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED
FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE
PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE
ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE
DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
B. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
EASEMENT PER CHANNEL BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON
SHEET 32 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
9. IF BEDROCK IS ENCOUNTERED DURING CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTION, STRUCTURES MAY BE RELOCATED OR
ELIMINATED PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR - -
- -$O - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- -46 - - --
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z m
2980
PROPOSED SPOT SHOT
•1.64
BERM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ---
re---- -ie - --
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
PROPOSED CENTERUNE OF
�2
� Z
CHANNEL
Z
EXISTING FENCELINE —
- - --K—
EXISTING TREELINE rYYY1
Z J
PROPOSED CHANNEL BOTTOM _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
J
LL
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LCE
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
EXISTING CHANNEL BENCH
PROPOSED FILL AREA
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
LEAF PACK
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
EXISTING TREE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
ROCK STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 33)
ROCK CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 32)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 35)
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
(SEE DETAIL SHEET 34)
T
6
I
•♦ 11
10
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULLSCALE'. V-30 H, V-3 V
0 30
�2" = FULL SCALE
l 1" = HALF SCALE I` LU
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
24
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
O
U
z �
° O
~
U-
0
F
U
a z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
Q
Z
W O
M Mv
o
a z
O �
� Z
Z J
W
p
N
>
W J
W
J
LL
F Z
W � Z
0
F
U
a z
Z m
O Q
�z
O w
�2
� Z
Q
W O
M Mv
N
r
Z J
W
Q
J Q W
CD
J
LL
F Z
W � Z
0
� O =
� M U
Q
CC
d
Q (-) W
z
H
F
Q
�
Z
� O
Z
�
0
Q
w
W �
J d
2
� 0 Z
H
U
Z_
0_
wZ 7
�
Z¢zm
aa�
o
O¢a�
O
o_

V vV rl'
/ \ NOW OR FORMERLY
\ BILLY F AYC07H, TRUSTEE
\ PIO 08303074
\ D.B. 5304, PG 860
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANK PHUNG
AND WEE
SYLVIA HITTING
PID 187, 7, 01 C 2
.B. 08 C
D
\ I
/ I/
/ \ I
/ t1l
/ REACH
BREAK
/ REACH UT1 -3
I
/
REACH UT1 -B
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
D.B. 2079, PC 825
11
1
1
I I
1
NOW OR FORMERLY
\ \
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND W FE
\
\
JUDY H. POPLIN
PI B 08273001
B.B. 2079, PG 825
\ \
Hordeum s .
50"/
Winter R "
Secale cereal,
\
I
\ \
NOW OR FORMERLY
\
\
I I I
I i
I
I I \
I
B - Summer
- --
NOW OR FORMERLY
CHERYL T. OWNBY
I
QA, I
I I
\
Se(aria italica
2ty%
NOW OR FORMERLY
FOREST HILLS BAPTISTI
PID 08JO -15C
\ \
BREAKI I
1 I
1 1
\
HEIRS OF THOMAS E. GRIFFIN
CHURCH
UP, PG 247
\
UT1 -C
\"
ZONE 2
\
PIN 08303015A
PIN 083030158
'\
x AND WEE
\
x� JUDY H. POPLIN
l
l
If PID 08273001
O.B. 2079, PG 825
REACH UT1 -4 lillll I
liiil
1`-
�) rl
1
�
111111
—
111111 ij j
111111111 1
1J
1, l� ,
lllll� I
11111111
_
'Ill IL I
1 1111
�
Z¢ z m
aa�
NOW OR FORMERLY
O¢a�
0
IL
NOW OR FORMERLY
BILLY F. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
BILLY
F AYCOTH, TRUS TEE
PIN 08303014
i
PIN 08303 014
sj1 r`III1
O.B. 5304, PG 860
B.B. 5304, PG 860
REACH UT1
-A
<p
1'
NOW OR FORMERLY
RONALD COLIN HOUGH
11 \
ANN W FE
-
`
PEGGY C. HOUGH
-
ll
PIN 083030120
t
ills
D.B. 333, PG 741
REACH UT1 -1
REACH
\
BREAK
Ir
C
/
REACH UT1
-2
V vV rl'
/ \ NOW OR FORMERLY
\ BILLY F AYC07H, TRUSTEE
\ PIO 08303074
\ D.B. 5304, PG 860
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANK PHUNG
AND WEE
SYLVIA HITTING
PID 187, 7, 01 C 2
.B. 08 C
D
\ I
/ I/
/ \ I
/ t1l
/ REACH
BREAK
/ REACH UT1 -3
I
/
REACH UT1 -B
NOW OR FORMERLY
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND WIFE
JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001
D.B. 2079, PC 825
11
1
1
I I
1
NOW OR FORMERLY
\ \
THOMAS RAY POPLIN
AND W FE
\
\
JUDY H. POPLIN
PI B 08273001
B.B. 2079, PG 825
\ \
Hordeum s .
50"/
Winter R "
Secale cereal,
50%
I
\ \
I
Scientific Name
I I I
I i
I
I I \
I
B - Summer
- --
I
I
I \ \
I
QA, I
I I
I \
Se(aria italica
2ty%
Ja anew Millet
Echinochloa i•unlentacea
REACHI
\ \
BREAKI I
1 I
1 1
F-- Z Z
d
0
UT1 -C
\"
ZONE 2
t
NOW OR FORMERLY
NOW RAY POPLIN
alt
'\
x AND WEE
u ill
ill
x� JUDY H. POPLIN
l
l
If PID 08273001
O.B. 2079, PG 825
REACH UT1 -4 lillll I
liiil
1`-
�) rl
1
�
111111
r � �
.. �1
111111 ij j
111111111 1
1J
1, l� ,
lllll� I
11111111
I\
I I` \
`I t
'Ill IL I
1 1111
�
I
/ NOW OR FORMERLY
\ DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WIFE
\ / / SUSAN D. FITCH
/ PID 09255072A 86
O.B. 751, PG 860
PLANTING LEGEND
ZONE 1: RIPARIAN PLANTING
ZONE 2: UTILITY EASEMENT AREA
Temporary Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name Scienfifre Name
Pe oce nt
—position
Seed Mix A - Winter
--
Barle j
Hordeum s .
50"/
Winter R "
Secale cereal,
50%
TotatPounds Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
composition
Seed Mix
B - Summer
- --
Sudan ass
Sor htoo bicolor
40%
Fo dal Millet
Se(aria italica
2ty%
Ja anew Millet
Echinochloa i•unlentacea
40°/
p
Y N
Total Pounds Seed Mix
100%
NOTES:
1. Rare root planting is proposed for all areas within the easement not designated for
livc staking or livc nutting band Ics.
2 Bar, loot planting density is xppo matcly 680 stems per amc.
3. I ive cutting bundles are proposed along the outside ofineander bends, ad latent
to pools.
4. Lire cutting bundles spcoics shall include silky willows or blank willoln.
5. I ive stakes are proposed along both banks ofstraight reaches adjacent to pools.
PLANTING NOTES
ALL PLANTING AREAS
1. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT
VEGETATION HE END THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AT T THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES ARE FUNCTIONING
PROPERLY.
2. DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN 10
WORKING DAYS. UPON COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING. PERMANENT VEGETATION SHALL BE
ESTABUSHED FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS. SEEDING SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
3. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED PRIOR TO PLANTING BY DISC OR
SPRING -TOOTH CHISEL PLOW TO MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES. MULTIPLE PASSES SHALL
BE MADE ACROSS PUNTING AREAS WITH THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL
FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS.
4. COIR FABRIC MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE CUT WITH PLANTING IMPLEMENTS. THE SMALLEST
OPENING NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE EACH PLANT SHALL BE CUT INTO COIR FABRIC
USING A SHARP KNIFE OR SHEARS. NO HOLES LARGER THAN 12 INCHES SHALL BE MADE.
5. SPECIES SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO 6 PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE
GROUPED TOGETHER.
6. BARE ROOT PLANTINGS SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 34.
LVE CUTTING BUNDLES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 33.
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 32.
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR -- - - - - --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- TB---- -Ta---
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, INC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
N� LICE—No
FULL SCALE: 1" =200
0 200
2" =FULL SCALE
HALF SCAL
PROD. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
G.G. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
25
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
Z
O
U
7
Z
O
Z �
O 0
U
W �
M z
Z m
O Q
Q ~
Z
�
O W
2
a
LL
F
Z
roil
~
O
O
o
Z
O �
�
�
J
Qww
Z
p
Y N
Z
n¢j J
F-- Z Z
d
U
W �
M z
Z m
O Q
Q ~
Z
�
O W
2
F
Z
O
�
J
Qww
Z
CD
F-- Z Z
d
Z
Q W
F
H
�o
as
Z
w
�
v~i
� W �
ILL
H
2
z 0 Z
U
�
N
W Z�
�
Z¢ z m
aa�
o
O¢a�
0
IL

I
I NOW OR FORMERLY
'
I
I I
I
TERRY L PRICE
\
PID 08273007
AND WIFE
I
/3etuln ni rn
JUDITH PRICE
�\
I
I
PID 0822 70073
Green ash
F— h— en's rlvanica
D.B. 684, PG 588
American sveamore
NOW OR FORMERLY
10%
1 I
JAMEY B. PRICE
PID 08273004D
20 %
l
I
D.R. 1581, PG 130
L5%
I
%i <I <iil REACH
15%
/ I
BREAK
15%
100%
REACH UT2 -2
_ I'iill
REACH UT2 -A
\
\
REACH
BREAK
REACH
BREAK
NOW M
OR FOR
\
DON SCOTT SIMPSERLY ON
\
PID 08273007
uiarr REACH UT2 -1
D.B. 4959, PG 42
/3etuln ni rn
5%
�\
I
I
REACH UT2 -A
\
\
REACH
BREAK
REACH
BREAK
REACH
BREAK
\
\
\ REACH UT2 -4�
NOW OR FORMERLY
/ CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PIN N8273008
Re 214, PG 660
IIIiiNiilri i
111111 / .
✓� iq
� ihl,,A,O
11 �o
Y�Id1i
Ilil II1' <`,_
ill l lilt l;', I <r 7 1
I
1,11 d
I lr/ /
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS
PO 09253067C I ,
0.8 778, PG 346 I
I (/
I
/
NOW OR FORMERLY
\
KAREN S HAMILTON
\
PID 08273006A
D.B. 4959, PC 38
uiarr REACH UT2 -1
River birch
REACH
BREAK
\
\
\ REACH UT2 -4�
NOW OR FORMERLY
/ CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PIN N8273008
Re 214, PG 660
IIIiiNiilri i
111111 / .
✓� iq
� ihl,,A,O
11 �o
Y�Id1i
Ilil II1' <`,_
ill l lilt l;', I <r 7 1
I
1,11 d
I lr/ /
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS
PO 09253067C I ,
0.8 778, PG 346 I
I (/
I
/
Zone 1
Riparian Areas
Common Name
Scientific Name
1'
i
Planting
Plant Species
uiarr REACH UT2 -1
River birch
/3etuln ni rn
5%
Common haekbem,
Cehis occiden[alis
10%
Green ash
F— h— en's rlvanica
10%
American sveamore
Platanus occider'alis
10%
Southern red oak
< r
r/ EXISTING
20 %
/
t �t 0", l <� /r WETLAND
L5%
er
Northern red oak
%i <I <iil REACH
15%
/
BREAK
15%
100%
REACH UT2 -2
_ I'iill
100%
Zone 2
Utility Easement Areas bammot or container
NOW OR FORMERLY
DON SCOTT SIMPSON l
Scientific Name
1111 \rrt.
�1 �
01 4
PIO 08273007
/
Ahi-s rrdata
IIIIIIIII _
I Ilt I I11
IYI
O.B. 4959, PG 42
Corrlus am ricana
I
1111111
Flowerim <crabapple
Malus an oats oha
'0°/
Wax ai
Morella ecn /era
AGO
Blactdww vibarmmn
Viburnum -nl oliunl
-
l��hi�
z 0 Z
O
-
inll
r 1 II III EXISTING
ri r
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
�
,r, Il;il
ll�illl WETLAND
I
/
Pcrccnt
com osition
� Ills r I '1 /ll�l
Cornur amo/rrum
45%
i4�lrll
Salix sericea
45%
1II�
/II
Salfx ni ra
I 10%
11
/
00%
NOW OR FORMERLY
/
-
TAMMY RENEE S. BAUCOM
O 4959, 959, 068
PID 1.B.
PG 48
/
/
/
REACH UT2 -3
/
—ZONE 2
/
�
\ NOW OR FORMERLY \
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY /
\ AND WFE /
ELLA BROADWAY
PID L8273008
Zone 1
Riparian Areas
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Composition
Planting
Plant Species
15%
River birch
/3etuln ni rn
5%
Common haekbem,
Cehis occiden[alis
10%
Green ash
F— h— en's rlvanica
10%
American sveamore
Platanus occider'alis
10%
Southern red oak
verca.r alcata
20 %
Wales' oak
)uercus ni ra
L5%
er
Northern red oak
}uercus rubra
15%
Slippery Elm
1 0— rubra
15%
100%
Totat Bareroot Stems
100%
Zone 2
Utility Easement Areas bammot or container
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Composition
Ta Alder
Ahi-s rrdata
20%
American hazelnut
Corrlus am ricana
200,
Flowerim <crabapple
Malus an oats oha
'0°/
Wax ai
Morella ecn /era
AGO
Blactdww vibarmmn
Viburnum -nl oliunl
20°/
z 0 Z
O
Total Stems
100%
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
�
Common Name
Scientific Name
Pcrccnt
com osition
SiOcv do <Wwood
Cornur amo/rrum
45%
Silky willow
Salix sericea
45%
Black willow
Salfx ni ra
I 10%
00%
PLANTING LEGEND
ZONE 1: RIPARIAN PLANTING
ZONE 2: UTILITY EASEMENT AREA
Permanent Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
composition
Bushy Bluestem
Androlo on glowratus
15%
Sedt4e, Fringed
Carex crini /a
10%
Settee, Tussock
Car- stricta
5%
V--ima Wild—
El Wmus vir iniclas
15%
Pu Tle hove 'ass
Era ros /is s lec/abilis
10%
Beaked attic ass
Panicamance s
30%
Little Blue Stem
Schizach rium sc ,ium
20%
Eastern Gam- ass
I 'l'ri. sacunl dacroloides
5%
40%
Total Pounds Seed Mix
100%
Temporary Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Pereent
com osition
Seed Mix
A Winter
--
Barley
7 /ordeunl5
50%
in C,
S", INcer .ale
50/
hotal Pounds Seed Mix
Q ~
Z
Common Name Scientific Name
Percent
composition
Seed Mix B - Summer
- -- --
Sodan,rass
S'or ham bicolor
40%
F-1,R] Milet
.Setaria i[alica
20%
Japanese Millet
I Echi'ochlon ron —tacea
40%
p Z
Y N
¢a j
W
Total Pounds Seed MN
100%
Ni
1. Rare root planting is proposed for all areas within the easement not designated for
live staking or live cutting bundles.
2. Bare root planting density is approximately 680 stern, per acre.
3. Live cutting bundles arc proposed along the outside of meander bends, xdj ---t
to pools.
4. Live cutting bundles species shall include silky willows ,,black willows.
5. live stakes are proposed along both banks fstraight reaches adjaecnt to pools.
PLANTING NOTES
ALL PLANING AREAS
1. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES STIALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT
YEAS RESN T ESTABLISHED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AT THE ENO OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES ARE FUNCTIONING
PROPERLY.
2. DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN 10
WO iKING DAYS. UPON COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING. PERMANENT VEGETATION SHALL BE
ESTABLISHED FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS. SEEDING SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
3. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED PRIOR TO PLANTING BY DISC OR
SPRING -TOOTH CHISEL PLOW TO MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES. MULTIPLE PASSES SHALL
BE MADE ACROSS PLANING AREAS W111-1 THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL
FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS.
4. CDR FABRIC MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE WT WITH PLANING IMPLEMENTS. THE SMALLEST
OPENING NECESSARY M ACCOMMODATE EACH PLANT S1ALL BE CUT INTO COIR FABRIC
USING A SHARP KNIFE OR SHEARS. NO HOLES LARGER THAN 12 INCHES SHALL BE MADE.
5. SPECIES SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO 6 PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE
GROUPED TOGETHER.
6. BARE ROOT PLMTNGS SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING M DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 34.
LOW CUTTING BUNDLES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 33.
LOW STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING M DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET 32.
LEGEND
EXISTING FEMA FLOOD ZONE — - - —
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - - - - -
- --
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK --- ie---- -Te - --
EXISTING TOE OF BANK —
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE - -
EXISTING WETLANDS 0
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tmn sportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(1) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.Com
FULL SCALE: V =200
0 200
2" =
FULLS
HALF SCAL LU
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
G.c.: FM
O.G. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
26
PROD. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
U
ui
Qv
a z
Q N
a �
zm
Q
O Q
i�
7
lr
Q ~
Z
Z
Z
Q
�
�
O W
2
O
a
Q
LL
F
Z
toil
~
O
O
Q
�
p Z
Y N
¢a j
W
Z
D¢j J
W
W lr
gCD
� Ix
m a
U
a z
zm
O Q
Q ~
Z
�
O W
2
F
Z
N
aaw
gCD
Zi O ¢
d
Z
¢CJw
F
g F
tr
Z
ga
¢
�o
Z
Q
L-1 v~i
¢ W �
w
H
2
z 0 Z
O
�
Z
N �
d
WZ 7
�
¢ � ....
Z¢zm
aa�
CL
o
3:
Q
IL

I
,yt REACH UTi —A
REACH UT2 -1
REACH UT1-B \ ii. ✓i
e ill /
rrri,!
� REACH UT1 -1
/ \ REACH \:, l r iii \ \ ii iiif Ni r • , i �// WESTING
EXISTING
REACH
BREAK
REACH UT1 -2
��/ N lr �riirr
REACH US2 -2
REACH UT2— AJs.:.� VP a ^I iII� `.
REACH s`
BREAK 1/II i'i i� `,,4
REACH I _
( BREAK
i
EXISTING
r WETLAND
REACH i

\ \ II
NOW OR FORMERLY \ \ 1 1 LEGEND
NOW OR FORMERLY CHERYL T OWNBY \ \ NOW OR FORMERLY LIMITS OF PROPOSED
FOREST HILLS BAPTISTS PID 0830 -150 \ HEIRS OF THOMAS E. GRIFFIN 1 1 \ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
CHURCH O.B. 1646, PG 247 \ \ PID 0830JO15A
PID 083030158 — \� — — — — — — — — I 1 TEMPORARY SILT FENCE �®
EXISTING TREELINE
_ — — EXISTING GRAVEL
1 I FARM PATH
NOW OR FORMERLY Q 1 1 Cl O��
HILLY F. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
NOW OR FORMERLY LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
BILLY F AYCOTH, TRUSTEE Pm as3o3o/4 I LOD
PID 08303014 yn�l' ��ilr� O.B. 5304, PG 860
O.B. 5304, PG 860 '��i t ' TEMPORARY GRAVEL
'1� CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
REACH UT1 -A
NOW OR FORMERLY
RONALD COLIN HOUGH - ";
AND dNFE - _ PROPOSED 't1 ` Now oR FORMERLY \ \ POPLIN ROAD TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE - UT1: 20.7 ACRES
TOTAL AREA OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT - UT1: 19.2 ACRES
PEGGY C. HOUGH - .STOCKPILE AREA. �\1l i1'i THOMAS RAY POPLIN \ \
PID 08303012C ` SEE DETAIL I REACH UT1 -B AND WIFE TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE: 31.7 ACRES
O.B. 333, PG 741 _ SHEET 31. l��is� JUDY H POPLIN \ \ TOTAL AREA OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT: 27.2 ACRES
/ . S 71 If PID 08273001
r`bY, O.B. 2079, PG 825
/ REACH UT1 -1
\ REACH
BREAK
/
\ \ \
I
it
REACH UT1 -2
\ \
PROPOSED STOCKPILE I I I \ \
AREA. SEE DETAIL SHEET I i I PROPOSED TEMPORARY
_ GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION
31.
ENTRANCE. SEE DETAIL
SHEET 31.
\ NOW OR FORMERLY
SILL YF. AYCOTH, TRUSTEE
\ PO 08303014
\ NOW FORMERLY
FRANK PHUNG
AND WIFE REACH
1 SYLVIA PHUNG BREAK
T 0830
1 D.B. 4187, PG 241 / : P, ) I V A
REACH UT1 -3
REAC
BREAKHI� \
\ I YY✓✓ I I I 1
REACH UT1 -C N,
NOW OR FORMERLY I I
THOMAS RAY POPLIN 1 I
\Ti
' . \ AND WIFE
/ / �liilli V JUDY H. POPLIN I 1
AN 2079, PC 825
\ NOW OR FORMERLY sill 1\
/ \ THOMAS RAY POPLIN REACH UT1 -4 IIII t`\ I
AND WIFE IIIIII� \
/ JUDY H. POPLIN
PID 08273001 III
/ \ D.B. 2079, PG 825
III III \
PROPOSED TEMPORARY
pit "I \ GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION
L-`1 ENTRANCE. SEE DETAIL
A iiiiiinl \
SHEET 31.
Ililii�ll 11 \
n, i1
1t �
PROPOSED
STOCKPILEAREA. SEE
DETAIL SHEET 31�
/ NOW 0R FORMERLY
V DARRIN J. FITCH
AND WIFE
\ / / SUSAN D. FITCH
/
FIR 0925307
O.B. 09 86 PG 860
�D CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE: 1" =200
0 200
2" = FULL SCALE
1-- HALF SCALE
LJ
w
w .6
Qv
ou
M z
O
a �
zm
r
Z
O
OQ
:m)
U
¢ z
z
U)
O
U
o 2
°
a
�
O
LL
Z
°
~
O
W O
Im Iv
O
Z
0
Q �
Z
C) > J
Z Z
Ir
F-
p
Y N
¢a j
w
w
W LU
W
w CL
Z
O
2
CL
LJ
w .6
ou
M z
zm
r
OQ
:m)
¢ z
Z
o 2
g
Z
d
W O
Im Iv
O
C) > J
Z Z
Ir
F-
< LU LL!
F z cD
Z
O
wiz
U
3: O =
Z¢ U
F-
Z
¢ U W
2
U
LU Im
LIJ
z
M O
z
w U
J)
06
O
U
�w0
J
r Z
=
Z C) Z
H O
N
Ufa
Z O
OZ�
¢ Lu
LLI
Z¢zm
as
o
O¢a�
O
IL
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
28
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA

I
I
I
I NOW OR FORMERLY
TERRY L. PRICE
AND WIFE
JUDITH K. PRICE
PO 08270073
I D.B. 684. PG 588
NOW OR FORMERLY
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
NO 08273007
D.B. 4959, PG 42
PROPOSED
STOCKPILE AREA. SEE
DETAIL SHEET 311
\ REACH UT2 -A
\
\ REACH UT2 -4
\ iIr
tI1 r
,III I
III
NOW OR FORMERLY
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
/ AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PIN N8273008
� S.B 214, PG 660
i1
II iI {��lllri'Ar A ilrl�llli�
� \ �J 11jJ!Iil�I Y1111 1�
7 r�o� 7i1 iln �11
1/�%; A1111
���III�,I�! � 11 jj1`111111
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS
REACH
BREAK
II I
ill
i
/
I
NOW OR FORMERLY
\
KAREN S. HAMILTON
\
PID 08273006A
D.B. 4959, PG 38
\
REACH
/
BREAK
\ REACH UT2 -4
\ iIr
tI1 r
,III I
III
NOW OR FORMERLY
CHARLES ATLAS BROADWAY
/ AND WIFE
ELLA BROADWAY
PIN N8273008
� S.B 214, PG 660
i1
II iI {��lllri'Ar A ilrl�llli�
� \ �J 11jJ!Iil�I Y1111 1�
7 r�o� 7i1 iln �11
1/�%; A1111
���III�,I�! � 11 jj1`111111
NOW OR FORMERLY
FRANCES HELMS
REACH
BREAK
II I
ill
i
/
I
NOW OR FORMERLY /
I
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
i
I
JAMEY B. PRICE
EXISTING TREELINE
/
EXISTING GRAVEL
1
PID 08273004D l
0 Q
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
(I M
LOD
/ 1
I
D.R. 1581, PG 130
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
g LU
�
°
a
I
7
U) Z
/
~
O
W O
J
I
O �
C, Z
in i
Z Z J
E[
F-
p z
Y N
W J
Z
�
� a
I
3: O =
M
F
C)
U
i REACH UT2 -1
Q LU
Q F
U
H
M O
U
U)
irj .6
O
U
W
Z
2
rAi
mmm O
U M d
Z
EXISTING
Z
cc
¢
Z
/
WETLAND
m
O
a
ON ¢w �
BREACH
BREAK
/
/
REACH UT2 -2
G
C
NOW OR FORMERLY
DON SCOTT SIMPSON
l
P/O 08273007
/
03 . 4959, PG 42
7 / �lilllll i�11 j�11 EXISTIN
'l�� i 1r I��I Iljli' WETLAND
REACH
BREAK
PROPOSED
VII STOCKPILE AREA. SEE
DETAIL SHEET 31.
NOW OR FORMERLY
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
w
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
i
TAMMY RENEE S. BAUCOM
PO 082730088
OR 4959, PG 48
EXISTING TREELINE
/
EXISTING GRAVEL
F-
FARM PATH
0 Q
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
(I M
LOD
TEMPORARY GRAVEL
Z
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
g LU
�
°
a
REACH UT2 -3
U) Z
/
~
O
W O
J
o
a
O �
C, Z
in i
Z Z J
E[
F-
p z
Y N
W J
Z
�
� a
3: O =
M
F
C)
U
z
Q LU
Q F
U
H
M O
U
U)
irj .6
O
U
W
Z
2
\ FORMERLY
CHARLES NOW ATLAS OR BROADWAY
mmm O
U M d
Z
AND WFE
Z
cc
¢
Z
\
ELLA BROADWAY
m
O
a
ON ¢w �
PIS L8273008
�
G
C
PO 092530674
S.8 178, PG 346 I ^/ / / / ///
ROANOKE
1 CHURCH ROAD
i
i
i I
1 !
LEGEND
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
w
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
ou
M Z
EXISTING TREELINE
.r -y-y- -Y1.
EXISTING GRAVEL
F-
FARM PATH
0 Q
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
(I M
LOD
TEMPORARY GRAVEL
Z
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
g LU
�
TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE - UT2: 11.1 ACRES
TOTAL AREA OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT - UT2: 8.0 ACRES
TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE: 31.7 ACRES
TOTAL AREA OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT: 27.2 ACRES
WD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Tm Isportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(1) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
FULL SCALE: 1" =200
0 200
2" =
FULLS
1 HALF SCALE
LJ
w
-c -6
v
ou
M Z
O
a �
Z m
F-
Z
O
0 Q
:m)
U
7
F
Z
U)
O
�
g LU
�
°
a
O
LL
U) Z
°
~
O
W O
J
o
a
O �
C, Z
in i
Z Z J
E[
F-
p z
Y N
W J
Z
�
� a
LJ
-c -6
ou
M Z
Z m
F-
0 Q
:m)
F
g LU
�
J
U) Z
d
W O
J
J
in i
Z Z J
E[
F-
< W UL
CD
Z
LU Z Z
O
3: O =
M
F
C)
U
z
Q LU
Q F
U
H
M O
U
U)
irj .6
O
U
W
Z
2
z (D
mmm O
U M d
Z
¢
Z
cc
¢
Z
�
Oa s
L
m
O
a
ON ¢w �
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DnrE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
29
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA

TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE - FALL
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES RATE (LB /ACRE)
RYE (GRAIN) 120
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS -AUG. 15 - DEC. 15
COASTAL PLAIN AND PIEDMONT -AUG. 15 - DEC. 30
SOIL AMENDMENTS
FOLLOW SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB /ACRE GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE
AND 1,000 LB /ACRE 10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LB /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, NETTING,
OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY STRAIGHT CAN BE
USED AS A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REPAIR AND REFERTILIZE DAMAGED AREAS IMMEDIATELY. TOPDRESS WITH 50
LB /ACRE OF NITROGEN IN MARCH. IF IT IS NECESSARY TO EXTEND TEMPORARY
COVER BEYOND JUNE 15, OVERSEED WITH 50 LB /ACRE KOBE (PIEDMONT AND
COASTAL PLAIN) OR KOREAN (MOUNTAINS) LESPEDEZA IN LATE FEBRUARY OR
EARLY MARCH.
EROSION CONTROL
GENERAL NOTES
TEMPORARY SEEDING - LATE WINTER /EARLY SPRING
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES RATE (LB /ACRE)
RYE (GRAIN) 120
ANNUAL LESPEDEZA (KOBE IN PIEDMONT 50
AND COASTAL PLAIN, KOREAN IN MOUNTAINS)
OMIT ANNUAL LESPEDEZA WHEN DURATION OF TEMPORARY COVER IS NOT
TO EXTEND BEYOND JUNE.
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS - ABOVE 2500 FT: FEB. 15 -MAY 15
BELOW 2500 FT: FEB. 1 -MAY 1
PIEDMONT - JAN. 1 -MAY 1
COASTAL PLAIN - DEC.1 -APR. 15
SOIL AMENDMENTS
FOLLOW RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB /ACRE GROUND
AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB /ACRE 10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LB /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT,
NETTING OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY
STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REFERTILIZE IF GROWTH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, REFERTILIZE AND
MULCH IM- MEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE.
1. REVIEW CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. ALL PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY EROSION
CONTROL STRUCTURES (I.E ROCK CHECK DAMS, SILT FENCE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES) SHALL BE
INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAND- DISTURBING ACTIVITY.
2. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AREAS SHOWN ARE TO GUIDE CONTRACTOR DURING CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL
COORDINATE WITH ENGINEER IF ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES WILL IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF CONSTRUCTION.
3. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SEEDED PER THE SPECIFICATIONS IN THE SEEDING SCHEDULE SHOWN
ON THIS SHEET.
4. MULCH: APPLY 2 TONS /ACRE GRAIN STRAW AND ANCHOR STRAW ON ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS.
5. EROSION CONTROL:
A. INSTALL PERMANENT VEGETATIVE COVER AND THE LONG -TERM EROSION PROTECTION MEASURES OR STRUCTURES AS
DIRECTED BY ENGINEER UPON CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. APPROPRIATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE
PLACED BETWEEN THE DISTURBED AREA AND AFFECTED WATERWAY AND MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENTLY VEGETATED.
B. PROVIDE FOR HANDLING THE INCREASED RUNOFF CAUSED BY CHANGED SOIL AND SURFACE CONDITIONS. USE EFFECTIVE
MEANS TO CONSERVE EXISTING ON -SITE SOIL CONDITIONS.
C. DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
USE TEMPORARY PLANT COVER, MULCHING, AND /OR STRUCTURES TO CONTROL RUNOFF AND PROTECT AREAS SUBJECT TO
EROSION DURING CONSTRUCTION.
D. ALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS AND AFTER
ANY STORM EVENT OF GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION DURING ANY 24 -HOUR PERIOD. MAINTENANCE OF
SEDIMENT TRAPPING STRUCTURES SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NECESSARY PER THESE INSPECTIONS. SILT FENCING SHALL
BE NSTALLED AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
E. STABILIZATION MEASURES SHALL BE INITIATED AT THE END OF EACH DAY IN PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE
CONSTRUCTION ACTMTIES HAVE TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. GROUNDCOVER MUST BE ESTABUSHED PER THE
GROUND COVER SCHEDULE" SHOWN ON THIS SHEET IN AREAS WHERE CONSTRUCTION HAS TEMPORARILY CEASED. ALL
AREAS WHERE FINAL GRADE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED WITHIN 2 CALENDAR DAYS.
F. CONTRACTOR MUST TAKE THE NECESSARY ACTION TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKING OF MUD ONTO THE PAVED ROADWAY FROM
CONSTRUCTION AREAS. DAILY REMOVAL OF MUD /SOIL MAY BE REQUIRED.
G. ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE
COMPLETION OF ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED. ADDITIONAL CONTROL
DEVICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ORDER TO CONTROL EROSION AND /OR OFF SITE SEDIMENTATION.
CONT RACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS
STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM OF 500 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
H. EROSION CONTROL MATTING (SEE DETAIL SHEET 41) SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL BANKS FROM
APPROXIMATELY 2.0' TO 3.0' ABOVE TOP OF BANK DOWN TO CHANNEL TOE.
I. SILT FENCING TO BE INSTALLED AROUND INDICATED STOCKPILE AREAS TO PREVENT LOSS OF SEDIMENT. STOCKPILE AREAS
MAY BE RELOCATED UPON APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
J. ASPHALT TACKIFIER SHALL NOT BE USED.
K. ALL NECESSARY MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO PREVENT OIL, TAR, TRASH, AND OTHER POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING THE
ADJACENT OFF SITE AREAS.
L. WETLANDS /STREAMS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED AS DESIGNATED IMPACT
AREAS.
M. ACTIVITIES MUST AVOID DISTURBANCE OF WOODY RIPARIAN VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA TO THE GREATEST
EXTENT PRACTICABLE. REMOVAL OF VEGETATION MUST BE LIMITED TO ONLY THAT NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
THE CHANNEL.
N. NO ONSITE BURIAL OR BURNING OF VEGETATION OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS WILL BE PERMITTED. VEGETATIVE DEBRIS
SHALL BE STOCKPILED AND DISPOSED OF ONSITE PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
O. ANY GRADING BEYOND THE CONSTRUCTION UMITS SHOWN ON THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE NORTH CAROUNA
EROSION CONTROL ORDINANCE, AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE.
P. PLEASE REFERENCE PLAN SHEET DETAILS AND NCDENR STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
Q. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES RELATED TO THE
CONSTRUCTION SITE.
R. THE LOCATIONS OF SOME EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY HAVE TO BE ALTERED FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS
IF DRAINAGE PATTERNS CHANGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
S. IF IT IS DETERMINED DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT SIGNIFICANT SEDIMENT IS LEAVING THE SITE (DESPITE
THE PROPER IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES), THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY IS OBUGATED TO TAKE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIVE ACTION.
TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE - SUMMER
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES RATE (LB /ACRE)
GERMAN MILLET 40
IN THE PIEDMONT AND MOUNTAINS, A SMALL - STEMMED SUDANGRASS MAY
BE SUBSTITUTED AT A RATE OF 50 LB /ACRE.
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS - MAY 15 -AUG. 15
PIEDMONT - MAY 1 -AUG. 15
COASTAL PLAIN - APR. 15 -AUG. 15
SOIL AMENDMENTS
FOLLOW RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB /ACRE
GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB /ACRE 10 -10 -10
FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LB /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH
ASPHALT, NETTING OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH
BLADES SET NEARLY STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS AN ANCHORING
TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REFERTILIZE IF GROWTH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, FERTILIZE
AND MULCH IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE.
GROUND COVER SCHEDULE
SITE AREA DESCRIPTION
STABILIZATION TIME FRAME
STABILIZATION TIME FRAME EXCEPTIONS
PERIMETER DIKES, SWALES, DITCHES
7 DAYS
NONE
AND SLOPES
Oa �
HIGH QUALITY WATER (HOW) ZONES
7 DAYS
NONE
IF SLOPES ARE 10' OR LESS IN LENGTH AND ARE
SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1
7 DAYS
NOT STEEPER THAN 2:1, 14 DAYS ARE ALLOWED
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER
14 DAYS
7 DAYS FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 50 FEET IN
LENGTH
ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SLOPES
14 DAYS
NONE (EXCEPT FOR PERIMETERS AND HWQ ZONES)
FLATTER THAN 4:1
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DESCRIBED IN THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND NOTES. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY BE
PHASED -IN TO THOSE AREAS OF THE PROJECT CURRENTLY BEING WORKED ON. THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY OR RELOCATE EROSION
CONTROL MEASURES TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FOR UNFORESEEN FIELD CONDITIONS SO LONG AS PROPER CONSTRUCTION IS MAINTAINED TO
ENSURE THE INTEGRITY AND USEFULNESS OF THE PROPOSED MEASURES. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS SHALL BE
STABILIZED WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND MULCH AT THE END OF EACH DAY.
2. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
3. EXISTING WETLANDS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UPON UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED AS DESIGNATED IMPACT AREAS. HIGH
VISIBILITY FENCING MUST BE PLACED AROUND ALL EXISTING WETLANDS THAT ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND /OR
ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
4. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
5. STOCKPILE AREAS MAY BE RELOCATED UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. SILT FENCING MUST BE INSTALLED AROUND ALL STOCKPILE
AREAS.
6. THE WORK TO RESHAPE THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE PERFORMED USING EQUIPMENT WORKING FROM THE TOP OF THE EXISTING STREAM
BANK, WHERE POSSIBLE.
7. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WILL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE ACTIVE CHANNEL TO PERFORM WORK IF POSSIBLE. PLATFORMS SHOULD BE USED
TO CROSS CHANNEL WHERE ACCESS IS NOT POSSIBLE.
8. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR TO RESTORING FLOW TO
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL SEGMENTS.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION 15 COMPLETE AND THE SITE 15 STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM
OF 200 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME
10. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
11. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE EXISTING CHANNEL IS BEING MAINTAINED, TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAMS AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE
USED TO DE -WATER THE WORK AREA AS DESCRIBED IN THE DETAILS.
12. WHEN THE PROPOSED CHANNEL HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO PREVENT EROSION, ALL TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAMS WILL BE
REMOVED FROM THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN
DESIGNATED SPOILS AREAS PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAM.
13. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH ROCK STRUCTURES, BOULDER TOE STABILIZATION, AND LOG TOE STABILIZATION ARE CALLED FOR ON THE PLANS,
TEMPORARY COFFER DAMS AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE -WATER THE WORK AREA, EXCEPT AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE
NORMAL FLOW CAN BE DIVERTED AROUND THE WORK AREA WITH THE USE OF AN EXISTING CHANNEL. WHEN THE TOE HAS BEEN
SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO RESTRAIN EROSION ALL TEMPORARY COFFER DAMS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND
NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN DESIGNATED SPOILS AREA PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF
TEMPORARY COFFER DAM.
14. MATERIAL THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE STREAM WILL BE RE- DEPOSITED OUTSIDE OF THE ACTIVE CHANNEL AND ITS FLOODPLAIN.
15. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STABILIZATION OF ALL DISTURBED GRASSED AREAS AT THE TOP OF THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE SEEDING AND MULCHING SPECIFICATION AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
16. RE- FERTILIZE AND RE -SEED DISTURBED AREAS IF NECESSARY.
17. TEMPORARY AND /OR PERMANENT IMPACTS TO EXISTING WETLANDS SHALL BE AVOIDED TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. HIGH VISIBILITY FENCING
SHALL BE INSTALLED AROUND ALL EXISTING WETLANDS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND /OR ADJACENT TO ANY CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES.
STREAM CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. CONDUCT PRE - CONSTRUCTION MEETING INCLUDING OWNER, ENGINEER, ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS, AND OTHER AFFECTED PARTIES.
2. OBTAIN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT FROM NCDENR - LAND QUALITY SECTION AND ALL OTHER APPROVALS NECESSARY TO BEGIN AND
COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
3. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT UTILITIES ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO THE
COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. CALL NC ONE -CALL (PREVIOUSLY ULOCO) AT 1- 800 - 632 -4949 FOR UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES 48
HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
4. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCE /EXIT AND ROUTES OF INGRESS AND EGRESS SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AS SHOWN ON
THE PLANS AND DETAILS.
5. PREPARE STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS OR AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
ANY EXCESS SPOIL FROM STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED TO CONSTRUCT CHANNEL PLUGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
6. INSTALL PUMP AROUND APPARATUS AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AT UPSTREAM END OF PROJECT. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, MOVE PUMP
AROUND OPERATION DOWNSTREAM. (SEE DETAILS ON SHEET 41)
7. CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIRST, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
B. ROUGH GRADING OF CHANNEL SHALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
9. INSTALL STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION
OF STRUCTURES.
10. UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING OR SOD MATS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS.
11. FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
12. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND PUMPING APPARATUS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE STREAM AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL
FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
13. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
14. INSTALL LIVE STAKE, BARE ROOT, AND CONTAINERIZED PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANTING PLANS.
WD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
v 919.782.0495
919.782.9672
- 1,dickson.com
7�
FULL SCALE: 1" =200
0 200
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCAL
PROJ.DATE JUNE 2013
QC: FM
Q.C. 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER
30
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
Q
�
O O O O Z
O
Z C Z W
W .6 00
M
Z 0) O W
Z O
O W z Z J
0 U F-
°zQ � Z
W Q (D Z Z W F
� x Z
0 W
Q J Q W %
2 F W Q
W � � o2O
wu)b J Z
W LD
Z ° (3 O 1
fa ZCC
Z W Z
� zF U 0U � LL ~ � � J 0m
IL ¢a� O O
0_
w
Q v
Oa �
W .6 00
M
Z 0) O W
Z O
O W z Z J
0 U F-
°zQ � Z
W Q (D Z Z W F
� x Z
0 W
Q J Q W %
2 F W Q
W � � o2O
wu)b J Z
W LD
Z ° (3 O 1
fa ZCC
Z W Z
� zF U 0U � LL ~ � � J 0m
IL ¢a� O O
0_

WHEN AND WERE TO USE IT FLOW
SILT FENCE IS APPLICABLE IN AREAS: B MIDDLE LAYER l TOP LAYER
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SHEET OR OVERLAND FLOW PATH LENGTH TO THE FENCE 100 -FEET. y1 BOTTOM LAYER
LINE) \ \\
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE STEEPNESS (NORMAL [PERPENDICULAR] TO FENCE LINE) IS EARTH SU
T RFACE
H:1 V. 1.25 LB. /LINEAR FT. STEEL POSTS
THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CONCENTRATED FLOWS GREATER THAN 0.5 CFS.
A A
DO NOT PLACE SILT FENCE ACROSS CHANNELS OR USE IT AS A VELOCITY CONTROL BMP. EXTRA STRENGTH s,
FILTER FABRIC Mqx
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: N>'� 'B TRENCH 0.25' DEEP ONLY
ST ENDS OF BAGS IN ADJACENT WHEN PLACED ON EARTH
1. USE A SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC OF AT LEAST 95% BY WEIGHT OF POLYOLEFINS OR qNp PLAN VIEW ROWS BUTTED SLIGHTLY SURFACE
POLYESTER, WHICH IS CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER AS CONFORMING ``� `�`: qA'O f, SEE NOTE TOGETHER
TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM D 6461. SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN \ \
ULTRAVIOLET RAY INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 6 MONTHS ��� �`: .��� 4e'pi0 / SEE NOTE SECTION B -B
OF EXPECTED USABLE CONSTRUCTION LIFE AT A TEMPERATURE RANGE OF 0' TO 120' F. `\ `` `: `:. / LOWEST POINT /GROUND
2. ENSURE THAT POSTS FOR SEDIMENT FENCES ARE 1.33 LB/LINEAR FT STEEL WITH A \� ���:``
HEAVY DUTY PLASTIC TIE f /GROUND
MINIMUM LENGTH OF 5 FEET. MAKE SURE THAT STEEL POSTS HAVE PROJECTIONS TO BACKFILL TRENCH WITH FOR STEEL POSTS
FACILITATE FASTENING THE FABRIC. COMPACTED EARTH
CONSTRUCTION:
1. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENT BARRIER OF EXTRA STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRICS. RJa \�` - "� ^' ^ " ^� EARTH SURFACE
2. ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 24 INCHES \ \ SECTION A -A NOTES:
ABOVE THE GROUND SURFACE. (HIGHER FENCES MAY IMPOUND VOLUMES OF WATER
SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE OF THE STRUCTURE.) BURY FABRIC NOT END OF DIKE AT GROUND LEVEL TO 1. EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY IN DRY AND /OR
3. CONSTRUCT THE FILTER FABRIC FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE USE EITHER FLAT - BOTTOM BE HIGHER THAN THE LOWEST POINT OF ISOLATED SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.
BARRIER TO AVOID JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN THE OR V- BOTTOM TRENCH FLOW CHECK. SUFFICIENT SANDBAGS ARE TO
FILTER CLOTH ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST WITH 4 FEET MINIMUM OVERLAP TO THE NEXT SHOWN BELOW BE PLACED TO PREVENT SCOURING. 2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS
POST. SILT FENCE INSTALLATION FROM STREAM FLOW.
4. EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC WITH 5 FEET POST SPACING DOES NOT REQUIRE WIRE
MESH SUPPORT FENCE. SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER FABRIC DIRECTLY TO POSTS. SANDBAG BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF THREE LAYERS OF 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN
WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES SHOULD HAVE MINIMUM 50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH. SANDBAGS. THE BOTTOM LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 3 ROWS OF BAGS, BE STABILIZED IN ONE WORKING DAY. A MAXIMUM OF 200 FEET
5. EXCAVATE A TRENCH APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 8 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE THE MIDDLE LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 2 ROWS OF BAGS AND THE TOP MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
PROPOSED LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. z LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 1 ROW OF BAGS. THE RECOMMENDED
6. PLACE 12 INCHES OF THE FABRIC ALONG THE BOTTOM AND SIDE OF THE TRENCH. FILTER FABRIC N FILTER FABRIC N DIMENSION OF A FILLED SANDBAG SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 0.5 FT X 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING .[ 7. BACKFILL THE TRENCH WITH SOIL PLACED OVER THE FILTER FABRIC AND COMPACT. 0 0.5 FT X 1.5 FT. PUMP SIZE SUFFICIENT TO PUMP BASE FLOW.
THOROUGH COMPACTION OF THE BACKFILL IS CRITICAL TO SILT FENCE PERFORMANCE. COMPACTED o COMPACTED
8. DO NOT ATTACH FILTER FABRIC TO EXISTING TREES. EARTH EARTH 5. DIKE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF NON- ERODIBLE MATERIALS
RUNOFF ml RUNOFF m SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKE SUCH AS SANDBAGS.
MAINTENANCE: - - NTS SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TYPICAL PUMP AROUND
SEDIMENT FENCES AT
IMMEDIATELY. EAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL. MAKE ANY T - T - z 1. INSTALL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTFACE USING CLASS
N z A RIP RAP AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED
SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME PROJECT WORKING AREA.
INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE IT PROMPTLY. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND
REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR FILTER III THE TEMPORARY PIPING THAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW
THE NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID FABRIC FILTER FABRIC FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA TO THE STABILIZED
UNDERMINING THE FENCE DURING CLEANOUT. 4 -IN OUTFALL.
REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA FLAT - BOTTOM TRENCH DETAIL V- SHAPED TRENCH DETAIL O 3. INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
TO GRADE AND STABIUZE IT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY DROP COARSE AGGREGATE - OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
STABIUZED. ��S�tJ STONE SIZE = 2"-3° 4, INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND DEWATERING
PUMPING APPARATUS IF NEEDED TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED
AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSE SHALL BE OF
SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER
WILL ALSO BE PUMPED TO AN OUTFALL STABILIZED WITH CLASS
A RIP RAP.
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT
AND DEWATER BEFORE REMOVAL OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE.
TUTS o WHEN AT AREA, ALL DIRTY WATER MUST BE PUMPED
THROUGH GH SILT A SILT BAG. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE/PIPING STARTING WITH THE
SO• DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST.
Miy �
6. ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE ALL RIP RAP
F`F'S - AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH
NPS�(F.V SEED AND MULCH.
E
INSTALLATION NOTES: 7 MPERMOUS DIKE. NOR IN CHANNEL
IKEANNEL MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE REMOVING
SITE PREPARATION KEY -IN MATTING PER PURPOSE:
FIG. 1 OR FIG. 2
GRADE AND COMPACT AREA. 2'0 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHOULD BE USED AT ALL POINTS WHERE TRAFFIC WILL BE
1111 LEAVING A CONSTRUCTION SITE AND MOVING DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC ROAD.
REMOVE ALL ROCKS, CLODS, VEGETATION, AND OBSTRUCTIONS SO THAT
MATTING WILL HAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL. CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
- -I FLOW
PREPARE SEEDBED BY LOOSENING 3 TO 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ABOVE - - 1. CLEAR THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AREA OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE
FINAL GRADE. O2 MATERIAL AND PROPERLY GRADE IT
2. PLACE THE GRAVEL TO THE SPECIFIC GRADE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL, AND
TEST SOILS FOR ANY NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND SUBMIT SOIL TEST SMOOTH IT. INTAKE HOSE
RESULTS TO THE ENGINEER. APPLY ANY TREATMENT SUCH AS LIME OR KEY -IN MATTING 3. PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO CARRY WATER TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR OTHER SUITABLE OUTLET. CLASS A
FERTILIZERS TO THE SOIL IF NEEDED. JUST ABOVE 4. USE GEOTEXTILE FABRICS BECAUSE THEY IMPROVE STABIUTY OF THE FOUNDATION IN LOCATIONS STONE
CHANNEL TOE SUBJECT TO SEEPAGE OR HIGH WATER TABLE. PUMP AROUND
SEEDING
PUMP
SEE SHEETS 35, 36, 37 FOR SEEDING REQUIREMENTS. MAINTENANCE:
WORK
APPLY SEED TO SOIL BEFORE PLACING MATTING. MAINTAIN THE GRAVEL PAD IN A CONDITION TO PREVENT MUD OR SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE DE- WATERING AREA
INSTALLATION - STREAM BANK CONSTRUCTION SITE. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2 -INCH STONE. AFTER EACH PUMP
TRENCH APPROX. TRENCH APPROX. SOIL PILE RAINFALL, INSPECT ANY STRUCTURE USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT AND CLEAN IT OUT AS NECESSARY.
SEE GRADING NOTES A PLAN AND PROFILE SHEETS RECEIVE ON SHEET 40 8" WIDE X 8" DEEP 8' WIDE x 8° DEEP FROM TRENCH
IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALS SPILLED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC
FOR INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE EROSION SOIL PILE ROADWAYS, OR AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS.
CONTROL MATTING. FROM TRENCH FLOW �L ^+� � IMPERVIOUS
OVERLAP ADJACENT MATS 4" (IN DIRECTION PARALLEL TO FLOW) AND 18" ^ I �`^ _�._ IMPERVIOUS DIKE
13E PLACED EVERY OVER "ACROSS DOWNSTREAM OVERLAP. THE UPSTREAM MAT SHOULD � '�� "OW-
LAY TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
1 - -- -` ^I NTS
EDGES SHOULD BE SHINGLED AWAY FROM THE FLOW OF WATER. ;�_,. -. -s MAT LOOSE TO ALLOW CONTACT WITH SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH TIGHT. , L. - - DISCHARGE HOSE
� 1 ROW OF STAPLES GENERAL NOTES: FLOW CLASS A
ANCHOR MAT USING BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINS. i. - -- OR STAKES, MIN. OF STONE
i �
1 ROW OF STAPLES 1. CONSTRUCT DAM ACCORDING TO NCDENR EROSION j% 5 WASHED
CUT 8" z 8" TRENCH ALONG TOP OF BANK FOR MAT TERMINATION AS OR STAKES, MIN. OF 24" O.0 CONTROL MANUAL. STONE ^^ NOTE: HOSE SHOULD BE
SHOWN IN FIGURES 1 & 2. EXTEND MAT 2 TO 3 FEET PAST TOP OF 24" O.0 q A KEPT OUTSIDE OF WORK
BANK. STEP 1 2. ROCK DAM RIPRAP SHALL BE 50/50 MIX OF CLASS SILT BAG AREA
STEP 1 AND II. LOCATION
PLACE ADJACENT ROLLS IN THE ANCHOR TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM OF 4"
OVERLAP. SECURE WITH BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINES, BACKFILL 1 ROW OF STAPLES 1 ROW OF STAPLES 3. PUKE ROCK DAM AS SHOWN ON PLANS. EXTEND
ANCHOR TRENCH, AND COMPACT SOIL. CLASS B RIP RP ROCK APRON 5 FEET
FLOW OR STAKES, MIN. OF OR STAKES, MIN. OF DOWNSTREAM FROM TOE OF ROCK DAM. STABILIZED OUTFACE
STAPLE AT 12" INTERVALS ALONG OVERLAP. i r� 18 O.0 12" 0.0 CLASS A STONE FILTER FABRIC
_. FLOW 1.5' THICK
STREAM BANK MATTING TO BE INSTALLED FROM TOE OF BANK TO A _ �'�, 5' -0" MIN. CLASS B g
MINIMUM OF 2.0 PAST TOP OF BANK. SEE FIGURE 3 FOR TERMINATION F _ __. ROCK PRON
AT TOP OF BANK. jI ; _ -- PLAN DISCHARGE
L C-4 l EXISTING HOSE
IF MORE THAN ROLL IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE CHANNEL FROM THE �L. SOIL FILLED 1 SPILLWAY 2:1 GROUND
FROM SOIL PILE, ,� CREST
TOP OF BANK DOWN TO THE TOE, THEN OVERLAP MATTING BY A MINIMUM ll� W (SPILLWAY)
COMPACT WITH FOOT4, SOIL FILLED 1' MIN OF # 5
OF 1'. L. = = -- 3:1 MIN 2/3 STREAM WIDTH STABILIZED
FROM SOIL PILE, WASHED STONE OUTFALL CLASS 15' TO 20'
STEP 2 COMPACT WITH FOOT CLASS I AND aFLOW A STONE
P
II RIP R
STEP 2 1.5' THICK 2•
CLASS B
ROCK APRON 2 4 - MIN. BELOW
MEET OR EXCEED FIGURE 1 _ _ _ OWEST BANK MUST FIGURE 2 1 _ _ _ EvEL MIN
THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: L - - CLASS AND ( ) O
CUTOFF FILTER FABRIC
• A R COCONUT FIBER (COIR) TWINE WOVEN INTO II RIP RAP FILTER 8" OF CLASS
TRENCH FILTER SECTION A -A
A HIGH STRENGTH MA. MI SECTION B -B FABRIC FABRIC A STONE
• THICKNESS - 0.35 IN. MINIMUM. EXISTING
• TENSILE STRENGTH - 1032 LB /FT MINIMUM CHANNEL SILT BAG PROFILE
SHEASTRESS -4.5 • FLOWRVELOCRY- OBSERVED Q12 FT /SEC EROSION CONTROL MATTING
• WEIGHT - 23 OZ /SY
• OPEN AREA (MEASURED) - 48% NTS
SLOPES -UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 1:1 TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAM PUMP AROUND & DEWATERING DETAIL
NTS MTS
DD CKSON
'ty infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(V) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
W W W. Wkdickson.com
:
U w
O U Z O U O O Z Q Z O 5; W
• •
w
Q v
Oa
�
J
U H 2 N ¢
U M Z
o_ Z O z
O w z
LU 0 J
Z Z ~
w o aCD W Z Z
O =
LU 0 U Q W Q U F 0O z U w � Cj W Z z p
U Z Z zZ 2,
0o O 7 0� F 0te
IL
PROJ.DATE JUNE 203
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER
31
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA w m
J

NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 6 -10 FEET LONG, RELATIVELY
STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
2. CABLE ANCHORS SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM EACH END OF LOG. REBAR (5/8"
MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR CABLE
ANCHORS PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
3. IF REBAR IS USED, PRE —DRILL HOLES WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT
BANKFULL ELEVATION
1/4 TO 1/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
PRIOR R FINAL GRADING
r PROPOSED BED
"" MINIMUM OF 2/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
EXISTING CHANNEL INVERT
8" MINIMUM LOG
DIAMETER (TYP.)
INSTALL CABLE ANCHOR AS SHOWN. DRILL
(OR SAW CUT) PILOT HOLE THROUGH LOG Y$
TO Ys OF THE WAY DOWN SO THAT ANCHOR
CABLE IS NOT EXPOSED.
LOG TOE PROTECTION
NTS
FIBER
0.75" TO 2 "�
VEGETATED SILL DEFLECTOR
LOG TOE
LOG TOE
` LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE LONG
8
PROPOSED 2" MAX
SEE CHANNEL DIMENSIONS TABLE FOR SPECIFICATIONS
GROUNDWATER TABLE. (GENERALLY,
y
BUD
STREAM BED
)S BOTTOM )$ BOTTOM X BOTTOM
IN THE RANGE OF 0.75 TO 2
INCHES.
ELEVATION FLOW _ PROPOSED
WIDTH OF WIDTH OF WIDTH OF
END
F Q
� Z
STREAMBED)
CHANNEL I CHANNEL I CHANNEL
CONSTRUCTED
qp TO 39
N
FLOW
R
Z
O
� Z J
Z
F
POINT REFERENCED IN
A
Z
END OF
STRUCTURE TABLE
FILTER FABRIC
¢
�
F
O
Q U
(J W
o
Z
A'
`"
PROPOSED STREAM BANK B
REPLACED CHANNEL CABLE ANCHOR
ROW
� OZ
POINT REFERENCED IN
BED MATERIAL
\ \
G�
STRUCTURE TABLE
2
H
PLAN VIEW
SECTION A —A
�
N
COIR FIBER
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 8 TO 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER,
z
MATTING
TIN
A MINIMUM OF 15 FEET IN LENGTH (UNLESS OTHERSE
WI
NOTED), AND RELATIVELY STRAIGHT.
SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
STREAM BANK
2. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON
U. PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
STR
PROPOSED STREAM BED
NAIL EVERY 2' ALONG THE LOG.
3. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2
ELEVATION
ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
ROCK CROSS VANE — PLAN VIEW
LOG TOE PROTECTION 10"
NOTES
LOG TOE
MINIMUM LOG DIAMETER (NP.)
1. HEADER ROCKS MUST HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE DIAMETER OF
NOTCH LOGS TO FIT GRADE
12" TO 18 ". FOOTER ROCKS MUST HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE
CONTROL LOGS
DIAMETER OF 16" TO 24 ".
2. INSTALL GEOTE %TILE FABRIC BEGINNING AT THE MIDDLE OF
CABLE ANCHORS
TO THE DEPTH
DUPSTREAM
LOG GRADE CONTROL
OFETHEABOTTOMCFOOTER ROCK, AND THEN TO A
FILTER FABRIC
MINIMUM OF THREE FEET.
3. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND
NTS
PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF VANE ARM, BETWEEN THE
ARM AND STREAM BANK.
GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
4. START AT BANK AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN
SECTION B
HEADER (TOP) ROCK.
—B
5. CONTINUE WITH STRUCTURE, FOLLOWING ANGLE AND SLOPE
BANKFULL STREAM BED
SPECIFICATIONS.
6. AN EXTRA ROCK CAN BE PLACED IN SCOUR POOL FOR
ELEVATION
HEADER ROCK
HABITAT IMPROVEMENT.
RLOW_�
7. USE NATURAL STONE CLASS A TO FILL GAPS ON UPSTREAM
SIDE OF ROCKS, AND # 57 STONE TO FILL GAPS ON
4 % TO 10% SLOPE UPSTREAM SIDE OF NATURAL STONE CLASS A.
B. AFTER ALL STONE HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM
I'!
SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE WITH CLASS A STONE TO THE
°
ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK.
SCOUR POOL
9. START SLOPE AT 1/2 TO 2/3 BANKFULL STAGE.
EXISTING
#57 S70NE FOOTER ROCK
(EXCAVATED)
10. CEO TEXTILE FABRIC SHALL MEET SPECIFICATIONS FOR TYPE 2
PLANTED COIR BANK
NCDOT GEOTEXTILE FABRIC.
FIBER ROLL
(ON —SITE NATURAL STONE
ALUIMUM) CLASS A
NORMAL WATER
ROCK CROSS VANE — PROFILE E3—B'
LEVEL
PLANTED
COIR FLOW
o.5'TO125'
FIBER ROLL WOOD
STAKES
DENSE COIR MATTING______
_
(ROLANKA BIOD— MutC90
OR EQUIVALENT)
WOOD STAKE
1.5' TO 3'
SECTION VIEW
PLAN VIEW
ROCK CROSS VANE
NTS
NOTES:
DESIGNER TO MARK LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
SILLS IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 6 -10 FEET LONG, RELATIVELY
STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
2. CABLE ANCHORS SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM EACH END OF LOG. REBAR (5/8"
MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR CABLE
ANCHORS PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
3. IF REBAR IS USED, PRE —DRILL HOLES WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT
BANKFULL ELEVATION
1/4 TO 1/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
PRIOR R FINAL GRADING
r PROPOSED BED
"" MINIMUM OF 2/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
EXISTING CHANNEL INVERT
8" MINIMUM LOG
DIAMETER (TYP.)
INSTALL CABLE ANCHOR AS SHOWN. DRILL
(OR SAW CUT) PILOT HOLE THROUGH LOG Y$
TO Ys OF THE WAY DOWN SO THAT ANCHOR
CABLE IS NOT EXPOSED.
LOG TOE PROTECTION
NTS
FIBER
0.75" TO 2 "�
VEGETATED SILL DEFLECTOR
FIAT TOP
END
DETAIL
` LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE LONG
TO 1.5' ENOUGH TO REACH BELOW THE
LATERAL
GROUNDWATER TABLE. (GENERALLY,
y
BUD
A LENGTH OF 2 TO 3 FEET IS
I SUFFICIENT.) ADDITIONALLY, THE
J STAKES SHOULD HAVE A DIAMETER
Z m
IN THE RANGE OF 0.75 TO 2
INCHES.
SIDE BRANCH ��IIIII� I 18"
REMOVED AT ,9L
SLIGHT ANGLE M
WATER TA
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE
SHALL BE PLACED BY OLD CHANNEL TO
VEGETATED SILL DEFLECTOR
w
o�
OVERLAPPING BE DIVERTED
WITH THE FLOW OF WATER
Qv
TUTS
O
M Z
IL
45 DEGREE
Z m
TAPERED BUTT
O �
END
F Q
� Z
NEW CHANNEL TO BE CHANNEL BLOCK
F
U
CONSTRUCTED
� Z
N
Z
PLAN VIEW
O
COMPACTED BACKFILL UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
(12" LIFTS) 1.5' MINIMUM
TYPICAL SECTION
CHANNEL PLUG
NTS
BANKFULL ELEVATION
m ALL IED OR ANCHOR L INVERT
TOE
U
0
L
ZK
N
MIN. 25' MAX. 75'
TOP OF
BANK
EXISTING
CHANNEL
BOTTOM
NOTES:
1. FILL EXISTING CHANNEL TO BANKFULL ELEVATION WHEN POSSIBLE.
2. IF CHANNEL CANNOT BE COMPLETELY FILLED TO BANKFULL, FILL TO
BANKFULL EVERY 75' FOR AT LEAST 25'.
CHANNEL BACKFILL
NTS
SECTION VIEW
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE
SPACED 3 FEET APART,
ALTERNATE SPACING.
NOTE:
1. ACCEPTABLE SPECIES INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW (SALT% NIGRA), SILKY
WILLOW (SAUX SERICEA) AND SILKY DOGWOOD (CORNUS AMMOMUM).
2. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED IN AN AREA EXTENDING 3 FEET OUT
FROM TOP OF BANK TO JUST BELOW BANKFULL.
LIVE STAKE
NITS
DD CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
— 1,dickson.com LU
LInENsENo ­
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
Q.c.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
32
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F
U
w
Qv
O
M Z
IL
a �
Z m
O �
O
F Q
� Z
F
U
O w
� Z
N
Z
O
� Z J
Z
F
U
Saw
cD
Z
�
O
wZz
� O =
� I
¢
�
F
O
Q U
(J W
o
Z
Q
�=
H
Q
O
� OZ
� Z
W
G�
W
2
H
F
U
M Z
IL
Z m
O �
F Q
� Z
O w
� Z
N
� Z J
Z
F
Saw
cD
o
wZz
� O =
� I
Q U
(J W
Q
�=
H
Q
O
o
Z
W Tn
� W �
J
2
H
z p Z
�
N
w � ::1
z
z
�
= . w
Z ¢zm
O °¢ate
a0�
o_
o

COIR FIBER
MATTING
PLAN
BANKFULL ELEVATION /\
/A.AA�vA/
TYPICAL SECTION
NOTE:
WATTLES ARE TO BE INSTALLED 4' O.C. BY CUTTING AN APPROXIMATELY 4" WIDE TRENCH
PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREAM BANK JUST ABOVE BASEFLOW ELEVATION. INSERT THE
WATTLES, ANCHORING WITH STAKES, AND TIGHTLY BACKFILL WITH TOPSOIL. WATTLES SHALL
CONSIST OF 5 TO 10 STEMS, 0.25" TO 0.5" IN DIAMETER. MINIMUM LENGTH IS 4.5 FEET. AT
LEAST 3.0 FEET SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE BANK. WATTLES SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT
AN ANGLE OF 20' TO 30' TO THE STREAM BANK AND SHOULD POINT DOWNSTREAM. FILL
VOIDS OF EXPOSED PORTION OF WATTLE WITH PINE STRAW (IF READILY AVAILABLE ON- SITE).
ylI
m
CUSS A STONE
OVER FILTER FABRIC
WATTLE
0
�i
COIR FIBER
MATTING
PLAN
BANKFULL ELEVATION
STAKE
TYPICAL SECTION
NOTE: USE DEAD BRUSH AND TOPS 0.5 TO 2.0 INCHES IN DIAMETER. TIE
BUNDLES WITH TWINE AND STAKE TO THE CHANNEL BED. IF PINE STRAW IS
READILY AVAILABLE ON -SITE, ADD TO BUNDLE.
PROPOSED
CHANNEL BED
1$ TO Xa OF BUNDLE
DIAMETER BELOW
PROPOSED STREAM BED
USE STICKS AND LOGS OF VARYING SIZES 1"-4" DIAMETER AND
V -4' LONG. WOODY DEBRIS SHALL BE HELD IN PLACE USING
TWINE AND WOODEN STAKES AND SHALL BE PLACED ACCORDING
TO DESIGN PLANS AND AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
WOODY DEBRIS BUNDLE
NOTE:
WHEN INSTALLING SMALL WOODY DEBRIS STRUCTURES AS LOCATED
ON THE PLAN SHEETS, CONTRACTOR SHALL ALTERNATE BETWEEN
WATTLE, SMALL LOG, AND DEAD BRUSH STRUCTURES BASED ON
READILY AVAILABLE MATERIALS AND PER DIRECTION OF THE
ENGINEER.
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS & HABITAT STRUCTURES
NTS
5' MAXIMUM STREAM CHANNEL
BANK HEIGHT f �I
It✓I A IP�I� 1
y SURFACE FLOW
I1I�1 ' i�l�' DIVERSION
STONE APPROACH
f SECTION: 2:1 MIN.,
O
MAX. SLOPE ON
ROAD
SURFACE FLOW
DIVERSION
NOTES:
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ON -SITE
BEFORE WORK BEGINS.
3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF STREAMBANKS. DO NOT
EXCAVATE CHANNEL BOTTOM. COMPLETE ONE SIDE BEFORE
STARTING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
4. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.
5. GRADE SLOPES TO A MINIMUM OF 2:1 SLOPE, MAXIMUM
6. MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN THE CONSTRUCTION
ROAD DOES NOT ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL.
7. A STABILIZED PAD OF NATURAL CLASS A STONE, 6 INCHES
THICK, LINED WITH FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE USED OVER THE
BERM AND ACCESS SLOPES.
8. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING
FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
9. `MDTH OF THE CROSSING SHALL BE SUFFICIENT (8' MIN.) TO
ACCOMMODATE THE LARGEST VEHICLE CROSSING THE CHANNEL.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE
ACCORDING TO EQUIPMENT UTIUZED.
11. TEMPORARY CROSSINGS ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE.
COIR FIBER
MATTING
BANKFULL ELEVATION
ROLANKA BIO -D 40
OR EQUIVALENT
CI C \ /ATInri
1/2 DIAMETER OF PIPE OR
OR AS STATED IN NOTE 6
BELOW.
COARSE AGGREGATE ( #5 WASHED STONE) 5" DEEP
-EARTH FILL COVERED BY LARGE ANGULAR ROCK
FILTER FABRIC O
° °O o C ° O o ° O °O O 1 O
O O O O C C C O O C O O O O C O °
O ° O ° O ° O ° O O
O O O O O O O O C O 0.0.0.0,-'o O O
O
C ° °° ° 00000 O ° ° oo o
/ oo
0° o° o° O
o o a o �A,�,AAA,AA /
O O
-0 O O ° O / FLOODPLAIN CULVERT
0� -N_ - �O� �\�T \% INVERT PER PLAN
LEAF PACK 1.0" -/ ­ /r�\�,/\\��, � \ \/\ 10" WOODEN STAKE, 1' %1'
TO 3.0" THICK SPACING
PIPE SIZE PER PLAN
SECTION A -A
LIMITS OF BANKFULL CHANNEL
PLAIN VILW Ur Lt r YHUM1
FABRIC INTO STREAM BED.
COMPACT DISTURBED
STREAM BED.
LEAF PACK
NTS
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE TYPICAL SECTION
3ER
INVERT PER PLAN
BURY CULVERT 1.0 FT (TYP.)
MINIMUM \ %� / /�/
STREAM CHANNEL LOG OR ROCK GRADE CONTROL
TOP OF BANK SET TOP OF GRADE CONTROL 1.0 FOOT
ABOVE CULVERT INVERT
NOTES:
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.
3. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE APPROPRIATE BEDDING MATERIAL WITH MANUFACTURER.
4. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
5. WIDTH OF TYPICAL FARM CROSSINGS SHALL BE PER PLAN OR A MINIMUM OF 12'.
6. SEE PLAN SHEET FOR CULVERT SIZE, LENGTH, MATERIAL, AND USE OF FLOODPLAIN
CULVERT OR TWIN PIPE.
7. FLOODPLAIN CULVERTS TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH UTZ PROPOSED CROSSING.
PROPOSED CULVERT CROSSING
NTS
-TOP OF BANK 2 (MAX
COIR FIBER MAT
PLAN
1
BANKFULL ELEVATION
FILTER FABRIC
�� \\
LOG OR ROCK GRADE CONTROL
\ \
FLOW
SET TOP OF GRADE CONTROL 1.0 FOOT
INSTALL CLAY PLUG
2 FEET BELOW CULVERT INVERT
\ \ \ \ / \ \\ \ \ / \ \ \ \\
ABOVE CULVERT INVERT
Y
Z m
X//
LARGE ANGULAR RODCK
STEP
POOL - PLAN
COARSE AGGREGATE
--
7
O- O O U O O U
O O O
O O O
"
O""
"O O v
MIN 3'
O O O O C O +
OOC
oc
HeOs
°�
°c
AN ELEVATION SLIGHTLY ABOVE BANKFULL ELEVATION, INSERTING THE
O°
�(
F
F-
O0
CUTTINGS AND TIGHTLY BACKFILLING WITH TOPSOIL. WILLOW CUTTINGS SHOULD
4. START AT BANK AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN HEADER (TOP) ROCK.
O
W Z Z
°
BE RINSED AT CUTTING POINT TO ALLOW BETTER ROOTING. ALDER
J
O°
°O
L Ov Ov °.� °" °"°"°"°" .�OV 000O �O� v
C
°C
.� °.� °.� °.� °.� °.�OOC
'O OO nOnOnO
O�O„C Al C)_.
OHO �O �O �O �O O�
'O
.O
0'
MINIMUM
MINIMUM \ %� / /�/
STREAM CHANNEL LOG OR ROCK GRADE CONTROL
TOP OF BANK SET TOP OF GRADE CONTROL 1.0 FOOT
ABOVE CULVERT INVERT
NOTES:
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.
3. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE APPROPRIATE BEDDING MATERIAL WITH MANUFACTURER.
4. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
5. WIDTH OF TYPICAL FARM CROSSINGS SHALL BE PER PLAN OR A MINIMUM OF 12'.
6. SEE PLAN SHEET FOR CULVERT SIZE, LENGTH, MATERIAL, AND USE OF FLOODPLAIN
CULVERT OR TWIN PIPE.
7. FLOODPLAIN CULVERTS TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH UTZ PROPOSED CROSSING.
PROPOSED CULVERT CROSSING
NTS
-TOP OF BANK 2 (MAX
COIR FIBER MAT
EXISTING STREAMBANK \
\\
1
BANKFULL ELEVATION
FILTER FABRIC
�� \\
\ \
\ \
STEP POOL - SECTION A -A'
STREAM BED HEADER
OR CULVERT INVERT ROCK
FLOW
13.66 MAX TYP.)
FOOTER ROCK
WELL GRADED MIX
OF NATURAL STONE FILTER FABRIC
CLASS A & B FOR DRAINAGE
STEP POOL - PROFILE VIEW
/
EXISTING STREAMBANK \
\\
w
LARGE ROCKS FOR
OPEN CHANNEL
INVERT OF CULVERT
FOR PIPES
A'
a
1. STEP POOL ROCKS MUST HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE DIAMETER OF 12" TO 20" FOR HEADERS AND 16" TO 24"
¢
¢
NOTE: ACCEPTABLE SPECIES INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW (SAUX NIGRA),SILKY
FOR FOOTERS.
a
A-
Z m
DOGWOOD(CORNUSAMOMUM) AND SILKY WILLOW (SAUX SERICEA). CUTTINGS
2. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC THE FULL LENGTH OF THE STRUCTURE STARTING AT THE DOWNSTREAM END, AND THEN
STEP
POOL - PLAN
VIEW
/
EXISTING STREAMBANK \
\\
w
1. STEP POOL ROCKS MUST HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE DIAMETER OF 12" TO 20" FOR HEADERS AND 16" TO 24"
✓/
NOTE: ACCEPTABLE SPECIES INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW (SAUX NIGRA),SILKY
FOR FOOTERS.
/
Z m
DOGWOOD(CORNUSAMOMUM) AND SILKY WILLOW (SAUX SERICEA). CUTTINGS
2. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC THE FULL LENGTH OF THE STRUCTURE STARTING AT THE DOWNSTREAM END, AND THEN
O �
Q
F
U
BUNDLES ARE TO BE INSTALLED (AFTER SOD MAT HAS BEEN PLACED) BY
UPSTREAM PAST THE LAST STEP POOL ROCK TO A MINIMUM OF THREE FEET.
7
O
� Z
M
DRILLINGAN APPROXIMATE 4" DIAMETER HOLE INTO THE STREAM BANKFROM
3. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF STEP POOL
CLASS A
AN ELEVATION SLIGHTLY ABOVE BANKFULL ELEVATION, INSERTING THE
ARM, BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAM BANK.
STONE
F
F-
U
CUTTINGS AND TIGHTLY BACKFILLING WITH TOPSOIL. WILLOW CUTTINGS SHOULD
4. START AT BANK AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN HEADER (TOP) ROCK.
�
W Z Z
°
BE RINSED AT CUTTING POINT TO ALLOW BETTER ROOTING. ALDER
5. CONTINUE WITH STRUCTURE, FOLLOWING ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS.
FILTER FABRIC
� a CJ
TRANSPLANTS CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR CUTTINGS BUNDLES WITH
6. USE CLASS A AND CLASS B STONE TO FILL GAPS ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF STEP POOL ROCKS.
Q (J W
o
Z
APPROVAL OF ENGINEER
7. AFTER ALL STONE HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE WITH CLASS A AND
CLASS B STONE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK.
O
� OZ
8. FILTER FABRIC SHALL MEET SPECIFICATIONS FOR TYPE 2 NCDOT FILTER FABRIC.
FORD CROSSING
NTS
LIVE CUTTINGS BUNDLE
TUTS
STEP POOL
NTS
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NO 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com LU
PRO'. DATE: JUNE 2013
D.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
33
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
v
w
O
a �
M Z
IL
Z m
O
O �
Q
F
U
F
4�z
W
7
O
� Z
M
0
� Z J
Z
F
F-
U
LU
z
�
W Z Z
°
O
� O =
F
� a CJ
�
O
Q (J W
o
Z
O
� OZ
� Z
W
G�
W
W
W D_
2
�
H
v
M Z
IL
Z m
O �
Q
F
4�z
W
O
� Z
M
� Z J
Z
F
F-
LU
W Z Z
� O =
� a CJ
Q (J W
U
O
OU
.. F Z
w U)
� W �
J
2
H
z p Z
�
N
U � ::1
Z_
w Z�
w w w
Z ¢zm
O¢a�
aa�
O
IL
�

FLOW NOTE:
3
Fill
REBAR (1/2" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN.
LENGTH TYPICAL) SHOULD DI PLACED 1' TO
3' FROM END OF LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO
BE PLACED AT 6' OFFSETS. LAST REBAR
SIGN SPECIFICATIONS:
_ MATERIAL ALUMINUM
GAUGE: .032
SIZE: 6" X 6°
EXISTING DITCH BANK a
PROPOSED CONSERVATION
q
MINIMUM DNMEIER 12° SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF
BACKGROUND COLOR: COATED CHROME YELLOW
PRINT COLOR: BLACK
EASEMENT LIMITS
LCE LCE LCE LCE
LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED AS
6' A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR, 2 PER LOG.
Conservation ArCA MOUNTING HOLES: 2 HOLES CENTER TOP AND
Po .d try else She fYnsh C —LE'. BOTTOM 3/8" DIAMETER 6' ON CENTER AND 2
LOG STRUCTURE
CHANNEL PLUG (SEE DETAIL)
— - -a
HOLES CENTER TOP AND BOTTOM 3/16"
(SEE DETAIL)
F-
4�z
w
No Mewing - No Cutting DIAMETER ON CENTER
LOGS
RE6W
ND CORNERS:
No Vehicles
—
J
%\ PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
PROPOSED FLOODPWN SURFACE
rge4��.lwcma.nwoc'
FILL DITCH To �Y
EXISTING GRADE
j
q•
LENGTH VARIES LOG
o
/ GRADE AREA SUCH THAT
F MAX SLOPE BETWEEN LOG
o / \ \ /T\\ j AND MATTING IS
DAN VALLEY
LOO
1 %UCTURE
LOG OR EARTH LEVEL SPREADER
� O =
(SEE DETAIL)
6" (IYP.)
/
BANK FULL LIMITS OF
PROPOSED CHANNEL
F-
Q
5.0'
NOTES:
0
PLAN VIEW
1. CONSERVATION AREA SIGNS SHALL ATTACHED TO A TREE,
T -POST, U- CHANNEL POST, OR SQUARE STEEL POST.
L
7!!!G
w�
�wO
2. ALL POSTS MUST HAVE A LENGTH OF 6.0 FEET AND BE BURIED
x
5/8° REBAR
TO A DEPTH OF 2.0 FEET.
INSTALL GOIR ' To 40'
SECTIONAL VIEW A - A'
3. SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED ON POSTS USING ALUMINUM
DRIVE RIVETS.
MATTING INSTALL LIVE STAKES
aa�
a
4. THE TOP 0.5 FEET OF T -POSTS OR U- CHANNEL POSTS SHALL
BE PAINTED YELLOW.
PLAN VIEW
5. USE % "ALUMINUM NAILS TO INSTALL SIGN ON TREES, LEAVING Ye"
OF THE NAIL EXPOSED.
PROPOSED GRADE
FLOODPLAIN SILL
CONSERVATION
LOG STRUCTURE
NTS
EASEMENT SIGN
EXISTING DITCH (SEE DETAIL)
TOP OF BANK EXIS TING GRADE
NTS
1
CHANNEL PLUG
\ / \ / INSTALL COIR MATTING
(SEE DETAIL) \ \ \ \ \�� \\ \ \
1��
Ys To 15 OF
BUNDLE DIAMETER
DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
— — — O�i1�ti
SAW KERFS BELOW PROPOSED
USING THE KBC PLANTING BAR
FILL
EXISTING FLOW - EXISTING GRADE
STREAM BED
DITCH INVERT
PROPOSED
CHANNEL BED
�A
2 inch
NOTES-
SECTION A -A
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10' -20' LONG AND AT
LEAST 8 INCHES IN DIAMETER, AND HARDWOOD.
DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
NOTES:
NTS
1. USE LOGS OF VARYING SIZES 6"-15" DIAMETER AND 4' -8' LONG. LOGS
SHALL BE HELD IN PLACE NTH REBAR OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS, MODEL
68 -DB1 OR EQUIVALENT, AND PLACED ACCORDING TO DESIGN PLANS AND
1. INSERT 2. REMOVE 3. INSERT
AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. A
PLANTING BAR PLANTING PLANTING BAR 2
AS SHOWN AND BAR AND INCHES TOWARD
2. ALL LOGS SHALL BE "ROUGHED UP" WITH A CHAINSAW PRIOR TO
PULL HANDLE PLACESEEDING PLANTER FROM
INSTALLATION. SAW KERFS SHALL BE 0.25" TO 2.0" IN DEPTH.
TOWARD PLANTER. AT CORRECT SEEDING.
DEPTH.
A
TYPICAL SECTION A -A
r loft
B o
PROPOSED
BED D ELEVATION FLOW
FLOW �//
TOP OF BANK
/ �
A A \
FLOC A
4. PULL HANDLE 5. PUSH 6. LEAVE
/
FILTER EFABRIC /I \\ \ \\�� \ \��\
2%x4''6
STREAMBED
OF BAR TOWARD HANDLE COMPACTION
PLANTER, FIRMING FORWARD HOLE OPEN.
SOIL AT BOTTOM. FIRMING SOIL WATER
JJJ
EXISTING DITCH BANK L —B
FILL OR UNDISTURBED CABLE ANCHOR
LOG SHOULD BE
AT TOP. THOROUGHLY.
EARTH
BURIED IN BANK
AT LEAST 3 FEET I
LOG
PLAN VIEW SECTION A -A
B
PLANTING NOTES:
NOT LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 10 TO 16 FEET LONG, \
RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
NOTES:
PLANTING BAG BARE ROOTS SHALL BE
DURING PLANTING SEEDLINGS PLANTED 6 FT. TO 10 FT.
SHALL BE KEPT IN A MOIST ON CENTER, RANDOM
MATTING ER
2. LOG ARMS SHOULD BE BURIED INTO THE BANK AND BED A MINIMUM OF 3
FEET.
CANVAS BAG OR SIMILAR
CONTAINER PREVENT THE SPACING, AVERAGING FT.
ON CENTER, APPROXI MATELY
PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
3. SET ELEVATION OF TOP LOG CROSS PIECES TO DESIRED ELEVATION OF
PROPOSED GROUND OR ST REAMBED.
ROOT SYSTEMS FROM DRYING.
680 PLANTS PER ACRE
� —
4. REBAR (5/8" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) SHOULD BE
PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END of LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT
5' OFFSETS. LAST REBAR SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF
LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR. \
5. PRE -DRILL HOLES FOR REBAR WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT.
8. DRIVE REBAR THROUGH LOGS AND BEND ENDS AS SHOWN.
KBC PLANTING BAR
PLANTING BAR SHALL HAVE A
BLADE WITH A TRIANGULAR
CROSS SECTION, AND SHALL
4E CWIDE
PROPOSED
CHANNEL
INCHES AND
1 INCH THICK AT CENTER.
// // // // / POROPOSED
CABLE ANCHORS \ \ \ \ \\ \ CABLE ANCHORS INVERT
TYPICAL SECTION B- B/
ROOT PRUNING
FILL
ALL SEEDLINGS SHALL BE ROOT
PRUNED, IF NECESSARY, SO THAT
FILTER FABRIC
EXISTING DITCH
NO ROOTS EXTEND MORE THAN
1 0 INCHES BELOW THE
INVERT
ROOT COLLAR.
SECTION B -B
(LOG STRUCTURE FOR DIFFUSE FLOW STRUCTURE)
LIMITS OF BANKFULL CHANNEL
FILTER FABRIC SECTION B -B
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
(LOG STRUCTURE FOR PROPOSED CHANNELS)
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 12 INCHES IN DIAMETER, HARDWOOD SPECIES
(EXCLUDING TULIP POPLAR AND SWEET GUM), A MINIMUM OF 10 TO 20 FEET
IN LENGTH (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED), AND RELATIVELY STRAIGHT.
2. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 3'
LARGE WOODY DEBRIS
BARE ROOT PLANTING
ALONG THE LOG.
3. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR
NTS
NTS
EQUIVALENT.
LOG STRUCTURE
NTS
COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION CRUSE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W K DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
�D IC
unity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
r
tell,-
PROJ.DATE: JUNE 2013
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
34
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
w
Qv
O
a �
O
F
U
0_
0
U
z x
O
F
� O
o Z
O �
a -
U
az
Z m
O �
Q
F-
4�z
w
O
� Z
�
� � U
J
� Z J
F
� Q
Saw
CD
o
� UZ
N
j
� W
x
� Z
w �
W
W 0_
x a
U
az
Z m
O �
Q
F-
4�z
w
O
� Z
�
� � U
J
� Z J
F
Saw
CD
o
I-- Z Z
� O =
� Q U
U W
Q
T
F-
Q
O
O
Z
w�
�wO
J
r
x
Z p Z
U f a
�
Z
N
w Z�
�
¢ w .. w
Z¢ z m
aa�
a
�
O¢a�

REBAR OR
MINIMUM
BENCH WIDTH
CUMULATIVE
BENCH WIDTH
UT1-1
STREAM BANK DUCKBILL ANCHOR
NA
UT1 -2
5'
16 FT MAX
UT1-3
5'
B
UT1 -4
NA
LINE POST
WOVEN WIRE BARBED OR
ELECTRIC
LINE POST
NA
UT2-2
NA
NA
UT2-3
WIRE
F
O
Z
UT2-4
RIP RAP
O �
REPLACED CHANNEL
o
� O
ul
>
�
PROPOSED STREAM
BED MATERIAL
� O =
� Q U
U W
BED ELEVATION
FLOW
U
H
O
Z
�
U
w
� W �
J
H
2
z p Z
U� d
�
Z_
N
wZ
Z ¢ Z m
aa�
O
IL
4.0'
0.1' MAX
LOG FLOW BOULDERS
.2.D
A A
0 0 0
URu(� Vu uL
1101-1101-1.0
LINE PANEL
0.75' O O O O O
O O O O O
15'(TVP)
REBAF
DUCKBILL ANCHOR
NOTES:
1. ALL BOULDERS SHALL HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE
DIAMETER OF 1.5' TO 2.0' AND SHALL NOT EXCEED
2.5' AS MEASURED THROUGH ANY AXIS.
2. BOULDERS (Ty".) ARE TO BE LOCALLY QUARRIED
KEY -IN COIR MATTING PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
3. LOG TOES ARE OPTIONAL PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
4. LOGS MUST BE OF HARDWOOD SPECIES AND HAVE A
12' MINIMUM DIAMETER.
5. LOGS ARE TO BE SALVAGED FROM PROJECT AREA.
SIZE AND SPECIES MAY VARY.
6. REBAR (5/8" MIN. DIAMETER, 4' MIN. LENGTH) OR
DUCKBILL ANCHORS INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURERS
INSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE USED TO ANCHOR LOG TOES.
7. FILTER FABRIC SHALL MEET SPECIFICATIONS FOR TYPE
2 NCDOT FILTER FABRIC.
CLASS A STONE —
SECTION A -A
STREAM BANK
FILTER FABRIC BARBED OR
ELECTRIC WIRE LINE POST
4" TO 6 ' 1 WOVEN WARE:
ASTM CLASS 3 GALVANIZED.
a TOP AND BOTTOM WIRES MIN. 12 GAUGE.
WOVEN WIRE n �_ INTERMEDIATE AND STAY WIRES MIN.
GROUND LINE 12 1/2 GAUGE.
o
T07
PROPOSED STREAM
BED ELEVATION
BOULDERS
0.75'
T_
FILTER FABRIC —
ROCK GRADE CONTROL
NTS
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS GREATER
THAN 0.75' BELOW
EXISTING GRADE. 3, _ T07
DESIGN
CROSS- SECTION
BENCH
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE; TIE TO EXISTING GRADE;
MAX SLOPE 2H:1V
MAX SLOPE 2H:1V
TYPICAL CROSS- SECTION WHEN TOB 10.75' BELOW EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION IS LESS THAN
0.75' BELOW EXISTING
GRADE.
DESIGN
CROSS- SECTION
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE; TIE TO EXISTING \Z:1�V
MAX SLOPE 5H:1V MAX SLOPE
TYPICAL CROSS- SECTION WHEN TOE < 0.75' BELOW EXISTING GRADE
REACH
MINIMUM
BENCH WIDTH
CUMULATIVE
BENCH WIDTH
UT1-1
NA
NA
UT1 -2
5'
110'
UT1-3
5'
Ito'
UT1 -4
NA
NA
UT2-1
NA
NA
UT2-2
NA
NA
UT2-3
ROCK CLASS I
F
O
Z
UT2-4
RIP RAP
O �
TYPICAL CROSS— SECTION GRADING
NTS
REBAR OR
DUCKBILL ANCHOR
V
30' TO 45' FROM
HORIZONTAL
CLASS A STONE
SECTION B -B
INSTALL LIVE STAKES
IAVBACK BANK;
MIN SLOPE 1:1
(TVP. SLOPE OF 2:1)
WOVEN WIRE WITH ONE BARB DETAIL
LINE POSTS (WOODEN)'. MIN. 4 IN DIAM. OR4IN. SQUARE
LINE POSTS (STEEL)'. STUDDED OR PUNCHED T, U, CRY SHAPED, WITH ANCHOR PLATES.
MIN. WEIGHT 1.3 LBS./FT. (EXCLUDING ANCHOR PLATE). POSTS SHALL BE DRIVEN A MINIMUM OF 18" DEEP AND MUST BE AT
LEAST 5.5 FT IN LENGTH
SPECIESAND TREATMENT FOR ALL WOOD: USE UNTREATED DURABLE POSTS OF SPECIES SUCH AS RED CEDAR,
BLACK LOCUST OR OSAGE- ORANGE WITH BARK REMOVED, OR NON- DURABLE WOOD THAT IS PRESERVATIVE
PRESSURE TREATED (0.40 LBS. /CUBIC FOOT CCA, OR EQUIVALENT NON -CCA TREATMENT). DO NOT USE RED
PINE.
WOVEN WIRE FENCE (NRCS DETAIL 3
NITS
INSTALL COIR MATTING (ROLANKA
BIOD -MAT 90 OR EQUIVALENT) PER
MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS
EXCAVATE /GRADE BANK
EXISTING CHANNEL BANK
IXISTING
CHANNEL BED
NOTES:
1. KEY -IN COIR MATTING PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
2. SEED AND MULCH ALL BANKS PRIOR TO INSTALLING
COIR MATTING.
INSTALL LIVE STAKES
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE;
MIN SLOPE 1.5:1
EXISTING BENCH
TYPICAL BANK GRADING (OPT 2)
REACH UT1 —4
NTS
ROCK TO
ROCK TOE STREAM BED GRAVEL
PROTECTION
INVERT SET AT
1.25' MIN.
PROFILE GRADE
0
� Z
GRADE CONTROL ROCK
GRAVEL SUBSTRATE
CLASS I RIP RAP
(NATIVE MATERIAL
0
0.25' TO 4" IN DIA.)
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
- SECTION C-C
TOP OF RIFFLE (SEE
PROFILE FOR
DESIGN ELEV.) SLOPE VARIES BOTTOM OF RIFFLE SUF CE 175
(SEE
(SEE PRORIE) DESSRGN BE PROFILE FOR DESIGN
3 MIN. ,
1_ MIN. 0.5'
1.0' 3 �1
GRAVEL SUBSTRATE
(NATIVE MATERIAL
0.25" TO 4" IN DIA.) GRADE CONTROL
ROCK CLASS I
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL - PROFILE B -B RIP RAP
0.25' TO 4" IN DIA.)
F— C r— A
LAC LEA
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
NTS
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE
MN SLOPE 5:1
LAVBACK LOWER BANK;
MIN SLOPE 1:1
(TVP. SLOPE OF 2:1)
NOTES:
1. TREES NOT INDICATED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE
PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
2. KEY -IN COIR MATTING PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
3. SEED AND MULCH ALL BANKS PRIOR TO INSTALLING
COIR MATTING.
N
EXISTING TREES IN EXCAVATION
AREAS TO BE REMOVED UNLESS
OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY DESIGNER
INSTALL COIR MATTING (ROLANKA
— BIOD -MAT 90 OR EQUIVALENT) PER
MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS
EXCAVATE / GRADE UPPER BANK
INSTALL LIVE STAKES
EXISTING CHANNEL BANK
1.0' TO 2.0'
(DESIGNER TO MARK
IN FIELD PRIOR TO
\ CONSTRUCTION)
EXISTING
CHANNEL BED
TYPICAL BANK GRADING (OPT 1
NTS
D CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
Www Wkdickson.com
`X_ LICENsENo
r
4
4 LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
QC: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
35
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
ROCK TOE STREAM BED GRAVEL
w
PROTECTION
Qv
0
� Z
INVERT SET
1' MAX 1.5' MIN. AT PROFILE 1 'Al
O
a �
o_ a
Z m
GRADE
0
0.75
0.75'
MII
T
z
T MIN.
T
O
� Z
GRADE CONTROL
�
o
GRAVEL SUBSTRATE
ROCK CLASS I
F
O
Z
(NATIVE MATERIAL
RIP RAP
O �
0.25' TO 4" IN DIA.)
F— C r— A
LAC LEA
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
NTS
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE
MN SLOPE 5:1
LAVBACK LOWER BANK;
MIN SLOPE 1:1
(TVP. SLOPE OF 2:1)
NOTES:
1. TREES NOT INDICATED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE
PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
2. KEY -IN COIR MATTING PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
3. SEED AND MULCH ALL BANKS PRIOR TO INSTALLING
COIR MATTING.
N
EXISTING TREES IN EXCAVATION
AREAS TO BE REMOVED UNLESS
OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY DESIGNER
INSTALL COIR MATTING (ROLANKA
— BIOD -MAT 90 OR EQUIVALENT) PER
MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS
EXCAVATE / GRADE UPPER BANK
INSTALL LIVE STAKES
EXISTING CHANNEL BANK
1.0' TO 2.0'
(DESIGNER TO MARK
IN FIELD PRIOR TO
\ CONSTRUCTION)
EXISTING
CHANNEL BED
TYPICAL BANK GRADING (OPT 1
NTS
D CKSON
unity infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
Www Wkdickson.com
`X_ LICENsENo
r
4
4 LU
PROJ. DATE: JUNE 2013
QC: FM
Q.C. DATE: 05 -30 -13
DRAWING NUMBER:
35
PROJ. NO.:
20120118.00. RA
F-
U
w
Qv
0
� Z
O
a �
o_ a
Z m
0
O �
Q
F
U
F-
Z
W
z
0
U
O
� Z
°
�
o
� 0 U
�
F
O
Z
Z Z J
o
O �
Saw
cD
o
� O
ul
>
�
� Z
w �
W
� a
F-
U
0
� Z
o_ a
Z m
O �
Q
F-
Z
W
O
� Z
N
� 0 U
J
Z Z J
F
Saw
cD
o
wZz
� O =
� Q U
U W
Q
U
H
O
Z
�
U
w
� W �
J
H
2
z p Z
U� d
�
Z_
N
wZ
Z ¢ Z m
aa�
O
IL
�
O¢a0