20171291 Ver 1_Mitigation-Plan_DRAFT_20180627

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
Gideon Mitigation Site
Surry County, North Carolina
USACE Action ID SAW -2018-01462
Yadkin River Basin
HUC 03040101
Prepared by:
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-209-1052
May 2018
"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). "

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Gideon Mitigation Site ("the Project") is located in Surry County, approximately 10 miles north of
Elkin. Water quality stressors currently affecting the Project include livestock production, agricultural
production, and lack of riparian buffer. The Project presents 4,818 linear feet (LF) of stream restoration,
enhancement, and preservation, generating 3,115 Cool Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along Mill
Creek and three unnamed tributaries.
The Project is located in the Yadkin River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03040101, Target Local
Watershed (TLW) 03040101080020, and NCDWR sub -basin 03-04-01. The current State classification
for Mill Creek is Class C, Trout Waters (Tr), and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) (NCDWQ
2011).
Consisting of agricultural fields, cattle pastures and wooded areas, the Project's total easement area is
approximately 11.45 acres within the overall drainage area of 3,191 acres. The Project is between two
separate portions of the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) Little Sebastian Site. While each site
could be developed independently of the other, the combined easements will result in a much larger
contiguous protected corridor and high quality aquatic habitat. Grazing livestock have historically had
access to all stream reaches within the Project. The lack of riparian buffer vegetation, deep-rooted
vegetation, and unstable channel characteristics have contributed to the degradation of stream banks
throughout the Project area.
Goals for the Project include an increase to hydrologic function and restoration to ecological function
within the existing stream and riparian corridor, and protect these features in perpetuity. These will be
accomplished by returning the existing streams into stable conditions by constructing an E/C type
stream with appropriate dimensions and pattern, reconnecting the channel to the floodplain, and
backfilling the abandoned channel. In -stream structures will be utilized for vertical stability and to
improve habitat. Buffer improvements will filter runoff from agricultural fields, thereby reducing
nutrient and sediment loads to the channel. Livestock exclusion fence will be installed along the
easement boundary. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas will also provide wildlife
corridors throughout the Project area. Benefits to be accrued from these activities include improved
water quality, and terrestrial and aquatic habitat.
The stream design approach for the Project 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 reference reach, or "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 is developed using analytical methods to identify the design discharge.
After completion of all construction and planting activities, the Project will be monitored on a regular
basis throughout the seven-year post -construction monitoring period, or until performance standards
are met. Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred
to Unique Places to Save (UP2S). This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term
steward for the property and will conduct periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions
required in the conservation easement are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold easement and
deed restrictions will be finalized prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
Gideon Mitigation Plan ii May 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Project Components................................................................................................................
1
1.2 Project Outcomes....................................................................................................................
1
2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION...............................................................
2
2.1 Site Selection..........................................................................................................................
2
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS..............................................................................
4
3.1 Watershed Summary Information..........................................................................................
4
DrainageArea.................................................................................................................................4
Surface Water Classification..........................................................................................................
4
3.2 Landscape Characteristics......................................................................................................
5
Vegetation......................................................................................................................................
5
ExistingWetlands...........................................................................................................................6
SoilSurvey.....................................................................................................................................
6
3.3 Land Use - Historic, Current, and Future...............................................................................
7
3.4 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints............................................................
8
Property, Boundary, and Utilities...................................................................................................
8
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass ....................................
8
Environmental Screening and Documentation...............................................................................
8
Threatened and Endangered Species..............................................................................................
8
CulturalResources..........................................................................................................................
9
3.5 Reach Summary Information...............................................................................................
10
ChannelClassification..................................................................................................................10
Discharge......................................................................................................................................10
ExistingChannel Morphology.....................................................................................................11
Channel Stability Assessment......................................................................................................12
BankfullVerification....................................................................................................................13
3.6 Site Photographs...................................................................................................................
14
4 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL.......................................................................................
17
4.1 Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements............................................................
18
Hydrology.....................................................................................................................................18
Hydraulic......................................................................................................................................18
Geomorphology............................................................................................................................18
Physiochemical.............................................................................................................................19
Biology.........................................................................................................................................19
5 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES............................................................
20
Best Management Practices (BMPs)............................................................................................
21
6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN.....................................................................................................
23
6.1 Reference Stream..................................................................................................................
23
Reference Watershed Characterization........................................................................................
23
ReferenceDischarge.....................................................................................................................23
ReferenceChannel Morphology...................................................................................................
24
Reference Channel Stability Assessment.....................................................................................
24
Reference Bankfull Verification...................................................................................................24
Reference Riparian Vegetation.....................................................................................................
24
6.2 Design Parameters................................................................................................................
25
Stream Restoration Approach.......................................................................................................
25
DesignDischarge..........................................................................................................................27
DataAnalysis...............................................................................................................................
29
Gideon Mitigation Plan iii May 2018

6.3 Vegetation and Planting Plan...............................................................................................
32
PlantCommunity Restoration......................................................................................................
32
On Site Invasive Species Management........................................................................................
33
SoilRestoration............................................................................................................................
33
6.4 Mitigation Summary.............................................................................................................
34
6.5 Determination of Credits......................................................................................................
34
6.6 Credit Calculations for Non -Standard Buffer Widths..........................................................
35
7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS................................................................................................
37
7.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria.....................................................................................
37
BankfullEvents............................................................................................................................
37
CrossSections..............................................................................................................................
37
DigitalImage Stations..................................................................................................................
37
SurfaceFlow.................................................................................................................................
37
7.2 Vegetation Success Criteria..................................................................................................
37
8 MONITORING PLAN.................................................................................................................
38
8.1 As -Built Survey....................................................................................................................
38
8.2 Visual Monitoring................................................................................................................
38
8.3 Hydrology Events.................................................................................................................
38
8.4 Cross Sections......................................................................................................................
38
8.5 Vegetation Monitoring.........................................................................................................
39
8.6 Scheduling/Reporting...........................................................................................................39
9 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN.........................................................................................
41
10 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN.....................................................................................
42
11 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE...............................................................................................
43
11.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits..................................................................................
43
11.2 Subsequent Credit Releases..................................................................................................
43
12 MAINTENANCE PLAN.............................................................................................................
45
13 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES......................................................................................................
46
14 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................
47
List of Tables
Table 1. Gideon Project Components Summary....................................................................................1
Table 2. Project Parcel and Landowner Information..............................................................................3
Table 3. Project Watershed Summary Information................................................................................4
Table 4. Gideon Vegetation Plot Summary............................................................................................
5
Table5. Mapped Soil Series...................................................................................................................7
Table 6. Regulatory Considerations.......................................................................................................
9
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics.......................................................................10
Table 8. Channel Stability Assessment Results....................................................................................13
Table 9. Functional Benefits and Improvements..................................................................................22
Table 10. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters......................................................
28
Table 11. Peak Flow Comparison........................................................................................................
30
Table 12. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses......................................................31
Table 13. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities.............................................................
31
Table14. Proposed Plant List...............................................................................................................
33
Table15. Mitigation Credits.................................................................................................................
35
Table 16. Stream Mitigation Credit Adjustments for Non-standard Buffer Widths ............................
36
Table 17. Monitoring Requirements.....................................................................................................
40
Table 18. Stream Credit Release Schedule...........................................................................................43
Gideon Mitigation Plan iv May 2018

Table19. Maintenance Plan................................................................................................................. 45
Table20. Financial Assurances............................................................................................................46
List of Charts
Chart 1. Stream Functions Pyramid...................................................................................................... 17
Gideon Mitigation Plan v May 2018

List of Figures
Figure 1 —
Vicinity Map
Figure 2 —
USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3 —
Landowner Map
Figure 4 —
Land -use Map
Figure 5 —
Existing Conditions Map
Figure 6 —
National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 7 —
Soils Map
Figure 8 —
Historical Conditions Map
Figure 9 —
FEMA Map
Figure 10
—Conceptual Plan Map
Figure 11 a — Ideal Buffer Width Zones
Figure l lb — Actual Buffer Width Zones
Appendices
Appendix A -
Plan Sheets
Appendix B -
Data, Analysis, and Supplementary Information
Appendix C -
Site Protection Instrument
Appendix D -
DWR Stream Identification Forms
Appendix E -
USACE District Assessment Forms
Appendix F -
Wetland JD Forms
Appendix G -
Invasive Species Plan
Appendix H -
Regulatory Agency Scoping Letters
Gideon Mitigation Plan vi May 2018

I PROJECT INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Components
The Gideon Mitigation Site ("Project") is located within a rural watershed in Surry County,
approximately 10 miles north of Elkin and seven miles west of Dobson. The Project lies within the
Yadkin River Basin, North Carolina Department of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub -basin 03-04-01
and United States Geological Survey (USGS) 14 -digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101080020
(Figure 1). The Project is being designed to help meet compensatory mitigation requirements for
stream impacts in the HUC 03040101. The Project proposes to restore 2,205 linear feet (LF), enhance
2,103 LF, preserve 510 LF of existing stream, and provide water quality benefit for 3,191 acres of
drainage area. The Project is in the Northern Inner Piedmont Level IV ecoregion.
The Project is comprised of a single easement location along Mill Creek and three unnamed tributaries,
totaling 4,608 linear feet, which eventually drain into the Yadkin River. The stream mitigation
components are summarized in Table 1 and Figure 10. The Project is between the 22.26 -acre Division
of Mitigation Services (DMS) Little Sebastian Site. The Project is accessible from Ed Nixon Road.
Coordinates for the Project are as follows: 36.39659, -80.85833.
1.2 Project Outcomes
The streams proposed for restoration have been significantly impacted by livestock production,
agricultural practices, and a lack of riparian buffer. Due to its water classifications (Class C Waters,
Trout Waters Jr), and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)), proposed improvements to the Project
will meet the water quality improvement needs expressed in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River
Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) as well as ecological improvements to riparian corridor within the
easement.
Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 4,818 LF of proposed
stream, generating 3,115 Cool Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) (Table 1).
Table 1. Gideon Project Components Summary
Mitigation Approach Linear Feet Ratio Base Cool SMU
Restoration 2,205 1 2,205
Enhancement I 522 1.5 348
Enhancement III 1,581 5 317
Preservation 510 10 510
Total
Non -Standard Buffer Width Adiustment 194
Total Adjusted SMUs 3,115
Gideon Mitigation Plan 1 May 2018

2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION
The DMS 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP identified several restoration needs for the entire Yadkin
River Basin, as well as for HUC 03040101. The Project watershed was identified as a Target Local
Watershed (TLW) (HUC 03040101080020, Middle Mitchell River TLW), a watershed that exhibits
both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream, and riparian buffer restoration. More specifically,
goals outlined in the 2009 RBRP for the watershed include:
1. Restoration of water quality and aquatic habitat in impaired stream segments;
2. Protection of high -resource value waters, including HQ W, OR W, and WSW designated waters
and those containing large numbers of rare and endangered species (Natural Heritage Element
Occurences);
3. Continuation of existing watershed restoration and protection initiatives and projects,
including efforts funded by Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF), DWQ's 319
Program, NC EEP, Ag Cost Share Program (A CSP) and Community Conservation Assistance
Program (CCAP);
4. Collaborative efforts with local resource agencies, land trusts and willing landowners to
implement new stream, riparian buffer and wetland restoration, enhancement and preservation
projects within TLWs;
S. Improved management of stormwater runoff (including the implementation of stormwater BMP
projects), especially in urban and suburban areas contributing to downstream degradation of
stream habitat and impairment of water quality; and
6. Implementation of agricultural BMPs in order to limit inputs of sediment, nutrients, and fecal
coliform to streams from active farming operations.
2.1 Site Selection
The Project was identified as a stream and buffer restoration opportunity to improve water quality,
habitat, and hydrology within the Yadkin River Basin, and more specifically, as a TLW within the 2009
Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP. The site lends itself to accomplish multiple RBRP goals along Project
reaches due to an absence of riparian buffers, cattle access to the stream, and the historic land use,
which has led to channelization. Many of the Project design goals and objectives will address major
watershed stressors identified in the 2009 RBRP. Project -specific goals and objectives will be addressed
further in Section 5. A project watershed map with the Project's drainage areas is shown on Figure 2
and watershed planning priority boundaries are shown on Figure 1.
The Project will address four of the six goals outlined in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP. By
establishing riparian buffers, instream structures, and increasing bedform diversity, the improvement
and restoration of water quality and aquatic habitat will be achieved (RBRP Goal 1). By establishing a
conservation easement, ORW designated waters will be protected in perpetuity (RBRP Goal 2).
Collaborative efforts have been made with local and willing landowners to implement new stream and
wetland restoration and enhancement projects within the Middle Mitchell River TLW
(03040101080020) (RBRP Goal 4). The Project will include the use of agricultural BMPs to limit
inputs of sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform to streams from active farming operations. (RBRP
Goal 6).
Gideon Mitigation Plan 2 May 2018

The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this Project includes one parcel
in Surry County with the following ownership in Table 2 & Figure 3. Once finalized, a copy of the
land protection instrument will be included in Appendix C. The Wilmington District Conservation
Easement model template will be utilized to draft the site protection instrument.
Table 2. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
Gideon Mitigation Plan 3 May 2018
PIN
Owner of Record
Or
Stream Reach
Tax Parcel ID#
Jimmy Edward Nixon &
495600381791
All stream reaches
Vivian J Life Estate
Gideon Mitigation Plan 3 May 2018

3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Watershed Summary Information
Drainage Area
The Project area is comprised of Mill Creek and three tributaries that flow west to east, and eventually
drain into the Yadkin River. The total drainage area for the Project is 3,191 acres (4.99 mi'). Primary
land use within the rural watershed consists of approximately 70 percent forest and 25 percent
agricultural land. Impervious area covers less than one percent of the total watershed (Table 3 & Figure
4). Within the agricultural land use, pastureland accounts for 91 percent of the area, cropland comprises
six percent of the area, and hay land comprises three percent of the area. Although the project watershed
is primarily forested, the majority of the agricultural areas within the watershed are in close proximity
to the Project, and play a significant role in the degradation of the Project streams. Historic and current
land -use within the immediate Project area and west of Mill Creek have allowed cattle direct access to
the streams. These activities have negatively impacted both water quality and streambank stability
along the Project streams and their tributaries. The resulting observed stressors include excess nutrient
input, streambank erosion, sedimentation, livestock access to streams, channel modification, and the
loss of riparian buffers.
Table 3. Project Watershed Summary Information
Level IV Ecoregion
45e — Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040101
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040101080020
DWR Sub -basin
03-04-01
Project Drainage Area (acres)
3,191
Percent Impervious Area
<1%
Surface Water Classification
Mill Creek has been classified as Class C, Trout Waters (Tr), and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW),
(NCDWQ 2011).
Class C waters are protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption,
aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body contact with
water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner (NCDWQ
2011).
Outstanding Resource Waters (OWR) are a subset of High Quality Waters. This supplemental
classification is intended to protect unique and special waters having excellent water quality and being
of exceptional state or national ecological or recreational significance. To qualify, waters must be rated
Excellent by NCDWR and have one of the following outstanding resource values: outstanding fish
habitat and fisheries, unusually high level of water based recreation or potential for such kind of
recreation, some special designation such as North Carolina Natural and Scenic River or National
Wildlife Refuge, important component of state or national park or forest, or special ecological or
scientific significance (rare or endangered species habitat, research or educational areas) (NCDWQ
2011).
Gideon Mitigation Plan 4 May 2018

Trout Water Jr) is a supplemental classification intended to protect freshwaters which have conditions
which shall sustain and allow for trout propagation and survival of stocked trout on a year-round basis
(NCDWQ 2011).
3.2 Landscape Characteristics
Vegetation
Vegetation around the unbuffered reaches of Mill Creek and its tributaries are primarily composed of
herbaceous vegetation and some scattered trees. In general, these riparian zones are disturbed due to
regular land management activities. On April 30, 2018 four 100m2 plots were surveyed along the
floodplain of Mill Creek, and its tributaries, to categorize the existing vegetation communities. Forested
riparian areas along the majority of Mill Creek and its tributaries have been intermittently cattle -grazed
and lack a well-developed understory and shrub strata, while short reaches of enhancement and
preservation represent more natural community assemblages. For this reason, representative plots were
surveyed along reach JN6 within the project, and MC 1, MC3, and BSI within the Little Sebastian Site
(Appendix B). Within each vegetation plot, all trees >5 inch (12.7cm) diameter at breast height (DBH)
were identified, measured, and used to calculate both basal area and stems per acre. Trees >54 inches
(137cm) in height were used to quantify tree species diversity. Canopy species data was calculated to
quantify the existing natural community (Schafale, 2012) (Table 4). Shrub species and herbaceous
species were also identified and the percent cover was estimated.
Table 4. Gideon Vegetation Plot Summary
Basal Area
Plot
(m /ha)
Avg. DBH (cm)
Trees per Acre
Total Tree Species
Natural Community
`
Disturbed Piedmont Headwater
1 71.21
40.53
162
5
Stream Forest
2- 66.83
19.40
324
6
Disturbed Piedmont Alluvial
Forest
Piedmont Headwater Stream
3 64.80
27.85
405
6
Forest
4'
AVG 50.71 21.94 222 4
. Indicates the vegetation survey was performed on the Little Sebastian Site
Pasture
Dominant canopy species across the Project included tulip -poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), white oak
(Quercus alba), American holly (Ilex opaca), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), Virginia pine (Pinus
virginiana), red maple (Acer rubrum), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and black cherry (Prunus serotina).
Sub -canopy species included great laurel (Rhododendron maximum), mountain laurel (Kalmia
latifolia), and spicebush (Lindera benzoin). Herbaceous species in the enhancement and preservation
reaches included Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum),
Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), trout lily (Erythronium americanum), wood anemone
(Anemone quinquefolia), and Solomon's seal (Polygonatum biflorum).
Invasive species were also found within the vegetation survey plots, and in the vicinity of the site: tree
of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora),
and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). Non-native species included wavy bittercress
(Cardamine flexuosa), little leaf buttercup (Ranunculus abortivus), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus
repens), common chickweed (Stellaria media), common white clover (Trifolium repens), common
speedwell (Veronica persica), mock strawberry (Duchesnea indica), annual meadow grass (Poa
annua), red fescue (Festuca rubra), and lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula).
Gideon Mitigation Plan 5 May 2018

Existing Wetlands
A survey of existing wetlands was performed on October 4, 2017. Wetland boundaries were delineated
using current methodology outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils were characterized and classified using the Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0 (USDA-NRCS 2010). Within the
boundaries of the proposed Project, four jurisdictional wetlands are present near Reach JN6 (Appendix
F & Figure 5), and are labeled as WC (Wetland C), WD (Wetland D), WE (Wetland E), and WF
(Wetland F). WC is approximately 0.01 acres in size, WD is approximately 0.04 acres in size, WE is
approximately 0.36 acres in size, and WD is approximately 0.42 acres in size. Large portions of WE
and WF are under active management for cattle. Vegetation within the wetland areas was made up of
tearthumb (Persicaria sagittata), Pennsylvania smartweed (Persicaria pensylvanica), common rush
(Juncus effuses), tiger nut (Cyperus esculentus), and green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens). Outside of the
easement and wetland areas, cattle are actively managed for, and fescue is the dominant forage. A
preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request was sent to the USACE on October 27, 2017
and a final PJD has not yet been received (SAW -2018-01462). Wetland forms are included in
Appendix F.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) does not depict
any potential wetland areas within the Project, but there is freshwater pond mapped west of the Project
area (Figure 6). Moreover, the soils mapped adjacent to the pond are considered predominantly
nonhydric (ArA, Arkaqua loam), and have the potential to be hydric (Figure 7).
Soil Survey
The Project is located in the Northern Inner Piedmont Level IV ecoregion, which is characterized by
rolling to hilly higher elevations than the Southern Outer Piedmont, more rugged topography, and more
monadnocks or mountain outliers than other areas of the Piedmont. It has colder temperatures, more
snowfall, and a shorter growing season than in Southern Inner, Southern Outer, Northern Outer, and
Carolina Slate Belt Piedmont regions. It has mostly mesic soils rather than the thermic soils that cover
other regions of the Carolina Piedmont. The region contains more Virginia pine and less shortleaf pine
than Southern Outer Piedmont and Carolina Slate Belt, more chestnut oak, and many mountain disjunct
plant species. Streams tend to have higher gradients than in the Outer Piedmont regions, and contain
many mountain -type macroinvertebrate species. Existing soil information from the Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS) shows the property is located within the Woolwine-Fairvew soil
association. The association is found on Piedmont uplands. It is made up of gently sloping to steep,
well drained soils that have a loamy surface layer and a clayey subsoil. Woolwine-Fairview soil
association is generally characterized by interfluves, ridges, and low hills scattered throughout the
county.
The Surry County Soil Survey shows several mapping units across the project. Map units include four
soil series. The soil series found on the Project are described below and summarized in Table 5.
Project soils are mapped by the NRCS as Arkaqua loam, Colvard and Suches soils, and Woolwine-
Fairview-Westfield complex within the easement (Figure 7). Arkaqua loam is a frequently flooded,
somewhat poorly drained soil that is found on drainageways on valleys. Colvard-Fairview-Westfield
complex is an occasionally flooded, well -drained soil that is found on natural levees on floodplains on
close to 50 percent of the Project. Woolwine-Fair-Westfield complex soils are stony, well drained, and
occur on 15-45 percent slopes on ridges.
The surrounding soils are mapped as Arkaqua, Colvard, and Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield complex.
Colvard and Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield Complex soils are considered non -hydric, while Arkaqua
Gideon Mitigation Plan 6 May 2018

is considered predominantly non -hydric. Arkaqua soils in drained areas have a moderate infiltration
rate, whereas undrained Arkaqua soils have a very slow infiltration rate; these soils occur on zero to
two percent slopes. Colvard soils have a high infiltration rate and occur on zero to three percent slopes.
Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield complex soils have a slow infiltration rate when saturated and occur on
slopes ranging from 15-45 percent slopes.
Arkaqua loam. This is a moderately deep, somewhat poorly drained soil that occurs on nearly level
floodplain along creeks and rivers in the Appalachian, Blue Ridge, and Great Smokey Mountains.
They formed in loamy alluvial sediments washed largely from soils formed in residuum from granite,
gneiss, schist, phyllite, and other metamorphic and crystalline rocks, and generally occur on slopes less
than two percent. Runoff is slow and permeability is moderate. Major uses are for pasture and crop
land. Arkaqua loam occurs in 10.1 percent of the total easement area.
Colvard and Suches soils. These are very deep, well -drained soils that occur on alluvium on
floodplains in the southern Appalachian Mountains. They formed in loamy alluvial sediments washed
largely from soils formed in residuum from granite, gneiss, schist, phyllite, and other metamorphic and
crystalline rocks, and generally occur on slopes between zero to three percent. Runoff is slow and
permeability is moderate to rapid. Major uses are cultivated crops and pasture land. Colvard and Suches
soils occur in 57.5 percent of the lower elevations along reaches MC -2 and JN4.
Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield complex. This is a very deep, well -drained soil that occurs on
hillslopes on ridges in the Piedmont upland. They formed in residuum from felsic or intermediate
metamorphic or igneous rock, and generally occur on slopes between 15-45 percent. Runoff is high and
permeability is moderate. Major uses include cultivated crops, pasture, and forest. Woolwine-Fairview-
Westfield occurs in 32.4 percent of sloped segments.
Table 5. Mapped Soil Series
Map
Unit
Map Unit Name
Percent
Drainage
Hydrologic
Landscape
Symbol
Hydric
Class
Soil Group
Setting
ArA
Arkaqua loam, 0-2% slopes
8%
Somewhat
BSD
Drainageways on
poor
valleys
CsA
Colvard and Suches soils, 0-
0%
Well
A
Natural levees on
3% slopes
floodplains
WoD
Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield
0%
Well
C
Hillslo es on
complex, 15-25% slopes
ridges
WoE
Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield
0%
Well
C
Hillslo es on
complex, 25-45% slopes
ridges
3.3 Land Use - Historic, Current, and Future
Historic aerial imagery indicates that the Project area has been used extensively for agricultural
purposes, and that the location of the streams has not significantly changed in over 50 years (Figure
Gideon Mitigation Plan 7 May 2018

8). Agricultural expansion occurred along the tributaries beginning in the mid -1960's. The northern
part of the easement area has remained forested. Several watershed characteristics, such as
groundwater, vegetation, surface drainage, and potentially soil parameters have been modified. Soil
structure and surface texture have been altered from intensive agricultural operations.
The Project area is currently still in agricultural use, and is being used as pasture for cattle. Livestock
have full access to the project reaches, and these reaches remain heavily impacted. The middle area of
the Project has remained cleared since at least 1950, and the remaining easement areas have remained
forested with cattle access. Outside the Project area is also mostly in agricultural use and where it is
not, remains heavily forested.
The future land use for the Project area will include an established 11.45 -acre conservation easement,
that will be protected in perpetuity. The Project easement will have 4,816 linear feet of high functioning
streams, a minimum 30 -foot riparian buffer, and will be protected with fencing. Outside the Project
will likely remain in agricultural use. Much of the forested area in the immediate vicinity of the Project
has steep terrain, and if it is cleared, will likely be used for pasture rather than cropland due to the
erosive properties of the soils in the area.
3.4 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints
Property, Boundary, and Utilities
There are three planned crossings within the Project. These crossings will occur at easement breaks,
and will allow landowners to continue current land -use and access as needed. One crossing will be a
new culvert and two are existing roads that will be maintained The bridge at the end of Ed Nixon Road
will be replaced. There are three easement breaks; one between JN4-A and JN4-13, that is an existing
road that will be maintained, and is approximately 73 feet wide; the second easement break is between
JN6-A and JN6-13, that is an existing road that will be maintained, and is approximately 28 feet wide;
the third easement break is between JN6-13 and JN6-C, that will be a culvert, and is approximately 31
feet wide.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass
According to the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Information System, the Project includes a
portion of Mill Creek within the FEMA 100 -year flood zone (Zone AE, one percent annual chance of
flooding) (Figure 9). No regulated floodway is mapped. Hydraulic modeling will be required to
determine whether restoration activities will have an effect on 100 -year flood elevations downstream.
The design and permitting of the mitigation will include coordination with the Surry County Floodplain
Administrator and a No -Rise Certification or CLOMR/LOMR will be secured. No hydrologic trespass
will be permitted to adjacent properties upstream or downstream of the project. The Project can be
found on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 4946 (map number 3710494600J), effective date
August 18, 2009.
Environmental Screening and Documentation
To ensure that a project meets environmental screening, scoping letters were sent to the regulatory
agencies of the IRT (Appendix H).
Threatened and Endangered 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. The USFWS
database lists three Federally listed species that may occur in proximity to the Project: Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeolodies), and Northern long -
Gideon Mitigation Plan 8 May 2018

eared bat (Myotic septentrionalis). No protected species or potential habitat for protected species was
observed during preliminary project evaluations. Species and species habitat listed in the USFWS
database were inspected during the field investigation to determine whether they occur at the Project.
No individual species or habitats were identified on site. Potential impacts to species and habitat off
site, downstream, and within the vicinity of the Project were also considered.
Informal USFWS consultation for Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) may be required if the proposed
mitigation project will impact trees. A letter from the USFWS dated January 30, 2018 indicated that no
adverse impacts to fish and wildlife are expected as part of the project. Documentation is included in
Appendix H. Incidental take of the NLEB is exempt, but the USFWS encourages to avoid tree cutting
from May 15 — August 15 if possible.
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with state fish and wildlife agencies when
"waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be
impounded, diverted ... or otherwise controlled or modified. A letter was sent to the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) on January 4, 2018 requesting review and comment of
possible issues with respect to fish and wildlife resources on the LSS. A response was received on
January 12, 2018 and NCWRC indicated that there is potential for the brook floater (federal species of
concern; state endangered) to be present on the Project. A NCWRC biologist performed a field
investigation in April 2018 to determine if the species is present. NCWRC did not find any brook floater
in the Project area. Documentation is included in Appendix H.
Cultural Resources
A review of North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) GIS Web Service (accessed
June 27 and December 29, 2017) database did not reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or
archeological resources on the proposed Project property. There are two documented structures on an
adjacent parcel of land (Kapps Mill and Kapps House). The Mill has been surveyed and is not in a
National Register historical district (Site ID SR0523) and the house is on the survey list (has not been
surveyed) SR0664. There are no anticipated impacts from Project activities to state surveyed properties
as there are none in the proposed project vicinity.
A letter was sent to SHPO on July 7, 2017 with the prospectus. The letter described the Project and
requested a review and comment of potential cultural resources occurring within the vicinity of the
Project. SHPO responded on November 7, 2017 stating that there will be no effect on historic resources.
Another letter was sent on January 4, 2018 and SHPO responded that this was already covered in the
prospectus submittal (Appendix H).
Table 6. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
Yes
No
Appendix H
Waters of the United States - Section 401
Yes
No
Appendix H
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix H
National Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix H
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
/Coastal Area Management Act CAMA
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
No
Appendix H
Magnuson -Stevens Act - Essential
Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
Gideon Mitigation Plan 9 May 2018

3.5 Reach Summary Information
The Project area is comprised of a contiguous easement area along Mill Creek. The easement has three
agricultural crossings; one between JN4-A and JN4-B, the second easement break is between JN6-A
and JN6-B, the third easement break is between JN6-B and JN6-C. The stream channels include Mill
Creek and three unnamed tributaries, split into eight reaches based on proposed treatment type (Figure
5). Results of the preliminary data collection are presented in Table 7.
In general, all or portions of JN4-A, JN4-B, JN5, JN6-B, JN6-C, MC2-A, and MC2-B do not function
to their full potential; whereas JN6-A seems to have functionality and is proposed for preservation only.
Current conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from agriculture,
livestock production, and lack of riparian buffer. Being heavily eroded and incised, some of the streams
do not access their floodplains as frequently as they naturally would have prior to agricultural
operations. In many cases in the lower elevations, the riparian buffer is in poor condition where much
of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs and row crops are present up to the edge of the existing
channel. In some of the higher elevation reaches, trees are present, the but understory riparian buffer
has been heavily impacted by cattle. Habitat along the majority of the restoration reaches is poor in that
there is little woody debris or overhanging vegetation for fish cover or protection for other aquatic
species. Morphological parameters are located in Appendix B.
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics
Reach
Drainage Area
(acres)
AsxF 1
(ftp)
Width
(ft)
Mean
Depth (ft)
W/D
Ratio
Sinuosity
Slope
(ft/ft)
MC2-A
3,177
30.6
17.4
1.8
10.0
1.16
0.008
MC2-13
3,191
67.6
31.0
2.2
14.2
1.12
0.009
JN4-A
37
2.4
6.4
0.4
17.1
1.04
0.044
JN4-B
39
3.3
6.3
0.5
12.2
1.70
0.035
JN5
198
10.1
11.7
0.9
13.6
1.21
0.010
JN6-A
23
1.8
5.8
0.3
19.1
1.25
0.043
JN6-13
38
3.2
5.4
0.6
9.2
1.00
0.039
JN6-C
45
5.6
5.9
0.9
6.3
1.17
0.024
Channel Classification
All stream reaches have been classified as perennial using the NCDWR Stream Identification Form
version 4.11 and are B-, E-, and F -stream types as classified using the Rosgen stream classification
system (Rosgen, 1996). Channel characteristics are summarized in Table 7 and Appendix B. Stream
determinations have been verified by the USACE.
Discharge
Estimating flows (discharge) for the Project is difficult due to the channelization and agricultural
impacts of the existing streams. Several models, regression equations, and the Piedmont regional curves
were used to estimate existing bankfull discharges. Land use and slope were considered when the
discharge calculations were developed. All hydraulic and hydrologic analyses are discussed in Section
6.2. Data and analysis of the hydrologic and hydraulic models are included as Appendix B.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 10 May 2018

Existing Channel Morphology
JN4
Reach JN4-A is 200 linear feet and is located in the southeast corner of the Project area and flows in an
easterly direction towards JN5. The reach is mostly wooded along the right bank with a mixture of
sparse vegetation and pasture along the left bank. Bed and bank stability are low throughout the reach
due to heavy cattle access. The average channel width is approximately seven feet with an average
depth of around 0.5 feet. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 37 acres.
Reach JN4-B is 237 linear feet and is located in the southeast corner of the Project area and flows in
from JN4-A in the easterly direction towards JN5. The reach is mostly wooded along the right bank
with a mixture of sparse vegetation and pasture along the left bank. Bed and bank stability are low
throughout the reach due to heavy cattle access. The average channel width is approximately seven feet
with an average depth of around 0.5 feet. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 39 acres.
JN5
Reach JN5 is 273 linear feet and located along the southernmost portion of the Project and flows in a
northerly direction into reach JN4-B. The reach is mostly wooded along the right bank with a mixture
of sparse vegetation and pasture along the left bank. Bed and bank stability are low throughout the
reach due to heavy cattle access. The average channel width is approximately 11.4 feet with an average
depth of around 0.7 feet. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 198 acres.
JN6
Reach JN6-A is 610 linear feet and located in the northwest portion of the Project area and flows in a
southerly direction toward JN6-B. This reach eventually flows into Mill Creek. The reach flows through
a fenced, wooded buffer and is fairly stable. The average channel width is approximately five feet with
an average depth of around six inches. The drainage area for this section of the reach is approximately
23 acres.
JN6-B is 730 linear feet and located in the northwest portion of the Project area and flows in from JN6-
A in southerly direction towards JN6-C. This reach eventually flows into Mill Creek. The channel
continues through a wooded buffer, but with less bed and bank stability due to regular cattle intrusion.
Channel width through this section is approximately seven feet with an average depth of one foot The
drainage area for this section is approximately 38 acres.
JN6-C is 1,029 linear feet and located in the northwest portion of the Project area and flows into JN6-
B in a southerly direction towards Mill Creek. This reach continues south along the edge of a cattle
pasture with little to no vegetated buffer, and has less bank stability due to regular cattle intrusion.
Channel width through this section is approximately eight feet with an average depth of one foot. The
drainage area for this section is approximately 45 acres.
MC2
Reach MC2-A is a 1,115 -foot portion of Mill Creek located on the eastern portion of the project, directly
adjacent to the DMS Little Sebastian Site. This channel flows in a southwesterly direction across the
site through active cattle pasture. Channel banks are severely degraded due to the lack of riparian buffer
and cattle access. Active widening and downcutting are present throughout the reach. The drainage area
for the reach is approximately 3,177 acres.
Reach MC2-B is a 474 -foot portion of Mill Creek in the southwest corner of the Project that connects
directly to the DMS Little Sebastian Site. Existing land use along this reach is mostly wooded, although
cattle have access throughout. The reach is fairly stable with an average width of approximately 30 feet
and depths ranging from three to six feet. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 3,191 acres.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 11 May 2018

Channel Stability Assessment
A modified version of the channel stability assessment method ("channel assessment") provided in
"Assessing Stream Channel Stability at Bridges in Physiographic Regions" by Johnson (2006) was used
to assess channel stability for the Project's existing channels. 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 channel assessment method was designed to evaluate 13 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 12
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 channel assessment results (scores and ratings) for the Project are provided in Table 8. Two of the
eight project stream reaches received "Fair" ratings, while six reaches received "Good" ratings. Most
Project streams were observed to have relatively high bank angles and many were found to be actively
eroding. A majority of the channels have been impacted by farming practices or livestock production,
and most are slightly entrenched. These characteristics are reflected in the higher channel assessment
scores for average bank angle and bank vegetation/protection. Most reaches also scored poorly for
watershed characteristics since the surrounding land use is dominated by agriculture activities.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 12 May 2018

Table 8. Channel Stability Assessment Results
MC2-A MC2-B JN4-A JN4-B JN5 JN6-A JN6-B JN6-C
1 Watershed 12 4 9 6 5 4 6 7
characteristics
2 Flow habit 6 4 5 5 5 5 7 7
3 Channel pattern 7 1 2 6 3 2 3 7
4 Entrenchment/channel 3 3 7 6 8 4 7 4
confinement
5 Bed material 3 6 5 6 4 4 4 7
6 Bar development 6 6 8 8 4 4 6 5
7 Obstructions/debris 4 5 5 5 4 3 5 4
jams
8 Bank soil texture and 4 4 10 10 4 3 4 5
coherence
9 Average bank angle 6 6 8 8 10 3 5 5
10 Bank 10 8 6 9 7 2 4 8
vegetation/protection
11 Bank cutting 4 4 5 6 7 1 2 4
12 Mass wasting/bank 4 5 4 4 6 2 4 6
failure
13 Upstream distance to 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
bridge
Score 70 56 74 79 67 37 57 69
Rating* Good Good Fair Fair Good Good Good Good
* Excellent (0 < Score <= 36), Good (36 < Score <= 72), Fair (72 < Score <= 108), Poor (108 < Score <= 144)
Bankfull Verification
Bankfull is difficult and often times impossible to accurately identify on actively maintained channels
and agricultural ditches. The usual and preferred indicators rarely exist, and other factors may be taken
into consideration in order to approximate a bankfull stage. Other factors that may be used are wrack
lines, vegetation lines, scour lines, or top of a bankfull bench; however, complete confidence should
not be placed on these indicators. Along the proposed restoration reaches, the channel is generally
entrenched and actively maintained, which means bankfull indicators were very limited or non-existent.
Therefore, bankfull stage was estimated by using Piedmont Regional Curves and other hydrologic
analyses, existing cross sections, and in-house spreadsheets to estimate bankfull area and bankfull
discharge.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 13 May 2018

3.6 Site Photographs
Gideon Mitigation Plan 14 May 2018
TIN
•n x�
-y.
TAY' c )
r m
Al
00 - 1 1 1 I i i
•• . . i
k
Gideon Mitigation Plan 14 May 2018

Gideon Mitigation Plan 15 May 2018

Looking downstream along Reach JN6-B
06/27/2017
Looking downstream along Reach JN6-C
06/27/2017
Looking upstream along Reach JN6-B
06/27/2017
Looking upstream along Reach JN6-C
06/27/2017
Gideon Mitigation Plan 16 May 2018

4 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL
The Stream Functions Pyramid Framework (Harman et. al. 2012) uses stream functions to describe
project objectives, existing condition assessments and monitoring, performance metrics, and design
criteria. The Framework separates stream functions into five categories, ordered into a hierarchy, which
communicate the interrelations among functions and illustrate the dependence of higher level functions
(biology, physiochemical and geomorpholgy) on lower level functions (hydrology and hydraulics).
Functions that affect the greatest number of other functions are illustrated at the base of the Pyramid,
while functions that have the least effect on other functions are illustrated at the top. The Pyramid is
illustrated below Chart 1.
Stream Functions Pyramid
A Guide for Assessing & Restoring Stream Functions m nvEevi Ew
Chart 1. Stream Functions Pyramid
wharrnang3tream-mec4anles corn 'd StreamMeehanies
Fischenich (2006) found that the most critical functions include those that address hydrodynamic
processes, sediment transport processes, stream stability and riparian buffer restoration. By addressing
these fundamental functions and processes, a restored stream and riparian system are capable of
supporting more dependent functions that typically require time to establish, such as diverse biological
communities, chemical and nutrient processes, diverse habitats and improved water and soil quality.
The objectives of the Project will address the most critical functional objectives that will allow for a
more restored stream and riparian buffer over time.
While traditional mitigation approaches have generally relied on surrogate measures of success (i.e.
linear feet of restoration) for determining SMU credit yields, a function -based approach provides a
Gideon Mitigation Plan 17 May 2018

more objective and flexible approach to quantify the expected ecological benefits of a mitigation
design. Additionally, a functional based approach broadens the reach -scale goals of a restoration project
by contextualizing the functional uplift to the watershed scale. The Gideon Mitigation Project will
provide numerous ecological and water quality benefits within the Yadkin River Basin by applying an
ecosystem restoration approach. The restoration approach at the reach scale of this project will have
the greatest effect on the hydraulic and geomorphology function of the system but will benefit the
upper-level functions (physiochemical and biology) over time, and in combination with other projects
within the watershed. Anticipated functional benefits and improvements within the Project area, as
based on the Function -Based Framework are outlined in Table 9.
4,1 Anticipated Functional Benefits and Improvements
Hydrology
According to the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework, hydrology is defined as the transport of water
from the watershed to the channel. Therefore, this project intends to make significant improvements to
the already functioning hydrology, making it high functioning. Much of the improvement will come
from altering land use within these reaches' catchment areas. By converting land -use for a significant
percentage of the catchment area from pasture to riparian forest, curve numbers will decrease and reach
runoff will improve.
Hydraulic
The hydraulic function of the Pyramid is defined as transport of water in the channel, on the floodplain,
and through sediments. Perhaps the greatest potential uplift at the Project will be achieved through
establishing healthy floodplain connectivity. Reaches in the Project do not have functioning floodplain
connectivity or stable flow dynamics. Reaches where floodplain connectivity is not -functioning or
functioning -at -risk will be improved to functioning by reducing bank height ratios and increasing
entrenchment ratios. Reaches in which stable flow dynamics are not functioning or functioning at risk
will be improved to functioning by constructing a new channel that is geometrically stable based on the
Project's hydrology inputs. Additionally, instream structures will be installed to address the energy and
erosive power of the water so that a stable base flow is achieved post -project.
Geomorphology
Geomorphology as defined within the Pyramid Framework, is the transport of wood and sediment to
create bed forms and dynamic equilibrium. Sediment Transport will be improved in reaches that
currently function -at -risk or not functioning by designing channels that transport sediment until it
reaches an appropriate place to settle like a point bar. Large Woody Debris Transport and Storage will
be improved through the use of woody debris such as log vanes, root wads, log weirs, and log toes for
in -stream structures on restoration and enhancement I reaches. The restoration reaches are also designed
to accumulate woody debris by having defined shallow riffles where cobble catches and holds woody
debris and leaf packs. Riparian vegetation is functioning in some areas but is either functioning at risk
or not functioning on most reaches. Therefore, riparian buffers will be planted out to a minimum of 30
feet to improve the riparian vegetation to functioning levels. Bed form diversity will be improved in
restoration areas by using a natural riffle pool sequence from the reference reach to inform design of
functioning riffle pool sequences in constructed channels based on reference reach conditions. This bed
form diversity will also further improve aquatic habitat. All of these functional parameters are
interconnected and ultimately depend on each other in order to function properly. Therefore, by
focusing improvements to these parameters, the restored channels will achieve dynamic equilibrium
and provide maximum geomorphic functional uplift.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 18 May 2018

Physiochemical
The Pyramid Framework defines the physicochemical category as temperature and oxygen regulation
and the processing of organic matter and nutrients. Although this project would support the overarching
goal in the Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Priorities to promote nutrient and sediment reduction in
agricultural areas, it is difficult to measure nutrient and sediment reduction at this project level because
they can be affected by so many variables. However, several restoration actions are known to help
reduce nutrients and sediment even though they may not be measurable at the project level. These
activities include cattle exclusion and direct removal of fecal inputs, filtering of runoff through buffer
areas, the conversion of active farm fields to forested buffers, and improved denitrification and nutrient
uptake through buffer zones. Additional benefits may also come from functional uplift of the lower
level stream functions (hydraulics and geomorphology), which will reduce sediment and nutrients in
the system through bank stabilization and reforesting. Temperature regulation will also be improved
through the restoration of canopy tree species to the stream buffer areas. Oxygen regulation will occur
through two actions: first, the temperature of the water directly impacts the amount of gas held by the
water. Therefore, through planting the buffer to shade the channel the temperature is decreased
dissolved oxygen is increased. Second, the log structures placed in the stream create mixing zones
where oxygen dissolves much faster than the standard exchange rate of oxygen to dissolved oxygen.
The processing of organic matter will be improved once healthy riffles are shallow enough to catch
twigs and branches that then retain leaves. Many of these physiochemical benefits occur slowly over
time and are dependent on multiple variables within the stream ecosystem. Therefore, it is not practical
or feasible to directly measure these parameters within the monitoring time -frame of this project. With
that said, it is logical to use existing riparian buffer and visual performance standards to demonstrate
the positive correlation between geomorphic parameters and physicochemical parameters. For
example, as riparian buffer trees grow, as represented in annual monitoring reports, it is anticipated that
canopy cover is actively shading the stream channel and reducing water temperature. This is not a
substitute for direct physicochemical monitoring, but it is a useful tool to help project the long-term
benefits of the Project in terms of its functional uplift.
Biology
The highest category of the Pyramid is biology and is defined as the biodiversity and life histories of
aquatic and terrestrial life, specifically referring to animals. As mentioned for the physiochemical
stream function, it will be difficult to measure the functional uplift of the biological functions at this
site within the monitoring period of the project. However, since the life histories of many species likely
to benefit from stream and wetland restoration are depending on all the lower -level functions, the
functional uplift from the hydraulic and geomorphic levels would have a positive effect to the biology
over time and in combination with other projects within the watershed is anticipated. Again, there is no
substitute for direct biological monitoring, but it is important to understand the hierarchy of the Stream
Functions Pyramid Framework in order to help project long-term benefits of the Project though only
categories two and three (hydraulics and geomorphology) will be directly measured during the seven-
year monitoring period.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 19 May 2018

5 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Project's maximum functional uplift using the Stream
Functions Pyramid Framework, specific, attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Project.
These goals clearly address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were
identified as major watershed stressors in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River RBRP. The Project
will address outlined RBRP Goals 1, 2, 4, and 6 (listed in Section 2).
The Project goals are:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a stable
channel;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads, and increasing dissolved oxygen levels;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and
connection to the active floodplain;
• Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, and restoring a native plant community.
The Project objectives to address the goals are:
• Design and construct stable stream channels with appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile
based on reference reach conditions;
• Permanently exclude livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
• Add in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
• Install habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of
varying depths to restored and enhanced streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least 30 feet on both sides of the channel along the
project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Implement two agricultural BMPs in order to limit inputs of sediment, nutrients, and fecal
coliform to streams from surrounding farming operations;
• Treat exotic invasive species;
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project.
Anticipated functional benefits and improvements within the Project area, as based on the Function
Based Framework are outlined in Table 9.
Limitations to achieving these watershed goals arise by remaining constrained to the project boundaries.
While we are restoring the habitat and streams to stable and effective conditions that achieve our goals
within the Project parcels, we are unable to influence the effect of poor riparian buffers and livestock
impact in other areas within the watershed. However, through this Project's connectivity with other
projects in the watershed, especially its close proximity to the DMS Little Sebastian Site, and
responsible stewardship of current restoration projects, overall watershed functionality and health will
improve to meet the RBRP goals.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 20 May 2018

Best Management Practices (BMPs)
A suite of agricultural BMPs will be utilized for the Project to reduce direct effluent inputs, pollutant
contamination, and sediment loading. The combination of the following agricultural BMPs: riparian
buffer planting, bank stabilization, stream restoration, livestock exclusion, livestock watering facilities,
and pipeline, will ultimately lead to the functional uplift of the site, while still allowing livestock
production to persist through the installation of alternative water sources.
The riparian buffer will be restored along all project reaches, except the preservation reaches. Restored
riparian buffers are established adjacent to and up -gradient from watercourses of water bodies to
improve water quality. The main advantages of the restored riparian buffer will be to provide water
quality treatment, erosion control, and water temperature benefits. Moreover, there will be significant
reductions in sedimentation, nutrient input, and fecal coliform input.
Approximately 5,300 linear feet of livestock exclusion fencing will be installed along the easement
boundary; therefore, livestock will no longer have stream access. The type of exclusion fence installed
will be based on landowner preference. The main advantages of exclusion fence are that there will be
significant reductions in sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform. To account for eliminating livestock
water access, landowners will be provided an alternate water source. A total of one well and two
watering facilities will be installed to provide high quality drinking water to livestock.
Gideon Mitigation Plan 21 May 2018

Table 9. Functional Benefits and improvements
Not Measured (NM); Not Functioning (NF); Functioning -at -risk (FAR); Functioning (F); Highly Functioning (HF)
° These categories are measured indirectly; *These categories are not quantifiably measured
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
22
Existing
Level
Function
Goal
Functional
Rating/Projected
Objective
Measurement Method
Parameter
Rating
Reach
Channel -Forming
Discharge
Precipitation/Runoff
Relationship
Convert land -use of
Percent Project drainage
Hydro loy
to transport water from
Flow Duration
streams and their
area converted to
Transport of water from
the watershed to the
F/HF
headwaters from
riparian forest
the watershed to the
channel in a non-erosive
Flood Frequency
(All Reaches)
(indirect measurement)
channel
manner
pasture to riparian
forest
Catchment
Hydrology
Reach Runoff
Baseflow Alteration
F/HF
Flood Bank
(JN6-A)
Cross sections
Hydraulic
to transport water in a
Connectivity
FAR/HF
Improve flood bank
connectivity by
Crest gauges
Z
Transport of water in the
channel, on the floodplain,
stable non-erosive
Dynamics
Flow D
(JN4-A, JN6-B
MC2 -B)
reducing bank height
and through the sediments
manner
Groundwater/Surface
ratios and increase
entrenchment ratios
Bank Height Ratio
water exchange
NF/HF
Entrenchment Ratio
(MC2-A, JN6-C,
JN4-B, JN5)
Sediment Transport
Large Woody Debris
(LWD) Transport
Reduce erosion rates
and Storage
F/HF
and channel stability
As -built stream profile
(JN6-A)
to reference reach
Channel Evolution
conditions
Geomorpholo�y
to create a diverse
FAR/HF
Cross sections
3
Transport of wood and
diverse
bedform
Lateral Stability
(JN4-A JN6-B
Improve bedform
Visual
sediment to create
to achieve dynamic
MC2-B)
diversity (pool
monitoring
bedforms and dynamic
equilibrium
Riparian Vegetation
spacing, percent
equilibrium
NF/HF
riffles, etc.)
Stream walks
Bedform Diversity
(MC2-A, JN6-C,
Bed Material
JN4-B, JN5)
Increase buffer width
Vegetation plots
to 30 feet
Characterization
Sinuosity
Unmeasured
Objectives
F/HF
Improve stream
to achieve appropriate
Water Quality
(JN6-A)
temperature
Vegetation plots
Physiochemical °
levels for water
regulation through
(indirect measurement)
Temperature and oxygen
temperature, dissolved
Water Temperature
FAR/HF
introduction of
4
regulation; processing of
oxygen concentration,
(JN4-A, JN6-B
canopy
Established fencing and
organic matter and
and other important
Nutrient Load
MC2-B)
perpetual conservation
nutrients
nutrients including but
Decrease nutrient
easement
not limited to Nitrogen
Organic Carbon
NF/HF
loading through
(indirect measurement)
and Phosphorus
(MC2-A, JN6-C,
filtration of planted
Bacteria
JN4-B, JN5)
riparian buffer, and
removing livestock
from the riparian
areas
Microbial
Communities
Unmeasured
Macrophyte
(1N6 A)
Objective
to achieve functionality
Communities
Biome *
in levels 1-4 to support
Improve aquatic
Biodiversity and life
the life histories of
Benthic
NF/HF
habitat through the
Vegetation plots
histories of aquatic life
aquatic and riparian
Macroinvertebrate
(JN4-A, JN4-B,
installation of habitat
(indirect measurement)
histories and riparian life
plants and animals
Communities
JN5, JN6-B, JN6-
features, construction
C MC2-A
of pools at varying
Fish Communities
MC2-B)
depths, and planting
the riparian buffer
Landscape
Connectivity
Not Measured (NM); Not Functioning (NF); Functioning -at -risk (FAR); Functioning (F); Highly Functioning (HF)
° These categories are measured indirectly; *These categories are not quantifiably measured
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
22

6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
63 Reference Stream
The restoration portions of the Project are characterized by livestock practices. Portions of the Project
were historically diverted to form poorly -functioning stream channels. Physical parameters of the
Project were used, as well as other reference materials, to determine the target stream type. The
"Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina" was also used to narrow the potential
community types that would have existed at the Project (Schafale, 2012). An iterative process was used
to develop the final information for the Project design.
Targeted reference conditions included the following:
• Located within the Physiographic Region and ecoregion,
• Similar watershed size,
• Similar land use on site and in the watershed,
• Similar soil types on site and in the watershed,
• Ideal, undisturbed habitat — several types of woody debris present,
• Similar topography,
• Similar slope,
• Pattern common among Piedmont streams, and
• Minimal presence of invasive species.
Obtaining property owner information and owner authorization for access was another factor in locating
suitable reference sites for the Project. There was no predetermined amount of reference sites needed
as long as the site was suitable and met the parameters. Many streams in this watershed are impacted
by cattle and agricultural practices, having a minimal riparian buffer, making it difficult to find an ideal
reference for the Project site. A reference stream site that proves to be ideal in both geomorphology and
habitat is located just upstream of the preservation Reach JN3-A on the Little Sebastian Mitigation Site.
The reference reach is located approximately 250 feet north of said project site. This site is the reference
for restoration reach MC2-A. The reference site for JN6-C is taken from a first order stream in Yadkin
County, an unnamed tributary flowing into Hauser Creek.
Reference Watershed Characterization
The first reference stream is an unnamed tributary that flows north to south and drains through the Little
Sebastian Mitigation Site to the Project, JN3 to Mill Creek. The portion of this reference reach that was
surveyed and analyzed is approximately 225 feet long. The drainage area for the reach is 1.44 square
miles (921 acres). The second reference reach, UT to Hauser Creek, is also located within the Yadkin
Pee -Dee River Basin. This reach is 185 feet in length, with a drainage area of 0.05 square miles (29
acres). The land use in both watersheds is characterized by mostly agricultural, with mixed pines and
hardwoods, and a small amount of residential.
Reference Discharge
Several hydrologic models/methods were used to develop a bankfull discharge for each reference reach.
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 for
the onsite reach was found to be around 113-122 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) and 5-7 ft3/s for UT to
Hauser Creek. See Section 6.2 for a more detailed description of the hydrologic analyses performed for
this project.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
23

Reference Channel Morphology
In comparison to the restoration reaches, both the onsite reference reach and the UT to Hauser Creek
reach are smaller than the designed restoration reaches when comparing pattern, dimension and profile,
which is the reason for using a scaling factor for the design. The scaling factor is based on the difference
in bankfull area of the reference channel. The designed reach would then have the necessary dimensions
of either a smaller or larger stream corresponding to differences in drainage area. The onsite reference
reach was typically 17.5 feet wide and 1.6 feet deep. The cross sectional area was typically around 27.7
square feet with a width to depth ratio around 11.1. For UT to Hauser Creek, the reach was typically
5.2 feet wide and 0.6 feet deep. The cross sectional area was typically around 3.0 square feet with a
width to depth ratio around 8.9.
Reference Channel Stability Assessment
The reference reaches were stable and showed no evidence of incision or erosion in the portions that
were surveyed and analyzed. Each stream appeared to maintain its slope and had sufficient amounts of
vegetation to secure its banks. Riparian buffer widths exceeded 30 feet on each side. The Channel
Stability Assessment scores and ratings for the reference reach JN3 is provided in Section 3.5. The
reach received a "Good" rating as the channels demonstrate a stable meandering pattern and a well
vegetated riparian buffer.
Reference Bankfull Verification
Typical indicators of bankfull include vegetation at the bankfull elevation, scour lines, wrack lines,
vegetation lines, benches/inner berm, and point bars. Throughout the entire length of the reference
reaches, bankfull is located at the top of bank elevation. The accuracy of this bankfull stage is verified
by the Piedmont Regional Curves and hydrologic analyses using existing cross sections to calculate
area and discharge. Evidence that can further support the location of bankfull is the lack of any bench
or berm features within the channel, and wrack lines present within the floodplain.
Reference Riparian Vegetation
The reference reach riparian community is characteristic of a Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest
community (Schafale, 2012). On March 8, 2018 two 100m2 plots were surveyed along the Smitheys
Creek, to categorize the existing vegetation community. Forested riparian areas along the reference
reach have not been heavily disturbed, and remain relatively intact. Dominant tree species included red
maple (Acer rubrum), white oak (Quercus alba), American holly (Ilex Opaca), sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), tulip -poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and eastern white
pine (Pinus strobus). The average basal area was approximately 52.5m2 per hectare, and the average
stems per -acre was 303 stems/ac. There was a high species diversity in the herbaceous stratum,
including: greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), cranefly
orchid (Tipularia discolor), hill cane (Arundinaria appalachiana), twister sedge (Carex torta),
partridge berry (Mitchella repens), wood anemone (Anemone quinquefolia), down rattlesnake plantain
(goodyera pubescens), shrub-yellowroot (Xanthorhiza simplicissima), and southern dewberry (Rubus
trivialis). Some invasive species we present at the reference reach, most notably Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
It is anticipated that a local seed source for high dispersal species is present upstream at the Project and
will disperse across much of the Project area. 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 6.3).
Hardwood species typical of the target community were observed in adjacent and nearby communities,
and were judged to be more appropriate for this site.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
24

6.2 Design Parameters
Stream Restoration Approach
Stream restoration efforts along the tributaries of the Project will be 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 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 Project will include priority I stream restoration, enhancement 1, enhancement III, and preservation.
Stream restoration will incorporate the design of a single -thread meandering channel, with parameters
based on data taken from reference sites, published empirical relationships, regional curves developed
from existing project streams, and NC Regional Curves. Analytical design techniques will also be a
crucial element of the project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design
as a whole. A conceptual plan view is provided in Figure 10.
Current stream conditions along the proposed restoration reaches exhibit 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, where much of it is devoid
of trees or shrubs, and active pasture is present up to the edge of the existing channel.
The Project design approach began with a thorough study of existing conditions, including the onsite
streams, valleys, and watershed. Design parameters, including active channel, habitat and floodplain
features were developed from analyses performed on the reference site data. Analytical design
techniques were used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole.
Engineering analysis will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach based design. A combination of methods will be used to estimate bankfull flows, and
flows corresponding to other significant storm events. A HEC -RAS model will then be used to simulate
water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The development of the HEC
model 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) will be determined. The subsequent design will be based on this calculated
discharge. As part of the design process, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply will be performed by
characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of windshield surveys, existing land use data, and
historical aerial photography, followed up by ground truthing, will be analyzed to assess existing and
past watershed conditions and to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact
sediment supply. Design parameters developed through the analyses of reference reach data, watershed
characterizations, and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling will be confirmed using the Stable Channel
Design function and/or the Sediment Transport Analysis components within HEC -RAS in conjunction
with shear stress and velocity analyses.
Geomorphic and habitat studies will be performed concurrently with the engineering analyses. While
stream design will be verified by simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of desirable
habitat features will be derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both in -
stream and riparian habitat features will be designed. In -stream structures will be used throughout the
project to act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and redirecting the stream's
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
25

energy. Bank stability may further be enhanced through the installation of brush mattresses, live stakes
and cuttings bundles.
Sections of abandoned stream channel will be backfilled with material excavated from on site to the
elevation of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the new channel, 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 30 -foot conservation easement which will
be fenced to exclude livestock as needed.
The Project has been broken into the following design reaches:
Reach JN4-A - This reach begins on the southwest end of the project, flows west to JN4-B, and totals
213 linear feet of Enhancement I11. Woodland is located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement activities
will include improving habitat through livestock exclusion fencing. The livestock exclusion fencing
will provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area and will remove livestock access to the
riparian areas.
Reach JN4-B - This reach begins on the southwest end of the project from JN4-A, flows west to JN5,
and totals 274 linear feet of Enhancement I. Actively managed pasture is located adjacent to the reach.
Enhancement activities will include removing pipe in old channel, fixing current culvert, grading banks,
installing grade control structures, planting the buffer, and cattle exclusion. The livestock exclusion
fencing will provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area and will remove livestock access to
the riparian areas.
Reach JN5 — This reach begins on the South end of the project, and flows northwest to MC2-B. This
reach totals 248 linear feet of Enhancement I. Actively managed pasture is located adjacent to the reach.
Enhancement activities will include improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings and
livestock exclusion fencing. Minimal bank grading and buffer re-establishment is also proposed along
the downstream end, and a grade control structure will be installed at the tie-in with MC2-A. The
restoration of the riparian areas at the downstream end will filter runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce
sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach JN6-A - This reach begins on the north end of the project, and flows south to JN6-B. The reach
totals 510 linear feet of Preservation. Dense woodland is located adjacent to the reach. Preservation
activities will include improving habitat through the construction of livestock exclusion fencing.
Reach JN6-B - This reach begins on the north end of the project, from JN6-A and flows west to JN6-
C. This reach totals 773 linear feet of Enhancement III. Dense woodland is located adjacent to the reach.
Enhancement activities will include improving habitat through livestock exclusion fencing, and
removing the livestock crossing. The livestock exclusion fencing will provide wildlife corridors
throughout the Project area and will remove livestock access to the riparian areas.
Reach JN6-C - This reach begins on the north end of the project, from JN6-B, and flows west to MC2-
B. The totals 1,172 linear feet of Restoration. Sparse woodland and actively managed pasture is located
adjacent to the reach. Restoration activities will include constructing a new channel within the natural
valley with appropriate dimensions and pattern and backfilling the abandoned channel. In -stream
structures such as log sills, brush toes, and log vanes will be installed for stability and to improve
habitat. Habitat will further be improved through buffer plantings and livestock exclusion. Proposed
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
26

buffer activities will improve riparian areas that will filter runoff from adjacent pastures, thereby
reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the channel. The two buildings are to be removed and the
culvert will be reset to improve hydrologic connection to JN6-B.
Reach MC2-A - This reach begins on the west end of MCI -C on the DMS Little Sebastian Site, and
flows west to MC2-B. This reach totals 1,030 linear feet of restoration. Actively managed pasture is
present on both sides of the reach. Restoration activities will include constructing a new channel within
the natural valley with appropriate dimensions pattern and backfilling the abandoned channel. Native
bed material will be harvested when possible. In -stream structures such as log sills, brush toes, and log
vanes will be installed for stability and to improve habitat. Habitat will further be improved through
buffer plantings and livestock exclusion. A crossing with a culvert will be installed along this reach,
(Figure 10). Proposed buffer activities will improve riparian areas that will filter runoff from adjacent
pastures, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the channel.
Reach MC -2B -This reach begins on the west end of the project, from MC2-C, and flows south to
MC3-A on the Little Sebastian Mitigation Site. This reach totals 595 linear feet of Enhancement III.
Woodland is located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement activities will include improving habitat
through livestock exclusion fencing, and planting the buffer on the left bank. The livestock exclusion
fencing will provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area and will remove livestock access to
the riparian areas.
Design Discharge
Design Discharge
Based upon the hydrologic analyses described below, design discharges were selected that fall between
model results for the 1.1 -year and 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis for each reach. The selected flows
for the restoration reaches are 250 ft3/s for MC2-A and 13 ft3/s for JN6-C. These discharges will provide
frequent inundation of the adjacent floodplain.
The design discharges were selected based on the following rationale:
• The calculated bankfull discharge for the analog/reference reach and existing reaches fall
between the results of the 1.1 -year and 1.5 -year flood frequency analysis,
• The results of the 1.1 -year flood frequency analysis are slightly higher than the NC regional
curve (Doll et al., 2002), and
• Selecting design discharges slightly higher than the 1.1 -year storm events allows frequent
inundation of the adjacent floodplain.
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 the
Proj ect.
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
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
27

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.
1. The appropriate bankfull cross sectional area (CSA) 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 CSA
necessary to convey the design discharge.
3. The scaling factor is determined from the ratio of the design topwidth to the analog topwidth
(Table 10). For this project, several cross sections and planform geometry were measured at
the analog site, resulting in an average width of 14.5 feet for JN6-C and 5.2 feet for MC2-A.
4. Pool cross sectional areas were calculated using both typical reference reach techniques and
the analog approach. Design CSAs were determined using the measured analog ratios of
shallow/riffle CSA to pool CSA as applied to the design CSAs. The pool cross sectional shape
was adjusted within the in-house spreadsheet as described above in step 2.
Table 10. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters
Drainage Proposed Bankfull Design Analog Reach Scaling
Reach Area (ac) CSA (ft) Topwidth (ft) Topwidth (ft) Factor
JN6-C 45 4.7 6.2 5.2 1.19
MC2-A 3178 54.4 23 14.5 1.59
Typical Design Sections
Typical cross sections for riffles and pools are shown on the design plan sheets in Appendix A. The
cross section dimensions were developed for the two design reaches by using an in-house spreadsheet
described in Section 6.2 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.
Meander Pattern
The design plans showing the proposed channel alignment are provided in Appendix A. The meander
pattern was derived directly from the analog reach and was altered in some locations to provide
variability in pattern, to avoid on site constraints, to follow the valley pattern, and to make the channel
more constructible. The morphologic parameters summarized in the Appendix B were applied
wherever these deviations occurred.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
28

Longitudinal Profiles
The design profiles are presented in Appendix A. 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.
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, rock structures will be utilized intermittently along Reaches JN6-C and
MC2-A to provide increased stability and habitat. Typical rock structures that will protect the channel
bed and/or banks will include riffle grade controls and cross -vanes.
Woody debris will be placed throughout the channel at locations and at a frequency that is similar to
those observed in the analog reaches. Woody habitat features installed will include dead brush, root
wads, brush toes, and log vanes. To provide additional bank stability, sod mats harvested on site 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 vegetation taken from the banks when
they were cut during construction, and are about nine inches thick. 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. Other bank stability measures include the installation of
live stakes, log sills, brush toes, log vanes, and log toes. Typical details for proposed in -stream
structures and revetments are in Appendix A.
Data Analysis
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 11) 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 Rural Piedmont, and
• USGS regional regression equations for rural conditions in the Blue Ridge -Piedmont.
Regional Flood Frequency 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 mit) 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 and USGS regional regression 2 -year
discharge equations.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
29

Regional Curve Regression Equations
The North Carolina Piedmont regional curves by Harman et al. (1999) and Doll et al. (2002) and the
Virginia Rural Piedmont regional curves by Lotspeich (2009) for discharge were used to predict the
bankfull discharge for the Project. 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 equation. The regional curve equations for NC discharges by Doll et al.
(2002):
(1)
Qbkjr=89.04*(DA)1.73
(Harman et al., 1999)
(2)
Qbkjr=91.62*(DA)1.71
(Doll et al., 2002)
(3)
Qbkl 43.895*(DA)0.9472
(Lotspeich, 2009)
Where Qbkf=bankfull discharge (ft3/s) and DA=drainage area (mit)
USGS Regional Regression Equations
USGS regression equations estimate the magnitude and frequency of flood -peak discharges. 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) (4) is:
(4) Q2=158*(DA)0.649
Table 11. Peak Flow Comparison
Drainage FFQ FFQ NC Regional NC Regional VA Regional Regional Design/
Reach Area(Ac) Regression Calculated
( ) Qi.� Q�s Curve Q (1) Curve Q (2) Curve Q (3) Eqns. Q2 (4) Q
JN6-C 45 19 29 13 14 4 28 13
MC2-A 3,177 203 337 287 286 200 447 250
Sediment Transport Analysis
An erosion and sedimentation analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design creates a
stable gravel bed channel 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 (USAGE) report, Stability Thresholds for
Stream Restoration Materials (Fochenich, 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:
Permissible Shear Stress Approach, and
Permissible Velocity Approach.
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:
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
30

(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 12. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses
Allowable Shear Stress'
Reach Proposed Shear Stress at Critical Shear Stress
Bankfull Stage (lbs/W) (lbs/ft') Coarse Gravel Cobble Vegetation
0 (lbs/ftl) (lbs/ft2) (lbs/ft')
JN6-C 0.52 >0.54 0.33 to 0.67 0.67 to 2.0 0.7 to 0.1.7
MC2-A 1.08-1.17 >0.54 0.33 to 0.67 0.67 to 2.0 0.7 to 0.1.7
I(Fischenich, 2001)
Review of the above table shows that the proposed shear stresses for the Gideon design reaches fall
between the critical shear stress (shear stress required to initiate motion) and the allowable limits.
Therefore, the proposed channel should remain stable.
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 13 compares the proposed velocities calculated using
Manning's equation with the permissible velocities.
Table 13. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities
Permissible
Reach Manning's "n" Value Design Velocity (ft/s) Bed Material Velocity'
(ft/sec)
JN6-C 0.05 2.6-2.8 Coarse gravel to 2.5-7.5
cobble
MC2-A 0.05 4.4-4.7 Coarse gravel to 2.5-7.5
cobble
'(Fischenich,2001)
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 to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact sediment
supply. As discussed in Section 3.3, the land use throughout the site has changed little since 1950.
Much of the project area has been used primarily for agricultural purposes over the past 60 years. Much
of the forested areas are located either within the headwater portions of the watersheds or along existing
stream channels to the north and to the east. Land use has remained relatively constant within this rural
watershed, and significant land disturbing activities are not anticipated for the future.
Observations and assessments of these reaches upstream and/or in the preservation reaches show little
signs of aggradation (deposition) or degradation, and that the streams appear physically stable. This
indicates 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
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
31

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.
6.3 Vegetation and Planting Plan
Plant Community Restoration
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the restoration project. The selection
of plant species is based on what was observed at the reference reach, species present in 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. The reference stream is
located within an intact Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest community. Dominant tree species
included red maple (Acer rubrum), white oak (Quercus alba), American holly (Ilex opaca), sourwood
(Oxydendrum arboreum), tulip -poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), and
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus). The reference site was chosen due to the stability of the channel,
the physical structure of the forest community, and to evaluate stream habitat.
A Piedmont Stream Headwater Forest will be the target community type for the tributaries flowing
south into Mill Creek (JN6-AB/C); and a Piedmont Alluvial Forest will be the target community along
Mill Creek and tributaries flowing north into Mill Creek (MC2-AB, JN4-A/B, and JN5), will be
established to include a diverse mix of species. These target communities will be used for the planting
areas within the project, shown in Appendix A. The plant species list has been developed and can be
found in Table 14. Although there is one planting zone, certain targeted species will be planted in the
appropriate target community location (Table 14). Species with high dispersal rates are not included
because of local occurrence, adjacent seed sources, and the high potential for natural regeneration. The
high dispersal species include red maple, tulip poplar, and sweetgum.
The restoration of plant communities along the Project will provide stabilization and diversity. For
rapid stabilization of the stream banks (primarily outside meanders), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum)
and black willow (Salix nigra) were chosen for live stakes along the restored channel because of their
rapid growth patterns and high success rates. Willows grow at a faster rate than the species planted
around them, and they stabilize the stream banks. Willows will also be quicker to contribute organic
matter to the channel. When the other species are bigger, the black 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 three-foot section along the top of bank. The live stakes will be spaced one
per linear foot with alternate spacing vertically.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
32

Table 14. Proposed Plant List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species
Common Name
Target
Salix nigra
Black willow
% of Total
Species
Common
CommunitySpacing
Unit Type
Species
Name
(ft)
Composition
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
15
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
15
Betula nigra
River birch
PAF
9X6
Bare Root
15
Platanus
American
PAF
9X6
Bare Root
10
occidentalis
Sycamore
NorthernRed
Quercus rubra
PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
10
O
Fraxinus
Green Ash
PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
10
pennsylvanica
Driodendron
yellow Poplar
PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
10
tulipifera
Diospyros
Persimmon
PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
5
virginiana
Sambucus
Elderberry
PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
5
canadensis
Nyssa biflora
Black Gum
I PAF/PHSF
9X6
Bare Root
5
PAF, Piedmont Alluvial Forest; PHSF, Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Species
Common Name
% of Total Species Composition
Salix nigra
Black willow
60
Cornus ammomum
Silky dogwood
40
On Site Invasive Species Management
Treatment for invasive species will be required within all grading limits associated with stream
restoration. 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 as to maximize
its effectiveness and reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods
will include mechanical (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw) and chemical (foliar spray, cut
stump, and hack and squirt techniques). Plants containing mature, viable seeds will be removed from
the Project and properly disposed. 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
employed, type of herbicide used, application technique, and herbicide concentration and quantities
used. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Soil Restoration
After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified and any compaction will be deep tilled before
the topsoil is placed back over the Project. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be
stockpiled and placed over the Project during final soil preparation. This process should provide
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
33

favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will provide natural
stabilization for the Project.
6.4 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 cobble/gravel-bed 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, restoring a portion of the hydrology for the existing wetlands.
A large portion of the existing stream will be filled using material excavated from the restoration
channel. However, many segments will be left partially filled to provide habitat diversity and flood
storage. Native woody material will be installed throughout the restored reach to reduce bank stress,
provide grade control, and increase habitat diversity.
Forested riparian buffers of at least thirty feet on both sides of the channel will be established along the
project reach. An appropriate riparian plant community (Piedmont Stream Headwater Forest along JN6-
AB/C; Piedmont Alluvial Forest along MC2-A/B, JN4-A/B, and JN5) will be established to include a
diverse mix of species. within the Project. The plant species list has been developed and can be found
in Table 14. Although there is one planting zone, certain targeted species will be planted in the
appropriate target community location. Replanting of native species will occur where the existing buffer
is impacted during construction.
Due to the nature of the project, complete avoidance of stream and wetland impacts is not possible.
Proposed stream impacts, including stream relocation and culverts, will be replaced on site. Wetland
impacts associated with restoration and enhancement efforts will only temporarily impact wetlands and
will provide an overall increase in wetland function with the addition of native trees and shrubs along
the stream banks, and restored hydrology. All stream mpacts will be accounted for in the Pre -
Construction Notification (PCN) form.
6.5 Determination of Credits
Mitigation credits presented in Table 15 are projections based upon site design (Figure 10). Upon
completion of site construction, the project components and credits data will only be revised to be
consistent with the as -built condition if there is a large discrepancy and with an approved mitigation
plan addendum. This will be approved by the USACE.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
34

Table 15. Mitigation Credits
*SMUs are adjusted in accordance with Section XI(C)- "Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator", supplied to
Providers in the January 2018, from the USACE. A detailed description of the methodology and calculations is described
below and in Figure(s) 11.
6.6 Credit Calculations for Non -Standard Buffer Widths
Buffer measurements for additional credit were made horizontally, beginning from the edge of the
wetted perimeter and extending to easement boundary. Due to the minimum required widths, additional
credit was not generated until a stream is at least 30 feet inside the edge of the buffer. Table 16 describes
the adjustments in stream credit based on buffer widths. Areas within the project that are being used to
generate additional credit are solely being used for the generation of stream mitigation credits, and will
not be used for the generation of any other credit type (i.e., the same square foot of buffer cannot be
used to generate wetland credit, nutrient offset credits or state buffer credits).
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
35
The Gideon Site Mitigation Credits
Mitigation Credits
Cool Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Riparian
Wetland
Totals
3,115
NA
NA
Reach
Mitigation Type
Proposed
Stationing
Existing
Length
(LF)
Proposed
Length
(LF)
Mitigation
Ratio
SMUs
JN4-A
Enhancement III
0+0 to 2+13
200
213
1: 5.0
43
JN4-B
Enhancement I
2+86 to 5+60
237
274
1:1.5
183
JN5
Enhancement I
0+0 to 2+48
273
248
1:1.5
165
JN6-A
Preservation
0+0 to 5+10
510
510
1:10.0
51
JN6-B
Enhancement III
5+38 to 13+11
730
773
1: 5.0
155
JN6-C
Restoration
Restoration
13+42 to 20+78
20+78 to 25+17
1,029
736
439
1:1.0
1:1.0
736
439
MC2-A Restoration
21+20 to 31+50
1,155
1,030
1:1.0
1,030
MC2-B
Enhancement III
Enhancement III
31+50 to 35+23
38+20 to 40+42
474
373
222
1: 5.0
1: 5.0
75
44
Totals
4,608
4,818
2,921
Non -Standard Buffer Width Adjustment*
194
Total Adjusted SMUs
3,115
*SMUs are adjusted in accordance with Section XI(C)- "Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator", supplied to
Providers in the January 2018, from the USACE. A detailed description of the methodology and calculations is described
below and in Figure(s) 11.
6.6 Credit Calculations for Non -Standard Buffer Widths
Buffer measurements for additional credit were made horizontally, beginning from the edge of the
wetted perimeter and extending to easement boundary. Due to the minimum required widths, additional
credit was not generated until a stream is at least 30 feet inside the edge of the buffer. Table 16 describes
the adjustments in stream credit based on buffer widths. Areas within the project that are being used to
generate additional credit are solely being used for the generation of stream mitigation credits, and will
not be used for the generation of any other credit type (i.e., the same square foot of buffer cannot be
used to generate wetland credit, nutrient offset credits or state buffer credits).
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
35

Table 16. Stream Mitigation Credit Adjustments for Non-standard Buffer Widths
Mountain Counties
Piedmont and Coastal Plain Counties
Buffer Width
Adjustment to
Stream Credit
Buffer Width
Adjustment to
Stream Credit
Less than 15 feet
-100%
Less than 15 feet
-100%
15 to < 20 feet
-50%
15 to < 20 feet
-50%
20 to < 25 feet
-30%
20 to < 25 feet
-40%
25 to < 30 feet
-15%
25 to < 30 feet
-30%
30 to < 50 feet
0%
30 to <35 feet
-20%
50 to < 75 feet
9%
35 to < 40 feet
-15%
75 to < 100 feet
16%
40 to < 45 feet
-10%
100 to < 125 feet
22%
45 to < 50 feet
-5%
125 to < 150 feet
27%
50 to < 75 feet
0%
125 feet or Greater
30%
75 to < 100 feet
7%
100 to < 125 feet
12%
125 to < 150 feet
16%
150 feet or greater
20%
In order to calculate credit adjustments, the Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator from
the USACE in January 2018 was utilized. To perform this calculation GIS analysis was performed to
determine the area (in square feet) of ideal buffer zones and actual buffer zones around all streams
within the project. Minimum standard buffer widths are measured from the top of bank (50 feet in
Piedmont and Coastal Plain counties or 30 feet in mountain counties) and are not included in the ideal
and actual buffer calculations. The ideal buffers are the maximum potential size (in square feet) of each
buffer zone measured around all creditable stream reaches, calculated using GIS, including areas
outside of the easement. The actual buffer is the square feet in each buffer zone, as measured by GIS,
excluding non -forested areas, all other credit type (e.g., wetland, nutrient offset, buffer), easement
exceptions, open water, areas failing to meet the vegetation performance standard, etc. Additional credit
is given to 150 feet in buffer width, so areas within the easement that are more than 150 feet from
creditable streams should were not included in this measurement. Non -creditable stream reaches within
the easement are removed prior to calculating this area with GIS (for both ideal and actual). The stream
lengths, mitigation type, ideal buffer, and actual buffer are all entered into the calculator. This is data
is processed, and the resulting credit amounts are totaled for the whole project (Table 15, Figure Ila
and llb).
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
36

7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The success criteria for the Project will follow accepted and approved success criteria presented in the
2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update and
subsequent agency guidance. Specific success criteria components are presented below.
7.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
Bankfull Events
Four bankf ill flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
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. Bank height ratio
shall not exceed 1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 1.4 within restored reaches.
Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented in
the seven-year monitoring period.
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.
Surface Flow
Stream restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow. This
will be accomplished through direct observation and the use of stream gauge transducers with data
loggers. Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow.
7.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Project
will follow IRT Guidance. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Project will be the
survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, five-year old trees at
six feet in height at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees per
acre with an average height of eight feet at the end of Year 7. Volunteer trees will be counted,
identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports, but will not be counted towards
the success criteria of total planted stems. Moreover, any single species can only account for up to 50
percent of the required number of stems within any vegetation plot. Any stems in excess of 50 percent
will be shown in the monitoring table, but will not be used to demonstrate success.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
37

8 MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the NCIRT monitoring template. The monitoring report
shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding project close-out. Monitoring reports will
be prepared annually and submitted to the USACE. Monitoring of the Project will adhere to metrics
and performance standards established by the USACE's April 2003 Wilmington District Stream
Mitigation Guidelines and the NC IRT's October 2016 Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update. Table 17 outlines the links between project goals, objectives, and
treatments and their associated monitoring metrics and performance standards within the context of
functional uplift based on the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework.
8.1 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. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual
monitoring reports unless requested by USACE. Stream channel stationing will be marked with stakes
placed near the top of bank every 200 feet.
8.2 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 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.
8.3 Hydrology Events
Crest gauges will be installed to document the occurrence of bankfull events. A minimum of one gauge
will be installed on each tributary that is greater than 1,000 feet in length, with one gauge required for
every 5,000 feet of length on each tributary and a maximum of five gauges per tributary. Reaches with
Priority 1 Restoration (designed to reconnect the stream to its floodplain), gauges will be capable of
tracking the frequency and duration of overbank events. Where restoration or enhancement activities
are proposed for intermittent streams, monitoring gauges should be installed to track the frequency and
duration of stream flow events.
8.4 Cross Sections
Permanent cross sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in
pools and half in riffle on all Restoration and Enhancement I reaches. All cross section measurements
will include bank height ratio and entrenchment ratio. Cross sections will be monitored in Years 1, 2,
3, 5, and 7. 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 -
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
38

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).
8.5 Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover a minimum of two
percent of the planted area. There will be five plots within the planted area (5.21 acres). Plots will be a
mixture of fixed and random plots, with four fixed plots and one random plot. Planted area indicates
all area in the easement that will be planted with trees. Existing wooded areas are not included in the
planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the fixed plots: species, height, planting
date (or volunteer), and grid location. For random plots, species and height will be recorded for all
woody stems. The location (GPS coordinates and orientation) of the random plots will be identified in
the annual monitoring reports. Vegetation will be planted and plots established at least 180 days prior
to the initiation of the first year of monitoring. Monitoring will occur in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 between
July 1st and leaf drop. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored so that none become dominant
or alter the desired community structure of the Project. If necessary, RES will develop a species-specific
treatment plan.
8.6 Scheduling/Reporting
A mitigation plan and as -built drawings documenting stream restoration activities will be developed
within 60 days of the planting completion on the Project. The report will include all information
required by IRT mitigation plan guidelines, 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 include species, height, date of planting, and grid location of each stem. The baseline
report will follow USACE guidelines.
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 seven 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 the IRT.
The monitoring reports will include all information, and be in the format required by USACE.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
39

Table 17. Monitoring Requirements
Level
Goal
Treatment
Outcome
Monitoring Metric
Performance Standard
To transport
Convert land -use of
Improve the
water from the
Project reaches from
transport of water
1 c
watershed to
pasture to riparian
from the watershed
NA
NA
a
the channel in a
forest
to the Project
x
non-erosive
reaches in a non -
manner
erosive way
Reduce bank height
�
Improve flood
p
Crest gauges and/or
Four bankfull events occurring in
.q'o�
To transport
ratios and increase
bank connectivity
pressure transducers:
separate ears
to
At least 30 days continuous flow
entrenchment ratios
by reducing bank
Inspected semiannually
each
yearby
2
water in a
stable non-
reconstructing
height ratios and
Entrenchment ratio shall be no less than
?.
erosive manner
channels to mimic
increase
Cross sections: Surveyed
1.4 within restored reaches
reference reach
entrenchment
in
conditions
ratios
years 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7
Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2
As -built stream profile
NA
Reduce erosion
Cross sections: Surveyed
Entrenchment ratio shall be no
Establish a riparian
rates and channel
buffer to reduce
stability to
in
less than 1.4 within restored
To create a
erosion and sediment
reference reach
years 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7
reaches
diverse
bedform
transport into project
conditions
Visual monitoring
Bank height ratio shall not exceed
41
3 c
streams. Establish
Improve bedform
1.2
E
To achieve
stable banks with
diversity (pool
Visual monitoring:
Identify and document significant
dynamic
livestakes, erosion
spacing, percent
Performed at least
stream problem areas; i.e.
equilibrium
control matting, and
riffles, etc.
semiannually
erosion, degradation,
other in stream
aggradation, etc.
structures.
Increase buffer
Vegetation plots:
MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
width to 30 feet
Surveyed in
MY 5: 260 trees/acre (6 ft. tall)
ears 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7
MY 7: 210 trees/acre 8 ft. tall
_
To achieve
Improve stream
Vegetation plots:
MY 1-3: 320 trees/acre
appropriate
levels for water
temperature erature
p
years 1 2, 3 Surveyed in 5 and 7
,
MY 5: 260 trees/acre (6 ft. tall)
temperature,
regulation through
(indirect measurement)
MY 7: 210 trees/acre (8 ft. tall)
-
dissolved
introduction of
oxygen
Exclude livestock
canopy
from riparian areas
4 �
nt
concentration
with exclusion fence,
Decrease nutrient
Visual assessment of
Z
and other
and plant a riparian
loading through
established fencing and
Inspect fencing and signage.
important
buffer
filtration of planted
conservation signage:
Identify and document any
�y
nutrients
riparian buffer, and
Performed at least
damaged or missing fencing
including but
removing livestock
semiannually
and/or signs
not limited to
from the riparian
(indirect measurement)
Nitrogen and
areas
Phosphorus
_
To achieve
Improve aquatic
functionality in
habitat through the
*
levels 1-4 to
Plant a riparian
p
installation of
Visual monitoring of in-
Identify and document significant
support the life
buffer, install habitat
habitat features
stream habitat features:
stream problem areas; i.e.
5 o
o
histories of
features, and
construction of
Performed at least
degradation, aggradation,
aquatic and
construct pools of
pools at varying
semiannually
stressed or failed structures, etc.
riparian plants
varying depths
depths, and
(indirect measurement)
and animals
planting the
riparian buffer
° These categories are measured indirectly; *These categories are not quantifiably measured
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
40

9 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of Project construction, RES 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 that the
Project's ability to achieve performance standards are jeopardized, RES will notify the USACE of the
need to develop a Plan of Corrective Action. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized
RES 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. Prepare Corrective Action Plan for review and approval by IRT.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
Provide the IRT a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent and
nature of the work performed.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
41

10 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval of the Project by the IRT, the Project will be transferred to Unique Places to Save
(UP2S):
Unique Places to Save
[phone]
PO Box 1183
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
[e-mail]
UP2S will 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. Easements will be stewarded in
general accordance with the guidelines published by the National Land Trust Alliance. Specific
responsibilities include:
• Monitoring of site is conducted on an annual basis.
• An on-site inspection is conducted once per year.
• Visits to the site are coordinated with landowner when possible.
• Annual monitoring reports are sent to the landowner when possible.
• Signage for the easement boundary is maintained.
• Violations and potential violations of the conservation easement deed are promptly
communicated to the landowner.
A model conservation easement and engagement letter from UP2S are included in Appendix C. The
engagement letter includes itemized annual cost accounting of long-term management, total amount of
funding, and the manner in which the funding will be provided.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
42

11 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved mitigation
plan of the 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 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 in Table 18.
11.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT
with written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE;
b) Approval of the final mitigation plan;
c) Mitigation site must be secured;
d) Delivery of financial assurances;
e) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE;
f) Issuance of the 404 -permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
11.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan and
IRT approval of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. 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. As projects approach milestones associated with credit
release, the Sponsor 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.
Table 18. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Release
Credit Release Activity
Interim
Total Released
Milestone
Release
1
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
15%
15%
stated above
2
Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey
15%
30%
3
First year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
40%
performance standards are being met.
4
Second year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
50%
performance standards are being met.
5
Third year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
60%
performance standards are being met.
6
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates
5%
65%
performance standards are being met.
(75%**)
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates
o
10%
75%
performance standards are beingmet.
85%**
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
43

Release
Milestone
Credit Release Activity
Interim
Release
Total Released
8
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates
5%
80%
performance standards are being met.
(90%**)
9
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates
90%
performance standards are being met, and project
10%
(100%**)
has received close-out approval.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
44

12 MAINTENANCE PLAN
The Project will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will be conducted 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 19. Maintenance Plan
Component/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.
Stream maintenance activities will be documented and reported in annual
monitoring reports. Stream maintenance will continue through the
monitoring eriod.
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 treated 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. Vegetation maintenance activities will be documented and
reported in annual monitoring reports. Vegetation maintenance will continue
through the monitoring period.
Site Boundary
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction
between the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries will be
marked with signs identifying the property as a mitigation site, and will
include the name of the long-term steward and a contact number. 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. Easement monitoring and staking/signage maintenance
will continue in perpetuity as a stewardship activity.
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. Crossings in easement breaks are the responsibility
of the landowner to maintain.
Livestock Fencing
Livestock fencing is to be placed outside the easement limits. Maintenance
of fencing is the responsibility of the landowner.
Beaver
Routine site visits and monitoring will be used to determine if beaver
management is needed. If beaver activity poses a threat to project stability or
vegetative success, RES will trap beavers and remove impoundments as
needed. All beaver management activities will be documented and included
in annual monitoring reports. Beaver monitoring and management will
continue through the monitoring period.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
45

13 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
CONFIDENTIAL
The Sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of a $343,000 Construction Performance
Bond to the USACE to assure completion of mitigation construction and planting. Construction and
planting costs are estimated to be at or below $343,000 based on the Engineer's construction materials
estimate and recent bid tabulation unit costs for construction materials. Following completion of
construction and planting the Construction Performance Bond will be retired and a $86,000 Monitoring
Performance Bond will be provided to assure completion of seven years of monitoring and reporting,
and any remedial work required during the monitoring period. The $86,000 amount includes
contingency and estimated monitoring costs from the Engineer. The Monitoring Performance Bond
will be reduced by $12,300 following approval of each annual monitoring report. The Monitoring
Performance Bond will be retired in total following official notice of site close-out from the IRT.
Financial assurances shall be payable to a standby trust or other designee at the direction of the obligee.
Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the USACE
receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation. The Performance
Bonds will be provided by a surety listed with the U.S. Treasury and has an A.M. Best Rating of B or
above. All Performance Bonds will be submitted to the USACE in draft form for approval prior to
execution. In the event of Sponsor default, UP2S has agreed to receive the funds and ensure the work
is successfully completed.
Table 20. Financial Assurances
Construction Costs
General (e.g. mobilization, erosion control, etc.
$35,000
Sitework
$67,000
Structures (e.. ditch plugs, logs, rocks, coir, etc.)
94,000
Crossings
$26,000
Vegetation
$30,000
Miscellaneous/Admin Fees
$91,000
Total
$343,000
onitorin Costs
Annual Monitoring and Reports
$45,000
Maintenance and Contingency
$41,000
Total
$86,000
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
46

14 REFERENCES
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.
Dalrymple, T. 1960. Flood Frequency Analyses. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1543-
A.
Doll, B.A., D.E. Wise -Frederick, C.M. Buckner, S.D. Wilkerson, W.A. Harman, R.E. Smith and J.
Spooner. 2002. Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Urban Streams throughout the
Piedmont of North Carolina. Journal of the American water Resource Association. 38(3):641-
651.
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.
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.
Fischenich, J.C., 2006. Functional Objectives for Stream Restoration, EMRRP Technical Notes
Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-52), US Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi. (available online at
htip:Hel.erdc.usace.qmy.mil/elpubs/Tdf�/sr52.pdf)
Harman, W.H. et al. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams.
AWRA Wildland Hydrology Symposium Proceedings. Edited By: D.S. Olsen and J.P.
Potyondy. AWRA Summer Symposium. Bozeman, MT.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-
K-12-006.
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.
Lotspeich, R.R., 2009, Regional curves of bankfull channel geometry for non -urban streams in the
Piedmont Physiographic Province, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations
Report 2009-5206, 51 p.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
47

NCDENR 2012a. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water
Quality htip://portal.ncdenr.ora/web/wq/home. (February 2012).
NCDENR 2012b. "2012 North Carolina 303(d) Lists -Category 5." Water Quality Section.
htlp://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/home. (August 2012).
NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2011. A Guide to Surface Freshwater
Classifications in North Carolina. Raleigh. http://portal.ncdenr.or-/c/document_librar/
get file?p 1 id=1169848&folderld=2209568&name=DLFE-35732.pdf; accessed October 2017.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). "Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities 2009."
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
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, 2"d edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2002. Regulatory Guidance Letter. RGL No. 02-2,
December 24, 2002.
USACE. 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and
C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR -10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center.
USACE. 2018. Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator.
USACE. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS).
1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Technical Release 55.
USDA NRCS. 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH 654), USDA
USDANRCS. 2007. Soil Survey of Surry County, North Carolina.
USDA NRCS. 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.
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
48

USDA NRCS. Web Soil Survey; http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov (October 2017).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 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.fws.,gov/raleigh/. (September 2014).
Gideon Mitigation Plan May 2018
49

Figures List
Figure 1—
Vicinity Map
Figure 2 —
USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3 —
Landowner Map
Figure 4 —
Land -use Map
Figure 5 —
Existing Conditions Map
Figure 6 —
National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 7 —
Soils Map
Figure 8 —
Historical Conditions Map
Figure 9 —
FEMA Map
Figure 10
—Conceptual Plan Map
Figure 11 a
— Ideal Buffer Width Zones
Figure 11b Actual Buffer Width Zones

Little Sebastian I
Mitigation Site
1
c
Gideon Mitigation Site
Cf'6
w�e
0 500 1,000
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Gideon Mitigation Site
Surry County, North Carolina
wiic y
°AS 1�,
Legend
Proposed Easement
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site
Service Area - 03040101
TLW -03040101080020
Date: 5/15/2018
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: ATP pres

�� � `.� \ � �� � r=te-- - �'� `� �- '•� � � •�� '
3191 ac \`
N
r 1
*\-JC
J
N .a,3�
OL
O
v
-p
,gy
38 ac
JN6
r,
JN5 1
Le-gen n
50 ac
198 ac
--
Drainage Areas r
Proposed Easement
Figure 2 - USGS Topographic Map Date: 5/15/2018
Bottom (1973)
e Drawn by: MDE
Gideon Mitigation Site Checked by: ATP res
0 1.000 2.000
Feet Surry County, North Carolina

Legend
Proposed Easement
Parcel of Intrest
w -E
0 200 400
NIXON'JIMMY EDWAF
VIVIAN `JLIFE ESTA
t
A*r ,,f
Figure 3 - Landowner Map
Gideon Mitigation Site
Surry County, North Carolina
Date: 5/15/2018
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: ATP pres

_ v
1402t
7
E'a^
6
Ah

1950 1966 I k ' -
�4
- - q ,
F
;IP
��f z
Source: USGSI Earthi Explorer Source: USGS Earth Explorer
1993X, 1998
1161 t t }
PIM
IMW
Le-gend
m .ir
r Proposed Easement
o Source: NC OneMap Source: NC'OneMap
Date: 511 512 01 8
Figure 8 - Historical Conditions Map
w F Drawn by: MDE
s Gideon Mitigation Site res
0 300 600 Checked by: ATP
Surry County, North Carolina
81 Feet

e-
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ah
*e
4f,^
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ah

Legend
Proposed Eas
Proposed Stre
Ideal Buffers
- 30'-50' (197,239 sqft)
50'-75' (234.527 sqft)
75-100' (211,211 sqft)
100'-125' (194,953 sqft)
- 125'150' (183,361 sqft)
Figure 11a - Ideal Buffer Width Zones Date: 5/16/2018
w f- Drawn by: MDE
Gideon Mitigation Site res
0 150 300 Checked by: OLP
Surry County, North Carolina
Feet 0

Legend
Proposed Easement
Proposed Stream
Ideal Buffers
- 30'-50' (108,016 sqft)
50'-75' (41,439 sqft)
75'-100' (13,444sqft)
100'-125' (3,916 sqft)
- 125'150' (9 sqft)
0 150 300
Buffer Zones
Max Possible Buffer (square feet)
Ideal Buffer (square feet)
Actual Buffer (square feet)
Zone Multiplier
Buffer Credit Equivalent
Percent of Ideal Buffer
Credit Adjustment
Total Baseline Credit
2,921
Figure 11 b -Actual Buffer Width Zones
Gideon Mitigation Site
Surry County, North Carolina
Date: 5/16/2018
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: OLP pres
Buffer Width Zone (feet from Ordinary High Water Mark)
>30 to 50 feet
>50 to 75 feet
>75 to 100 feet
>100 to 125 feet >125 to 150 feet
192,720
240,900
240,900
240,900
240,900
197,239
234,527
211,211
194,953
183,361
108,016
41,439
13,444
3,916
9
9%
7%
6%
5%
3%
263
204
175
146
88
55%
18%
6%
2%
0%
144
36
11
3
0
Credit Loss in
Required Buffer
Credit Gain for
Additional Buffer
Net Change in
Credit from Buffers
Total Credit
0
194
194
3,115
Figure 11 b -Actual Buffer Width Zones
Gideon Mitigation Site
Surry County, North Carolina
Date: 5/16/2018
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: OLP pres

Appendix A -Plan Sheets

PROJECT LOCATION
4'
�m[h
OWPI o Rw h Iqd
Co6son
Zephyr
w&0
© 2017 HERE t 2017 Microsoft Corporation
'j p
VICINITY MAP
NTS
LU
J_
LL
41
a
GIDEON STREAM MITIGATION SITE
(RES YADKIN 01 STREAM & WETLAND UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK)
SURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
YADKIN RIVER BASIN: HUC 03040101080020
MAY 2018
RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC
302 JEFFERSON ST, SUITE 110
RALEIGH, NC 27605
51TE MAP
NTS
Sheet L15t Table
Sheet Number
Sheet Tale
-
COVED
E I
GENERAL NOTES * LEGEND
E2
EX15TING CONDITIONS
5 1 3
LEACH J N4
5 1 4
REACH J N 5
5 1 5
LEACH J N G
5 1 G
LEACH J N G
5 1 7
LEACH J N G
5 1 8
LEACH MC2
5 1 9
LEACH MC2
520
LEACH MC2
F I
PLANTING PLAN
M I
MONITORING PLAN
D I
D ETA I L5
D2
D ETA I L5
D3
DETA I L5
D4
DETA I L5
D5
D ETA I L5
DG
DETA I L5
D7
D ETA I L5
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, INC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "=300
0 300
600
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
Iii
Q
00
C,
o
N
F-
oLO
0
C)
z
O
F -
Z)
0
z
O
z
O
o
IL
0
O
0
w
0
°
w
Q
Qzo
z
O
(n
Lu
U)LU
Q
J
W
>
J
Ir
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:

CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
I . INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DESCRIBED IN THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND
NOTES. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY BE PHASED -IN TO TH05E AREAS OF THE PROJECT
CURRENTLY BEING WORKED ON. THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY OR RELOCATE ER0510N
CONTROL MEASURES TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FOR UNFORESEEN FIELD CONDITIONS 50 LONG
AS PROPER CONSTRUCTION 15 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. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION AND
STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED IN51DE THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE ABANDONED AT AN
ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
G. STOCKPILE AREAS MAY BE RELOCATED UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. SILT FENCING
MUST BE INSTALLED AROUND ALL STOCKPILE AREAS.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT 501L AROUND ROOTS 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.
8. REMOVE AND STOCKPILE GRAVEL/COBBLE SUBSTRATE LOCATED WITHIN EXISTING CHANNELS TO
BE ABANDONED. THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE PROPOSED BED OF SHALLOW
CHANNEL SECTIONS.
9. IN -STREAM STRUCTURES PROPOSED ALONG THE OUTSIDE OF MEANDER BENDS (BRUSH TOES,
LOG VANES, AND LOG TOES) MAY BE USED INTERCHANGEABLY THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT PER
APPROVAL FROM DESIGNER.
10. THE WORK TO RESHAPE THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE PERFORMED USING EQUIPMENT WORKING
FROM THE TOP OF THE EXISTING STREAM BANK, WHERE POSSIBLE.
1 1. 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.
12. 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.
13. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION 15
COMPLETE AND THE 51TE 15 STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM OF 200 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM MAY BE
DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
14. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
15. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE EXISTING CHANNEL 15 BEING MAINTAINED, TEMPORARY PUMP
AROUND DAM5 AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE -WATER THE WORK AREA AS
DESCRIBED IN THE DETAILS.
I G. 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.
17. 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 HA5 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.
18. MATERIAL THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE STREAM WILL BE RE -DEPOSITED OUTSIDE OF THE ACTIVE
CHANNEL AND ITS FLOODPLAIN.
19. 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.
20. RE -FERTILIZE AND RE -SEED DISTURBED AREAS IF NECESSARY.
2 1. 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:
I . CONDUCT PRE -CONSTRUCTION MEETING INCLUDING OWNER, ENGINEER, ASSOCIATED
CONTRACTORS, NCDEQ EROSION CONTROL PERSONNEL, AND OTHER AFFECTED PARTIES.
CONTACT NCDEQ EROSION CONTROL PERSONNEL AT 9 19-79 1-4200.
2. OBTAIN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT FROM NCDENR - LAND QUALITY SECTION AND ALL OTHER
APPROVALS NECESSARY TO BEGIN AND COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
3. CONTRACTOR 15 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 I -800-G32-4949 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. MAINTAIN EXISTING
DRIVEWAY OVERTOPPING ELEVATION / PROFILE.
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.
G. INSTALL PUMP AROUND APPARATUS AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AT UPSTREAM END OF PROJECT.
AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, MOVE PUMP AROUND OPERATION DOWNSTREAM. (SEE
DETAILS ON SHEET D 1)
7. INSTALL SILT FENCE, TEMPORARY CROSSINGS AND ALL OTHER EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS
SHOWN ON PLANS.
8. CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIR5T, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
9. ROUGH GRADING OF CHANNEL SHALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
10. INSTALL STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, OBTAIN
APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
1 1. UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING OR 50D MATS
ALONG CHANNEL BANKS.
12. FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THE
ENGINEER.
13. 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.
14. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END
OF EACH WORKING DAY.
15. INSTALL LIVE STAKE, BARE ROOT, AND CONTAINERIZED PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANTING
PLANS.
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
- -50-
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR
4G -
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
50
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
42
EXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING STREAM
EXISTING TOP OF BANK----T6-----TB
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK ---- 88----- ee
EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE ohE one
PROPERTY LINE - - - -
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF CHANNEL - -
EXISTING FENCELINE -x-x
EXISTING TREELINE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK -----------------
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROPOSED FILL AREA
EXISTING TREE
BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL D2) wmzm
LOG SILL
(SEE DETAIL D4)
LOG CROSS VANE
(SEE DETAIL D5)
DOUBLE LOG DROP _
(SEE DETAIL D4)
ROCK CR055 VANE
(SEE DETAIL D5)
ROCK A -VANE
(SEE DETAIL DX)
ROCK/WOOD RIFFLE W/ SILL
(SEE DETAIL DG)
ANGLED LOG STEP POOL
(SEE DETAIL D7)
LOG SILL
(PROFILE)
LOG CROSS VANE O
(PROFILE) (�
DOUBLE LOG DROP
(PROFILE)
ROCK CR055 VANE/A-VANE
(PROFILE)
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite
110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
6i
Q
00
C)
0
�
N
O
co
J
Z
O
U
Z)
Z
O
z
O
O
IL
0-
m
it
O
0
Z
w
0
o�
w
LO
Q
Q
zo
Z
OU)
-QLI)
LLJ
Lu
J
W
Q
w
w
Q
z
W
�
J
�
0
Cn
z
LU
O
Q
U
F_
w
Q
=
J
~
0
w
z
F_
Q
O
>
LL]
F_
z
z
J
z
C)
W
L O
Lu
z
z _
z
~
(�
CD
3
3:
O
Q
I
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
E1

lNV ISI
Q �
\\ll��o
�vA�� DI r/III /f rvv v 1�\ A l
/IVI( �llp 1
'4/0' /10F"
11��i'
v vvfit i t
ll�llll I I
V I \
����\�j1� Iv � vA1 �( 11�VAVA�AA\ 1111111 I �
yv�&, V AVA�A v� y� � III 1111111 II �I
y� � �w = � v � ,vvvvvw v lo�lllll,111w1, ,111,11
1i1\I 1\�\\ 1 1 % I X1111\\ \\11111111111\� II �
hll A v NAVA\VA\VIIjj1AI
��o �� v �v�� � AVAI�III111 AJ /v� /f / IIIII�IIIIIIII II �
�\���y�\���I�����"+�.wv�\ � �i� �1111�II111111�1VA( � �/ II11j1�11<<�IIIIII11111111111111i �
_ =, �10111�1111II 111 A�\
!AvvA\V�\\ VAy U l 1111111 I I IIIIIII I� 11 VAy
-------
---------
---
vvVvN vv�v�------------,
�V \�����Q
\ \VA\V A��
IllI
v `\i\111 IIj�Alll�l�v v��\1Vl�lllll 11j1�1111�IIIII11111� / i v� �v w���
� Il�llllllllljl\\. �\� \11 IIIb IIII II 1I11� � �
111111�j1j \��� �\\\\V�I111111� �Ilpllll�llljllllllll i � "1�© �\\
X111111111111 v ��1�II1111 �IIII�III)�111�1111�1/ ����� v �
Aa
���v
�\ \ \\ \ \,
v A�A\\VA�\\ \VAAA\\VwAA����A
vv
C "�III��\ \
1IV �
\ 1�
16l�� ��v jlllll� /II/'/ / —��� 1 �II
1�1411�/II11117 Av \1\ 11
\VAqV
\
1/ H
III
// �/ � � ���-• � p / � / / �� /ice '� - �=—_=-�� Av�v�-'?• 1 _�- � / l V�� ��, v_� v� v,, ���
TY-%" /A / bio Ao "'�A���„� - // / / / A•- A --� V A %� //-' ��
��\\\%— � �\ %/���=/ \\\���\\\\tip �\•f /� "'ti� ��'���'j'�������9 �� //�� � _ �\\ �.
16
VI I I
�� � i��'lilii�lii 1 I1vII I1P�1
II v v
BEACH JN4
I\Ln�l I JIVJ
0 0 V1 •���� �/ �-
- Q
\Vv v
/ci
0 D
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite
110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 ”=150
0
150
300
2 FULL SCALE
"
1 = HALF SCALE
W
Q
00
C,
CD
N
F-
0 O
o
z
O
Z)
z
0
z
O
O
LL
z
w
'
0
O
111
Q
Q
cf)
C)
z
Z
O
(n
Lu
U)LU
Q
J
L1J
Q
z
W
�
J
O
Cn
z
Q
Z
U
_O
Q
=
F---
�
�
Z
O
z
U
Q
�
(D
W
�
z
Z
0U)
U)
OCU
z
X
2i OW
>-
J
W
z
z
F—
O
Z)
LLJ
Y)
O
Q
o
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
E 2

LU
J
LL
REACH MC2 \
�l
VE, R AD \ L,
t V BENCH LEFT BANK ALONG W
REACH JN4 ENHANCEMENT REACH
ENHANCEMENT III LGE ^ \ PER TYPICAL DETAIL —�
STA 0+00 TO 2+ 13 SEE SHEET D3
vot
24" CMP
INV. IN = 1 172.24
INV. OUT = I 169.72'
O -
/ e�y
e %� — \ 537
ai TB
�NO IN USE4+00
)
t�
�\ EX15TING CHANNEL CR055ING AND ��\\ \� V� �� � � s T 1 use �
k O ) �j 5+55 /
\\\\ ACCE55 ROAD TO REMAIN \
iz-
• / L
REACH JN4
ENHANCEMENT I \\\\ \ \Te
STA 2+8G TO 5+50 m V A A \
�I RtAC`\
REMOVING EXI5TING
PIPES * DISPOSE
OF OFF 51TE
177
I
1180- I I I -1160
1 170 — 1170
1537]
I I GOA \ \ I I GO
r
EXI5TING GRADE ALONG
I STREAM CENTERLINE
1 150 J 1 150
EXI5T. 24 LF
OF 48" CMP
m CONSERVATION - - -
N EASEMENT N
Q BREAK Q
1140 - - r _ 1140
0+00 0+50 1 +00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 G+00
SCALE: HOK 1''=30'; VERT I''=G'
10
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
0
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
030
60
2 — FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
°°
C)
o
N
H
(.0
o_
o
z
O
U)
z
O
Of
Z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
'
o
o0�
w
u_
Q
Q
z
o
z
o
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
W
J
W
7Q
z
w
J
0
Z
O
U
�
�
O
�
zLu
=
Q
�
Q
LU
Z
U)
0
Z
U
O
J
Q
�_
z
F -
w
z
O
U)
Q
�
o
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S13

1150
1145
1135
1130
w
J
U -
V
z
rn
i
I
15' CMF I I
/ BURi F-/
CMP
43.37'
y
BEACH JN4
..TB— T,
2
1
101
LAY BACK LEFT BANK, I N5TALL V% �� \ \r'k / re
01 /
COIR MATTING � LIVE STAKES /� /
STA 0+30 TO 0+70 / ,
REACH MC2
REACH JN5
ENHANCEMENT I J'' I iiillil I
STA 0+00 TO 2+48
SCALE: HOR 1''=30'; VERT 1''=3'
1150
MEN
1135
)0
E83
_
----
/ , � � ,� �//'/III `i. / •, �
10
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Cy
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
C�`'
0
30
60
2" FULL SCALE
m
i
1
I`
�y
w
Q00
1
101
LAY BACK LEFT BANK, I N5TALL V% �� \ \r'k / re
01 /
COIR MATTING � LIVE STAKES /� /
STA 0+30 TO 0+70 / ,
REACH MC2
REACH JN5
ENHANCEMENT I J'' I iiillil I
STA 0+00 TO 2+48
SCALE: HOR 1''=30'; VERT 1''=3'
1150
MEN
1135
)0
E83
_
----
/ , � � ,� �//'/III `i. / •, �
10
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2" FULL SCALE
1 " — HALF SCALE
I`
w
Q00
C)
o
N
H
(.0o;
�o
z
O
Y)
z
O
z
O
o
LL
E
it
O
C)
z
w
w
LO
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
W
J
W
cr
cc
D_
Q
z
W
J
�O
Z
Q
O
U
�
~
O
�
z
=
Q
a
�
W
W
z
U)
O
Z
U
O
J Lu
Q
n�/
N
z
F-
W
z
U)
O
Q
cr
cr
CL
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S14

i
EX15TING ACCE55
ROAD TO REMAIN
-- -- -
- _ - - - -
_ _
-_
_ _ - _ - - - - _ - _ y
i
-cFtC E _ - -- - - ---- -- - --- -- ---
- -- ----- - - � � QE �
v / LCE
0+-0
o —
4+50
00 cp
ioO13
ir
V 16,071
YT 185 +$0 - TB
13- o -
-
( Cj
-TB - d
i
LCE
REACH JNG--- � _ - - \
_ = REACH JNG
PRESERVATION -- -_� _ = ENHANCEMENT III
STA 0+00 TO 5+ 10 -_ STA 5+38 TO 13+ 1 1
REACH JNG
ENHANCEMENT III
STA 5+38 TO 13+ 1 1
;'-
LCE
_6±5$
----
/
7+50
13
\�TB�----TBS
- 94-00
T8`_\
O
�9
W
z
J
L
U
Q
93�
0
0
A-
c�
�Z S>
L 50
i
O
uu
z_
I J
Z
U
Q
im
C
sl3 rn
— 10+50
– - —
�T�
t5 ----
---
- - ---
--- --- ---- ---
LCE
6+5p
vot
L
vu
J
1 0
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
C)
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
°°
C)
o
N
O
C°
J
D_
�
O
z
O
U)
z
O
z
O
0
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
w
°
w
Q
Q
ZD
z
O
(n
LU
ccl)
Q
J
W
o�
>
J
cr
cc
D_
Q
z
W
II.—
J
O
F
z
Q
O
U
�
�
O
�
zLu
=
Q
Q
�
LU
z
U)
O
Z
U
O
J
Q
z
F-
W
z
�
v)
d
�
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S15

LU
J_
LL
o REAC N J N G STA 13+42 TO STA 20+76
6.2'
PROPOSED 24 LF Z 1.5' I.6'
OF 30" RCP i S23 BANKFULL STAGE
U
00
LC,t� TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
12+00
—
BANKFULL STAGE
so —LCE
—13
D
- _
— , 515 x_moi S 2 1
_ L -
XS
-- x
00
937+ \
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
1 moo/ � G
o \\ I EXISTING CPP TO BE �S 1 9
1 1.71 3.8'
111 I �j REMOVED AND DISPOSED �'� BANKFULL STAGE
+ 1 OF OFF SITE
m
ct
REACH JNG
RESTORATION /
STA 13+42 TO 20+78 TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
REACH MC2
G- S3 2
1165 'I 1165
512 513
I I GO 5 1 4 t- 1 1 GO
515
_ 516
,3Opp—�--- ��
5I7
-J-I58
I 155 -- 4 1 5 1 9S20 I 155
'-
� PROPOSED TOP
PROP 24 LF OF BANK
OF 30" RCP 3.00/
1 1 50 1 150
0o J I
EXISTING GRADE ALONG
STREAM CENTERLINE
w ,z
LJLLI CLQ I —
Q t7 Q CD Q
LU
1 145 – — 1 145
PROPOSED CfIANNEL
BED SLOPE
12+00 12+50 13+00 13+50 14+00 14+50 15+00 15+50 1 6+00 I G+50 17+00 17+50 1,5+00
SCALE: HOR 1 "=30'; VERT 1 "=3'
0
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
C o
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2" = FULL SCALELE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
Q00
C)
CD
N
O
C°
J
D_
�
O
z
O
z
O
Z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
w
w
LL
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
W
J
W
Q
z
ILL]
�
J
�
z
O
U
�
~
O
�
zILL]
=
Q
�
Q
LU
z
U)
O
Z
U
O
Lu
J
Q
�_
z
F-
F -
z
U)
O
Q
CL
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S16

REACh JN6 5TA 13+42 TO STA 20+78
i
G. 2'
i 1.5' I.G'
�y
BAN KFULL STAGE
/
� / o
�D c` —
TYPICAL SHALLOW CR055 SECTION
REACH JN6 -
RE5TORATION
STA 13+42 TO 20+80 — k3
G.7'
�
3.8' 1.71
C� E LC LCE
BANKFULL STAGE
LCE
- ` -LCA
22+50 _ 20 �O �
— / \ 22+0 - — --j/ 2 +
+50 _ ,,�
21 +p0
—
20+00 29+50
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CR055 SECTION
dL
i REACH J N 6
I F�//////l I I i� G.7
STA 200 80 TO 25+ 17 '�\IIJ \�� j 1 .7' 3.8'
_ TIE RESTORATION INTO RELIC ���/� 1
- � / /�j/ /� // / BANKFULL STAGE
\ i CHANNEL FEATURE AT STA 20+80 i /�///// ////// /z�///l
�j�
LCE
r
REACH MC2 � � � � =:�L� ////� //��/////� �/ TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
1155
1150
1145
1 140
1135
18
I
+00
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
0
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
I
030
521
60
2 — FULL SCALE
I 522
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
523
w
Q00
I
C)
CD
N
PROP05ED TOP
H
(.0o ;
OF BANK
o_
o
z
EX15TING GRADE ALONG
0
— — — '
STREAM CENTERLINE
-0.90%
PROPOSED ChANNEL
`
BED SLOPE
z
O
z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
18+5 19+ 19+5 20+00 20+50
21+0 21+5 22+00 22+50
23+00
23+50 24+
1155
1150
1145
1140
1135
00
SCALE: HOR 1 ''=30'; VERT 1 ''=3'
1
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
0
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
030
60
2 — FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
Q00
C)
CD
N
H
(.0o ;
o_
o
z
0
z
O
z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
w
w
LL
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
w
J
w
Q
z
ILLI
�
J
0
Z
O
U
�
�
O
�
Z
Q
�
Q
W
W
Z
U)
0
Z
U
O
Lu
J
Q
�_
z
F—
w
z
O
U)
Q
cr
o=
CL
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S17

N
U)
F-
m
0
w
a
LU
J_
LL
�\ \ CC REACH MC2 STA 20+72 TO STA 31 +50
�\ REACH MC2
RESTORATION 23.0'
STA 2 1+20 TO STA 3 1+50 \ �� 4.2' 7.3'
BANKFULL STAGE
\ \ \ 4c \ \
—
\ 22+50 4c
k°° TYPICAL 5rIALLOW CR055 SECTION
22 00
S28
c 23.0
10.8' 7.9'
\ \ 5 �3Xso _ — 2�xso LC LC E
� \ BANKFULL STAGE
\ \ 91 /tib
sCL
N TYPICAL RIGrIT MEANDER CRO55 SECTION
i - "
- TBTB Q�y \ \ x
00
23.0'
7.9' 10.8'
0 BANKFULL STAGE
PROPOSED BRIDGE
26+0 N -
i 1
o m
\ \ v
2 koo \ \ \ 03 \ \ 'L
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CRO55 SECTION
00
LITTLE SEBASTIAN
5TREAM MITIGATION 51TE O \ T
\� S +
1155 1155
I
1 150-- S28 — — — — 1 150
- 529
PROPOSED TOP 530
OF BANK
I 53
I I I
1 145 — I / T� --- — — 1 145
I - T -- -- -0.88%
1140 —
-0.65% 1140
PROPOSED ChANNEL
BED SLOPE
+I CONSERVATION I� EXISTING GRADE ALONG
OI EASEMENT IN STREAM CENTERLINE
BREAK
�I I�
1135 I I 1135
I
I
I
20+50 21+00 21+50 22+00 22+50 23+00 23+50 24+00 24+50 25+00 25+50 2G+00 2G+50 27+00
SCALE: NOR 1 "=30'; VERT 1 "=3'
1pres'
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2 FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
Li.i
°°
C)
o
N
F-
0LO
C
D_
O
z
O
z
O
z
O
0
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
w
w
LL
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
Q
W
W
Q
Z
W
�
J
0
Z
O
U
�
<
�
N
U
~
O
Z
2
Q�
Q
ILLIIZ
W
U)
0
Z
U
O
J
Q
z
F -
w
z
O
U)
Q
cr
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S18

- LC
N
V-
cz
U)
F-
F-
m
0
w
a
w
J
LL
LCE
27+50
LCE
LCE
REACH MC2
RE5TORATI ON
STA 21 +20 TO 31 +50
29+Sp �
1
\ X \ �O"°o
—�
\ X
00 28 a wINN
0 1 eI -.Tei \/
0
O
N
S>
�y
X81 ----i
1150-
1145-
1135-
1130-
27 -
16"
32+001
T 31+50 32+
SB �-� �TB—_ 50 /\
i
i
TB----- TB----- TB—�
ro `C1 I/ * TB —/
m/
I
1y
�sXoo � \ e� \ r)�
\ 35+50
/11\K� r...)
�r)
4,
ENHANCEMENT III
STA 3 1 +50 TO 35+24
SCALE: HOR 1''=30'; VERT 1''=3'
v.
1145
.N
1135
Effel
im
REACH M C 2 STA 20+72 TO STA 3 1+50
23.0'
4.2' 7.3'
BANKFULL STAGE _
N �
I
rL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CR055 SECTION
2.':� n,
q -
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CR055 SECTION
P.'� n'
q -
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CK055 SECTION
I p
res'
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
C3
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2 FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
°°
C)
o
N
H
0
C
PROPOSED TOP 532 EXI5TING GRADE ALONG
OF BANK STREAM CENTERLINE 533
_
----------- - - - - - - -------
-j --J 1
-0. 5% 1
PROPOSED CHANNEL -0.85 QXI
5EI}75t$PF — - — -----
z
0
z
0
z
0
O
LL
C
\
it0
----
INN
C)
X00 27+50 28+00 28+50 29+00 29+50 30+00 30+50 31+00 31+50
32+00
32+50
33+
SCALE: HOR 1''=30'; VERT 1''=3'
v.
1145
.N
1135
Effel
im
REACH M C 2 STA 20+72 TO STA 3 1+50
23.0'
4.2' 7.3'
BANKFULL STAGE _
N �
I
rL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CR055 SECTION
2.':� n,
q -
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CR055 SECTION
P.'� n'
q -
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CK055 SECTION
I p
res'
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
C3
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0
30
60
2 FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
°°
C)
o
N
H
0
C
LO
z
0
z
0
z
0
O
LL
C
it0
C)
z
w
w
LL
Q
Q
z
o
z
0
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
W
J
W
Q
Z
W
II.—
J
0
F
z
Q
O
U
�
<
�
N
U
z
=
Q
�
Q
Z
W
U)
0
z
U
O
J Lu
Q
�_
z
F-
W
z
U)
0
Q
c
d
�
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S1 9

N
U)
F-
F-
m
0
w
a
LU
J
LL
10
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "_ ##
0
##
##
2" = FULL SCALE
IN
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
°°
C)
o
N
H
(.0O
J
D_
�
O
z
O
U
U)
z
O
z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
C)
z
w
w
LO
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
o�
Q
>
W
J
W
cr
cc
D_
Q
Z
W
J
0
Z
Q
0
F-
< <
�
N
U
Z
2
Q
�
Q
LL]Z
W
U)
Z
U
O
J
Q
z
F-
W
z
U)
O
Q
cr
cr
CL
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
S20

IYoOl
IJ11�iN--nvA\\l� �vv��1/VIII Ir> >l �v rVIl A 1 /Ji
II'llJr/////%//\�\I
\\\ �/n //il\\\ ` l / J/ I!/I/�
I�� 111 ll'I
A
A�\y_ \\\\\�)(o� �� ���1111�VA)��VVII\VII\�1��
AVX8VV \ \VA ITV
111A 11A 1�A Ill�lpl�ll
1\\l/l��\�A���_ � � ��v� / v v v IIIIIII II IIII II
\�v���-ate�V� v� l . �1�lll\VV,�IVII1111111\�AI
9�4\S\as
\y� ��� AAV\\1\tel ��A111111 IIII III �I IIII Il
\\���
�/Ij�l
`1��1X'1\1R
l/ 1 1�Il1�1�lIl11l1ll1 lI ( II l�� fv i - mvil V\1ASj1)�1�)�f)/(�/II1I1I�A1II1II1II1I�II1I1IIIlI11�I1I111I11I1�11�Jill
1�I
6 l���
vvvovvvvvvvv�� vvv — /,
/
R,
'I� v
`V VAVA\V vvv v v � III Il,ll VVA\V
\�\\\VA\ vvvwv��vv�
� \\ 1�1 � AAVA A� AV L- 1111111 i 11�111111�1111 / � V �v��vsem
\
� ilh lllllllll lei vvv }\A111 I� IIIIIIIIII�III1111h / '� E v �vov� \\1 1 I I I IIS
�IIVIIIIIII\\.� \\'i}�I,II�IIIIA
� I 1 11� Y I Il � 11111��111111�11j1 /� � � vvv ��
�� 111111I�1j1A�t � ,,\V11 1111 IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIII �I,� �A
d�l1II I I � I�I11 �V ��\II�111111111�
AP I
�\�VIIIII�VAII IIII VA \ \VA �/ / /VON� A
/T
IIS
vvvvIi 1111 y /I/ /v��vvvvv�v� til r �l� ��Ivv�I
A��I���II
V � vAo viiy v\vv� ,�v �� vm , il�w v v � • I zw � 1 v
N°)v\vv�����"`�\` v��`�vL
vov�\°wwOwvv \vvv\V
vAy'\� '
�qV��,I II �/� \w � III 1/ I 1 1 ) ✓ ,, ��cvA
yll l I I �1/ v vvv Ill l 1( I v
�` IIIIIIIIII�III 3 ��\ ��\
�` �,�V� V111 114111 I ' T�� � ��I I> � / I j I I � •�� < _ / .AA \�a
IIIIII111111IJ1Jl �\\\ � II II ! / J � 1
�� j11lllly�pl�l/�,r ��v �v
�, I
I K�
C, ;,III)IIIIIII I �t
C )/
//
`\ III II//fl\\\
� � I"f1 � ,Ty°�� 1111,1)/IIII I� ��• ,v ��fUll I A���,
17
\ //i � �� \ ��"-E-�-���_-�_,"E�" �/) / Ill/ I / I) `� • � i� �� \_ \���\\. \ \ �'�`` (f
—
��l\
-�/A/J/�I
J�
� ( P?s
7�7-_ � v / r V A � � •�- � i� _ / � X11 � , / \ �, �
�iOE%
ill r
b \I �,,1�P7-
1 _
� tel%
\, REACH MC2
REACH J N 4
PLANTING TABLE
Permanent Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Composition
Virginia Wildrye
,
25%
Indian Grass
5or6jha5trum nutans
25%
Little Blue Stem
,
10%
Soft Rush
Juncus effusus
10%
Blackeyed Susan
,
10%
Deertongue
Dichanthelium clandestinum
10%
Common Milkweed
,
5%
Showy Goldenrod
Solidago erecta
5%
Elderberry
Sambucus canadensis
5%
Black Gum
Nyssa biflora
5%
LLI
o
00
0
�
N
O
J
i
Z
O
Z)
Permanent Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Composition
Virginia Wildrye
Elymus virgmicus
25%
Indian Grass
5or6jha5trum nutans
25%
Little Blue Stem
Schizachyrium scoparium
10%
Soft Rush
Juncus effusus
10%
Blackeyed Susan
Rudbeckia hirta
10%
Deertongue
Dichanthelium clandestinum
10%
Common Milkweed
Asclepias syriaca
5%
Showy Goldenrod
Solidago erecta
5%
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Common Name Scientific Name Percent
Composition
Silky dogwood Cornus arl 40%
Black willow Salix nigra GO%
Bare Root Planting Tree 511
Common Name
Scientific Name
Percent
Composition
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
15%
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
15%
River Birch
Betula nigra
15%
American Sycamore
Platanas occidentalis
10%
Northern Red Oak
Quercus rubra
10%
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
10%
Yellow Poplar
Liriodendron tulipifera
10%
Persimmon
Diospyros virginiana
5%
Elderberry
Sambucus canadensis
5%
Black Gum
Nyssa biflora
5%
PLANTING NOTES
ALL PLANTING AREAS
1 . EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT VEGETATION
IS ESTABLISHED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AT THE END
OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES ARE FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. 11 \ \ \ \
2. DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN 10 _-�- �� ° i a \
WORKING 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 % >z77
PLANTING AREAS WITH THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHIC AT
CONTOURS.
4. BARE ROOT PLANTINGS SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET D2. LIVE
STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET D2.
5. TREATMENT/REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES, PINES AND SWEET GUMS LESS THAN G" DBH SHALL
BE PERFORMED THROUGHOUT THE PLANTED AREA.
G. SPECIES SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO G PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE
GROUPED TOGETHER.
7. BARE ROOT PLANTING DENSITY IS APPROXIMATELY 800 STEMS PER ACRE.
8. LIVE STAKES ARE PROPOSED ALONG THE OUTSIDE OF MEANDER BENDS AND ALONG BOTH
BANKS OF STRAIGHT REACHES ADJACENT TO POOLS.
9. TEMPORARY SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF 150 LBS/ACRE TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS
WITH SLOPES EQUAL TO OK STEEPER THAN 3: 1.
10, PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT AT A RATE OF 15 LBS/ACRE,
1 1 . PERMANENT HERB SEED MIX SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT BREAKS AT A RATE OF 15 LBS/ACRE.
w
a
c/
jjR// �p
LEACH J N G
PLANTING LEGEND
RIPARIAN PLANTING
(TOTAL AREA: XX.X AC)
LIMITS OF CONSERVATION
EASEMENT CE
EXISTING TREELINE
��I (��� / I IIII I IIIIIII
/fill/I�II�I ti 111 1111111 I I
/ll ,� IIIIIII�Illfllgllll�l
/��/ 1//I //l�lllllllllll
�111�I1% �Illlll )llllll�l�v�
�Illi�l�llll� II
IIII Ill �� I f / �ll�f/)II
I c J I I�V
\\\
P)
�/z' I \\\\
AiI
BEACH J N 5 �\ �'v -- f/
Q
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite
110
Raleigh, INC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "=150
0
150
300
2 — FULL SCALE
"
1 = HALF SCALE
LLI
o
00
0
�
N
O
J
Z
O
Z)
z
O
z
O
O
IL
O
LLJ
'
0
O
W
Q
a
cl)
C)
Z
o
z
O
(n
Lu
U)
Q
LU
J
W
7Q
z
LLI
J
�75
O
10�
Z
Q
_O
=
z
Q
F—
O
z
z
Q
w
z
�
z
1'/ )
O
/J^
a_
Z
U
O
>
J
Q
�_
Z
F -
��N/
C_'3
Ir
cr
0-
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
P 1

cz
co
m
0
w
w
J_
LL
10
res,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
FULL SCALE: 1 "=150
0
150
300
2" = FULL SCALE
IN
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
00
o
o
O
(D
J
0_
LO
z
O
U
U)
z
O
z
O
o
LL
C
it
O
z
w
w
LO
Q
Q
z
o
z
O
(n
c
Q
J
W
oc
Q
>
W
J
W
cr
cc
D_
7Q
z
w
J
�O
�
Z
O
U
Z
�
Q
=
~
O
�
O
z
z
LL]
z
�
z
U)
O
Z
U
O
J
Q
�_
z
F-
W
z
U)
O
Q
cr
cr
CL
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
m 1

45
U)
H
m
LU
Q
0)
C/)
J
H
LU
0
I
0
LO
Ln
0
C7
Q
c
.M
M
ro
ro
ro
74z
U
2
CO
0
LU
cr
ci?
LU
Q
z
LU
J_
LL
WIZEN AND WHERE TO USE IT
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
SILT FENCE 15 APPLICABLE IN AREAS:
1.25 LB./LINEAR FT. STEEL POSTS
Fax: [phone]
FLOW
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SHEET OR OVERLAND FLOW PATH LENGTH TO THE FENCE IS 100 -FEET.
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE STEEPNESS (NORMAL [PERPENDICULAR] TO FENCE LINE) IS 2H: 1 V.
THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CONCENTRATED FLOWS GREATER THAN 0.5 CFS.
EXTRA STRENGTH i
SEAL
B MIDDLE LAYER
BOTTOM LAYER
TOP LAYER
FILTER FABRIC ` �.i
6
W
DO NOT PLACE SILT FENCE ACROSS CHANNELS OR USE IT AS A VELOCITY CONTROL BMP.
k�jTy
EARTH SURFACE
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
i.
ST
qN
A A _
___
-�
I . USE A SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC OF AT LEAST 95% BY WEIGHT OF POLYOLEFINS OR POLYESTER, WHICH IS
CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER AS CONFORMING TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM D 646 1.
Fq�Pr
\\ ` c
B
TRENCH 0.25DEEP
SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN ULTRAVIOLET RAY INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS TO PROVIDE A
MINIMUM OF G MONTHS OF EXPECTED USABLE CONSTRUCTION LIFE AT A TEMPERATURE RANGE OF O° TO 1 20°
o
\\ \` HEAVY DUTY PLASTIC TIE
FOR STEEL POSTS
PLAN VIEW ENDS OF BAGS IN
ONLY WHEN
BACKFILL TRENCH WITH
\ �
PLACED ON EARTH
F.
O
\ �
ADJACENT ROWS
2. ENSURE THAT POSTS FOR SEDIMENT FENCES ARE 1.33 LB/LINEAR FT STEEL WITH A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 5 FEET.
COMPACTED EARTH
SEE NOTE LOWEST POINT BUTTED SLIGHTLY
SURFACE
MAKE SURE THAT STEEL POSTS HAVE PROJECTIONS TO FACILITATE FASTENING THE FABRIC.
GROUND LEVEL TOGETHER SECTION
B -B
CONSTRUCTION:
1. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENT BARRIER OF EXTRA STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRICS.
\ \
BURY FABRIC
2. ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 24 INCHES ABOVE THE GROUND
SURFACE. (HIGHER FENCES MAY IMPOUND VOLUMES OF WATER SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE OF THE
USE EITHER FLAT -BOTTOM
\
�"
STRUCTURE.)
3. CONSTRUCT THE FILTER FABRIC FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID
OR V -BOTTOM TRENCH
Z)
EARTH SURFACE
JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER CLOTH ONLY AT A SUPPORT P05T WITH 4
SHOWN BELOW
SECTION A -A
FEET MINIMUM OVERLAP TO THE NEXT POST.
4. EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC WITH G FEET P05T SPACING DOES NOT REQUIRE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE.
SILT FENCE INSTALLATION
NOTE: END OF DIKE AT GROUND LEVEL TO BE
SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER FABRIC DIRECTLY TO POSTS. WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES SHOULD HAVE MINIMUM
HIGHER THAN THE LOWEST POINT OF FLOW CHECK. SANDBAG BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF THREE LAYERS OF SANDBAGS.
50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH.
SUFFICIENT SANDBAGS ARE TO BE PLACED TO
0
5. EXCAVATE A TRENCH APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 8 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE PROPOSED LINE OF
PREVENT SCOURING. THE BOTTOM LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 3 ROWS OF BAGS, THE
MIDDLE LAYER
POSTS AND UP51-OPE FROM THE BARRIER. FILTER FABRIC
FILTER FABRIC
SHALL CONSIST OF 2 ROWS OF BAGS AND THE TOP LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF I
G. PLACE 12 INCHES OF THE FABRIC ALONG THE BOTTOM AND SIDE OF THE TRENCH.
ROW OF BAGS. THE RECOMMENDED DIMENSION OF A FILLED SANDBAG
SHALL BE
7. BACKFILL THE TRENCH WITH SOIL PLACED OVER THE FILTER FABRIC AND COMPACT. THOROUGH COMPACTION COMPACTED v
COMPACTED
APPROXIMATELY 0.5 FT X 0.5 FT X 1 .5 FT.
O
OF THE BACKFILL 15 CRITICAL TO SILT FENCE PERFORMANCE.
EARTH o
EARTH
o
8. DO NOT ATTACH FILTER FABRIC TO EXISTING TREES.
0
o�
RUQ
RUNOFF
p
SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS
DIKE
MAINTENANCE:
Z
NTS
w
INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL. MAKE ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS
'
0
IMMEDIATELY.
N
_
N
SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE IT
PROMPTLY.
w
-
Q
FILTER
Q
zLu
Z
41 FILTER FABRIC
REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE NEXT RAIN AND TO FABRIC
REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING THE FENCE DURING CLEANOUT.
J
W
Q
Lu
Lu
NOTES:
REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA TO GRADE AND STABILIZE
FLAT -BOTTOM TRENCH DETAIL
V -SHAPED TRENCH DETAIL
I .
EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY IN DRY AND/OR ISOLATED SECTIONS OF
IT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY STABILIZED.
Q
CHANNEL.
LLJ
2.
IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS FROM STREAM
�
J
�75
FLOW.
3.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN BE STABILIZED IN
10�
z
ONE WORKING DAY. A MAXIMUM OF 200 FEET MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE
O
TIM
ECONTRACTOR
U
TEMPORARY SILT
EEN CE
G�OPO O COARSE AGGREGATE - 4.
THE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING PUMP SIZE
��� STONE SIZE = 2 3
SUFFICIENT TO PUMP BASE FLOW.
F-
NTS
`\� 5.
DIKE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF NON -ERODIBLE MATERIALS SUCH AS SANDBAGS.
~
O
O�O�
Z
SEQUENCE CONSTRUCTION:
F-
I .
INSTALL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTFALL USING CLASS A RIP RAP AT THE
W
F-
0
O O O O
DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED PROJECT WORKING AREA.
z
2.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY
(n
0
/�
PIPING THAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA
2" x I " OR 2" x 2"
WOODEN STAKE MINIMUM 9" EROSION
O
2i
>
O O O
O
TO THE STABILIZED OUTFALL.
EXISTING CONTROL STRAW WATTLE
OR COIR WATTLE/LOG
NOTE:
EROSION CONTROL WATTLES OR COIR LOGS/WATTLES MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF
o 3.
INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR
STREAM DIVERSION.
GRADE
SILT FENCE.
F-
O�O� 4.
INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND DEWATERING PUMPING
��N/
Z)
APPARATUS IF NEEDED TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED AREA. THE PUMP AND H05E
T'r\ SLOPE
LLJ
U)
MSN
FOR THI5 PURPOSE SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA.
THI5 WATER WILL AL50 BE PUMPED TO AN OUTFALL STABILIZED WITH CLA55 A RIP
r�T/ TT� �?
/\�j��j��� \\/�
<
0
\�� z
5.
RAP.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
/ r
��
E ROS I O N CONTROL WATTLE
JP \��e
REMOVALTHE IMPERVIOUSTERING AREA, ALL TY ER
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
BELPOf:
SILT BAG. REMOVEEN
PUMPS,
UM EDITHROU IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS
TRS
CHECKED:
NTS
DPI
AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE H05E/PIPING STARTING WITH THE DOWNSTREAM DIKE
INSTALL WATTLE IN 3" TO
D1
FIRST.
5" TRENCH
G.
ONCE THE WORKING AREA 15 COMPLETED, REMOVE ALL RIP RAP AND IMPERVIOUS
PURPOSE:
DIKES AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.
7.
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHOULD BE USED AT ALL POINTS WHERE TRAFFIC WILL BE LEAVING A
ALL WORK IN CHANNEL MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE REMOVING IMPERVIOUS DIKE.
CONSTRUCTION SITE AND MOVING DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC ROAD.
INSTALLATION NOTES:
KEY -IN MATTING PER
FIG. I OR FIG. 2
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
2.0'
FLOW
SITE PREPARATION
MIN.
I . CLEAR THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AREA OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL AND
i
I I
PROPERLY GRADE IT.
I . GRADE AND COMPACT AREA.
2. PLACE THE GRAVEL TO THE SPECIFIC GRADE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL, AND SMOOTH IT.
INTAKE H05E
2. REMOVE ALL ROCKS, CLODS, VEGETATION, AND OBSTRUCTIONS 50 THAT MATTING WILL --
1
_ _
1
3. PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO CARRY WATER TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR OTHER SUITABLE OUTLET.
CLA55 A
HAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL.
--
--
4. USE GEOTEXTILE FABRICS BECAUSE THEY IMPROVE STABILITY OF THE FOUNDATION IN LOCATIONS SUBJECT TO
STONE
3. PREPARE SEEDBED BY LOOSENING 3 TO 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ABOVE FINAL GRADE.
����
SEEPAGE OR HIGH WATER TABLE.
PUMP AROUND
4. TEST SOILS FOR ANY NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND SUBMIT 501L TEST RESULTS TO THE
ENGINEER. APPLY ANY TREATMENT SUCH AS LIME OR FERTILIZERS TO THE SOIL IF NEEDED.
KEY -IN AND/OR
PUMP
STAKE MATTING
MAINTENANCE:
SEEDING
JUST ABOVE
WORK
CHANNEL TOE
MAINTAIN THE GRAVEL PAD IN A CONDITION TO PREVENT MUD OR SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. DE -WATERING
AREA
I . SEE PLANTING SHEETS FOR SEEDING REQUIREMENTS.
THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2 -INCH STONE. AFTER EACH RAINFALL, INSPECT ANY STRUCTURE
PUMP
2. APPLY SEED TO SOIL BEFORE PLACING MATTING.
USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT AND CLEAN IT OUT AS NECESSARY. IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALS
INSTALLATION - STREAM BANK
SPILLED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC ROADWAYS, OR AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS.
IMPERVIOUS
I . SEE GRADING NOTES ON PLAN AND PROFILE SHEETS AND DETAIL SHEETS FOR
DIKE
INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE COIR MATTING.
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
2. OVERLAP ADJACENT MATS 3" (IN DIRECTION PARALLEL TO FLOW) AND ANCHOR EVERY 12"
ACROSS THE OVERLAP. THE UPSTREAM MAT SHOULD BE PLACED OVER THE DOWNSTREAM SOIL PILE
MAT.
TRENCH APPROX.
8" WIDE X 8" DEEP
TRENCH APPROX. SOIL PILE
g" WIDE x 8" DEEP FROM TRENCH
TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
3. EDGES SHOULD BE SHINGLED AWAY FROM THE FLOW OF WATER. FROM TRENCH
FLOW
NTS
4. LAY MAT LOOSE TO ALLOW CONTACT WITH SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH TIGHT.
5. ANCHOR MAT U51NG BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINS.
G. CUT 8" x 8" TRENCH ALONG TOP OF BANK FOR MAT TERMINATION AS SHOWN IN FIGURES I
\r7��%7/.
FLOW
DISCHARGE H05E
FLOW
A
2. EXTEND MAT 2 TO 3 FEET PAST TOP OF BANK.
7. PLACE ADJACENT ROLLS IN THE ANCHOR TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM OF 4" OVERLAP.
SECURE WITH BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINES, BACKFILL ANCHOR TRENCH, AND
��
-- --
//%~////////�
r-///////,//�/�A'��
\\
\�
GENERAL NOTES: B� # 5 WASHED STONE
I CONSTRUCT DAM ACCORDING TO NCDENK EROSION CONTROL
STONE
\ \ \ \ \ `
'\\r\\/��r\i
.
MANUAL. Z:
Q NOTE: H05E SHOULD BE
COMPACT SOIL. \/�%\�%\//
C r\'� \ \ \
8. STAPLE AT 12" INTERVALS ALONG OVERLAP. /j//\//\//\//j//i
9. STREAM BANK MATTING TO BE INSTALLED FROM TOE OF BANK TO A MINIMUM OF 2.0' \\�\\ \\\\\%j; j/\
I %ij
�j
\\\
\//\\
-
-
2. ROCK DAM KIPRAP SHALL BE 50/50 MIX OF CLA55 I AND II.
3. PLACE ROCK DAM AS SHOWN ON PLANS. EXTEND CLA55 B RIP SILT
KEPT OUTSIDE OF WORK
BAG AREA
1 ROW OF STAPLES OR
LOCATION
PAST TOP OF BANK. SEE FIGURE 3 FOR TERMINATION AT TOP OF BANK.
`'
jj/
\ STAKES, MIN. OF 24"
RAP ROCK APRON 5 FEET DOWNSTREAM FROM TOE OF ROCK
10. IF MORE THAN ROLL IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE CHANNEL FROM THE TOP OF BANK DOWN
/, I ROW OF STAPLES OR
O.0
DAM. A A
TO THE TOE, THEN OVERLAP MATTING BY A MINIMUM OF I'. /
STAKES, MIN. OF 24"
o
O.0
STEP I
STA IZED
CL
LASS AOUTIFALL
STONE FILTER FABRIC
STEP I
I .5' THICK CLASS
ROCK APRON
I ROW OF STAPLES ORB
I ROW OF STAPLES OR
B
OW STAKES, MIN. OF 18"
F� LO.0
STAKES, MIN. OF 12"
0.0
5� PLAN
SPILLWAY CREST
DISCHARGE
HOSE
C \,\�/T
GROUND
\ �
r\
FLOW
W (SPILLWAY)
I' MIN OF # 5 MIN. �i/3 STREAM WIDTH
STABILIZED
�\TT�T
CLA55 AND II RIPS WASHED STONE
RAP
OUTFALL CLA55 A 15' TO 20'
STONE
SOIL FILLED
VAA%/�
1 .5' THICK CLA55 LOWEST BANK
FLOW
EROSION CONTROL MATTING MUST MEET OR EXCEED THE
FROM SOIL PILE,
SOIL FILLED
B ROCK APRON o. LEVEL
� � � � � �� N 1
FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: STEP 2 COMPACT WITH
FOOT
• 1 00 % COCONUT FIBER (COIR) TWINE WOVEN INTO A
FROM SOIL PILE,
COMPACT WITH FOOT
STEP 2
- - - - -
- ' CLA55 I AND II
FILTER FABRIC
HIGH STRENGTH MATRIX.
CUTOFF TRENCH RIP RAP FILTER FABRIC
8" OF CLA55 A
• THICKNESS - 0.35 IN. MINIMUM.
FILTER
FABRIC SECTION A -A
STONE
• SHEAR STRESS - 5 LB5/5QFT FIGURE I
FIGURE 2
SECTION B -B
EXISTING
• FLOW VELOCITY- OBSERVED I G FT/ EC
CHANNEL
• WEIGHT - 29 OZ15Y
SILT BAG PROFILE
• OPEN AREA - 38%a
• SLOPES - UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 1: 1
COIR
MATTING
TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAM
PUMP AROUND DEWATERING DETAIL
NT5
NTS
NT5
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q
00
o
�
N
O
J
Z
O
Z)
Z
0
z
O
O
LL
o�
O
Q
Z
w
'
0
w
LO
Q
Q
zLu
Z
O
(n
Lu
U)
Q
Lu
J
W
Q
Lu
Lu
Q
z
LLJ
�
J
�75
0
10�
z
Q
O
U
F-
~
O
J
Z
F-
W
F-
0
z
(n
0
z
U
O
2i
>
J
LuQ
Z
F-
��N/
Z)
LLJ
U)
<
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D1

45
U)
H
m
0
LU
Q
0)
C/)
J
H
LU
0
0
0
LO
Ln
0
C7
0
Q
U
c
ro
M
Q)
U)
ro
J
U
z
U
2
CO
0
LU
cr
ci?
LU
Q
z
LU
J_
L
NOTES:
IR f IB R
I . LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 5-8 FEET LONG, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, AND
Raleigh, NC 27605
0.75" TO 2" MATTING
HARDWOOD.
Fax: [phone]
2. CABLE ANCHORS SHOULD BE PLACED I' TO 3' FROM EACH END OF LOG. REBAR (5/8" MINIMUM DIAMETER
FLAT TOP END o
3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) MAY BE USED A5 A SUBSTITUTION FOR CABLE ANCHORS PER DIRECTION OF
SEAL
1?
ENGINEER.
SCALE: AS SHOWN
O
3. IF REBAR 15 USED, PRE -DRILL HOLES WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT.
W
LATERAL BUD n DETAIL611LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE LONG ENOUGH
TO REACH BELOW THE GROUNDWATER
TABLE. (GENERALLY, A LENGTH OF 2 TO 3
FEET IS SUFFICIENT.) ADDITIONALLY, THE
Q00
STAKES SHOULD HAVE A DIAMETER IN
SIDE BRANCH THE RANGE OF 0.75 TO 2 INCHES.
�i
BANKFULL ELEVATION
C)
REMOVED AT z
SLIGHT ANGLE g
114 TO 1/3 OF LOG
�
WATER TABLE
DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
O
®�
\\\�\i PROPOSED B E D
J
45 DEGREE NIS ER
MATTING
TAPERED BUTT I
END4
Z
O
INIMUM OF 2/3 OF LOG
l
I
DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
EXISTING CHANNEL INVERT
Z)
10" MINIMUM LOG DIAMETER (TYP.)
INSTALL CABLE ANCHOR AS SHOWN. DRILL (OR
SAW CUT) PILOT HOLE THROUGH LOG 1/3 TO
3' MIN.
1/4 OF THE WAY DOWN SO THAT ANCHOR
'
CABLE IS NOT EXPOSED.
LOG TOE PROTECTION
NTS
NOTE:
1. ACCEPTABLE SPECIES INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW (5ALIX NIGRA), SILKY WILLOW
(5ALIX 5EKICEA) AND 51LKY DOGWOOD (CORNUS AMMOMUM).
2. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED IN AN AREA EXTENDING 3 FEET OUT FROM TOP
OF BANK TO JUST BELOW BANKFULL.
3. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE SPACED 3 FEET APART, ALTERNATE SPACING.
BANKFULL ELEVATION
BACKFILL AREA BETWEEN BANK AND COIR FIBER ROLL
\\\/\/\/\\/ \\// /
\� \\� %
(APPLY PERMANENT SEED MIX � COIR MATING)
LIVE STAKE
\\� /\/\\j
/\i\\� \\/\�\\% �\
\i\\�\i\\�\�\
EXISTING BANK
NT5
1 /4 TO 1 /3 OF LOG
\\�\�\\� o DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
PLANTED COIR FIBER
ROLL
\i
PRIOR TO FINAL
GRADING
FLOW
�—
O
\�\\%\�\i\\%\\%\�\i\\%\\i �\LEVEL
NORMAL WATER PLANTED COIR FIBER
ROLL WOOD
PROPOSED BED
STAKES
IL
0-
0.5' TO 1 .2 5'
DENSE COIR MATTING
DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
m
m
(KOLANKA BioD-Mat®90 OR
EQUIVALENT)
USING THE KBC PLANTING BAR
O
2.0' TO 3.0'
Q
MINIMUM OF 112 TO 2/3 OF
WOOD STAKEWOOD
~
LOG DIAMETER BEDDED
KEY IN UPSTREAM
PLAN VIEW
2
STAKES BELOW CHANNEL INVERT
END OF ROLL APPROX
12" LOG DIAMETER (TYP.)
NOTES: 2-4 FT INTO BANK
SECTION VIEW
I . DESIGNER TO MARK LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
—
NOTES:
SILLS IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
—
I . INSTALL STAKES ON 3' CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL. TOP OF STAKE SHOULD
2. INSTALL STAKES ON 3' CENTERS ON EACH 51DE OF ROLL.
NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL.
2. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (DEPTH APPROX 112 TO 2/3 OF LOG DIAM) FOR
TOP OF STAKE SHOULD NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL.
PLACEMENT OF ROLL.
3. COIR LOGS SHALL BE 10 FT LONG AND HAVE A DIAMETER OF 12 IN.
3. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (APPROX tin DEEP) FOR
PLACEMENT OF ROLL.
1. INSERT 2. REMOVE 3. INSERT
PLANTING BAR A5 PLANTING BAR PLANTING BAR 2
SHOWN AND PULL AND PLACE INCHES TOWARD
HANDLE TOWARD SEEDING AT PLANTER FROM
LO
PLANTER. CORRECT DEPTH. SEEDING.
COIR LOG (TOE PROTECTION)
Q
NTS
VEGETATED SILL DEFLECTOR
NT5
Z
NEW CHANNEL TO BE
CONSTRUCTED 0
I I
1 1 1 1 1 1
O
(n
LLJ
U)
QLU
J
W
4. PULL . FU5h G. LEAVE
LE OF HANDLE
BAR TOWARD COMPACTION
Q
MIN. 25'
PLANTER, FIRMING FORWARD HOLE OPEN.
501L AT BOTTOM. FFIIRMIINP SOIL WATER
OLD CHANNEL TO BE �C CHANNEL PLUG
MAX. 75
DIVERTED OR
ABANDONED
TOP OF BANK
Q
PLAN VIEW
EXISTING ��\� ��\\ \\\�
\� i i\! \
PLANTING NOTE5: ,�I I NOTES:
PLANTING BAG BARE ROOTS SHALL BE PLANTED 6
z
CHANNEL /\\
FILL TO TOP QF , ��\\��\\�\ j\� \\�\�\\i \\� %\i\/ \\� /\\\�\�\
N BANK BOTTOM\\\i\\i
FT. TO 0 FT. ON CENTER,
DURING PLANTING, SEEDLINGS SHALL RANDOM SPACING, AVERAGING 8
BE KEPT IN A MOIST CAN VAS BAG OR
w
/\/ �\
SIMILAR CONTAINER TO PREVENT THE FT. ON CENTER, APPROXIMATELY
z \/ r\, \\� i\�\\/ \�\i\\\�\�\\
ROOT SYSTEMS FROM DRYING. 680 PLANTS PER ACRE.
UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
COMPACTED BACKFILL
KBC PLANTING BAR
BAR 5HALL HAVE A
1 .5' MINIMUM BANKFULL ELEVATION
(12" TO 18" LIFTS)
WITPLANH HA TRIANGULAR CR055 SECTIONING
,
AND SHALL BE 12 INCHES LONG, 4
FILL AT LEA�5
INCHES WIDE AND I INCH THICK AT
CENTER.
30'
70% Of' CHANNE
NEW CHANNEL BANK SHALL
ROOT PRUNING
FINISHED GRADE BE TREATED AS SPECIFIED
NOTES:
ALL SEEDLINGS SHALL BE ROOT
COMPACTED BACKFILL I IN PLANS
1. FILL EXISTING CHANNEL TO BANKFULL ELEVATION WHEN POSSIBLE.
PRUNED, IF NECESSARY, 50 THAT NO
ROOTS EXTEND MORE THAN 10
(12" LIFTS) I
/ 2. CHANNEL MUST BE FILLED IN 12" TO 18" LIFT5,
INCHES BELOW THE ROOT COLLAR.
Q
3. IF CHANNEL CANNOT BE COMPLETELY FILLED TO TOP OF BANK, FILL TO TOP OF
BANK FOR 25OUT OF EVERY 100' SEGMENT.
z�
Ld_
U)
PROPOSED
0
J
CHANNEL INVERT
CHANNEL BACKEILL
BARE ROOT PLANTING
IMPERVIOUS SELECT MATERIAL
(PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER) TYPICAL SECTION
LOG TOE OR COIR LO
NTs
NT5
CHANNEL PLUG
NTS
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q00
C)
0
�
N
O
co
J
Z
O
Z)
Z
O
0Y
z
O
O
IL
0-
m
m
O
Q
Z
w
0
w
LO
Q
Q
zo
Z
O
(n
LLJ
U)
QLU
J
W
Q
Lu
ED
Q
z
w
J
0
cn
10�
z
U
�
Q
=
Ld_
U)
0
J
C_
C
z
F_
w
F_
0
z
O
z
U
O
>
J
Q
0_
z
F—
F--
� V
�0N/
L.f_
C_'3
<
0
0-
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D2

8
0)
45
ro
U)
H
m
LU
Q
W
J
H
LU
0
H�
W
0
i
0
L0
In
0
c�
Q
U
c
M
ro
ro
U)
m
U
z
U
2
C7
LU
cr
ci?
LU
Q
z
LU
J
L
_
3' MAXIMUM STREAM CHANNEL
BANK HEIGHT
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
I
I
110
SEAL
jI JAII� ISI / + 1411 III SURFACE FLOW
li 1I '�'� DIVERSION
O o
—O p Qo
SCALE: AS SHOWN
o
°� 0 ' O °°0
00®/ & o ° oo o o
° °
W
ROOT WAD
— —
oa°�p° o oo0°°° °
°,°° °o °
.. �—
°O° ° ° °�
o ° o ° ° o _
BOULDER
(AS DIRECTED BY
ENGINEER)
0
INSTALL COIR MATTING PER DETAIL
�
N
SEE DETAIL D 1
O
co
EXCAVATE / GRADE UPPER BANK
STONE APPROACH
/ SECTION: 2:1 MIN., 5:1
/ ROOT WAD
BOULDER
MAX. SLOPE ON ROAD
(AS DIRECTED BY
INSTALL LIVE STAKES (SEE PLANTING
PLAN)
CLASS A STONE OVER
FILTER FABRIC
FOOTER LOG
O
EXISTING CHANNEL BANK
Z)
\X'/�//i
SURFACE FLOW
DIVERSION
PLAN VIEW -TRENCHING METHODPLAN
VIEW -DRIVE POINT METHOD
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE VARIES
MIN SLOPE 2.5H: I V \/\\ �. \\ \\ (DESIGNER TO MARK IN FIELD
EXISTING STREAMBANK
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION)
I I I W I , „,
O
IF ROOT WAD DOES NOT COVER
ENTIRE BANK $ CONSTRUCTION
IS BETWEEN MID OCTOBER TO
/Xi/�i/�i
\\\\\/
z
j\//
O
/
MID MARCH, PROTECT BANK
SOD MATS WITH BRUSH LAYER.
DRIVE POINT METHOD:
SHARPEN THE END OF THE LOG WITH A CHAINSAW BEFORE "DRIVING" IT INTO
IL
CLASS A STONE — — — — — —
TOP OF BANK
THE BANK. ORIENT ROOT WADS UPSTREAM SO THAT THE STREAM FLOW
FLOOD PLAIN
MEETS THE ROOT WAD AT A 90 -DEGREE ANGLE, DEFLECTING THE WATER
O
FILTER FABRIC
Q
AWAY FROM THE BANK. A TRANSPLANT OR BOULDER SHOULD BE PLACED
EXISTING
z
BANKFULL STAGE
BOULDER
ON THE DOWNSTREAM SIDE OF THE ROOT WAD IF A BACK EDDY IS FORMED
CHANNEL BED
NOTES:
BY THE ROOT WAD. THE BOULDER SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 3'X 3'X 2'.
NOTES: I O' TO 15'
1 . CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
(AS DIRECTED III—III—I I
—III— —
0
I . TREES NOT INDICATED TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE BENCH
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ON-SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS.
BASEFLOW
BY ENGINEER) = = = =
TRENCHING METHOD:
PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN
3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF STREAMBANKS. DO NOT EXCAVATE
IF THE ROOT WAD CANNOT BE DRIVEN INTO THE BANK OR THE BANK NEEDS
ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS.
w
CHANNEL BOTTOM. COMPLETE ONE SIDE BEFORE STARTING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
LO
- 1=1 1=1 1=1
TO BE RECONSTRUCTED, THE TRENCHING METHOD SHOULD BE USED. THIS
2. SEED AND MULCH ALL BANKS PRIOR TO INSTALLING
Q
4. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.
Z
METHOD REQUIRES THAT A TRENCH BE EXCAVATED FOR THE LOG PORTION
COIR MATTING.
5. GRADE SLOPES TO A MINIMUM OF 2:1 SLOPE, MAXIMUM
LLJ
U)
Q
24" MIN. FOOTER LOG > 12" DIAMETER
OF THE ROOT WAD. IN THIS CASE, A FOOTER LOG SHOULD BE INSTALLED
G. MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN THE CONSTRUCTION ROAD DOES NOT
ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL.
DIAMETER BOULDER MINIMUM OF 1 /2 OF DIAMETER
UNDERNEATH THE ROOT WAD IN A TRENCH EXCAVATED PARALLEL TO THE
BANK AND WELL BELOW THE STKEAMBED. ONE-THIRD OF THE ROOT WAD
7. A STABILIZED PAD OF NATURAL CLASS A STONE, G TO 9 INCHES THICK, LINED WITH
INSTALLED BELOW STREAM BED
SHOULD REMAIN BELOW NORMAL BASE FLOW CONDITIONS.
z
FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE USED OVER THE BERM AND ACCESS SLOPES.
w
8. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
10- 15 FEET LONG
0
9. WIDTH OF THE CROSSING SHALL BE SUFFICIENT (8' MIN.) TO ACCOMMODATE THE
C/)
> I O DIAMETER
LARGEST VEHICLE CROSSING THE CHANNEL.
CRASS SECTION VIEW
Z
Q
10, CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE ACCORDING TO
O
EQUIPMENT UTILIZED.
1 1. TEMPORARY CROSSINGS ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE.
Q
TYPICAL BANK GRADING
NTs
U)
CJ
R W
D
c
FORD CROSSING
Q
Q
NTs
w
N T5
TOE OF BANK
NOTES:
I . LOG VANES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF ONE OR MORE LOGS HELD IN PLACE BY EITHER BALLAST BOULDERS, DUCKBILL
U)
INSTALL COIR MATTING PER DETAIL
ANCHORS, OR REBAR. LOGS SHALL BE OF A LENGTH AND DIAMETER SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER AND BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT
U
SEE DWG D I
O
HARDWOOD, RECENTLY HARVESTED. THE LENGTH SHALL BE SUCH THAT THE LOG IS BURIED INTO THE SOIL OF THE STREAM
J
Q
0_
NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE �
O
BANK (ON ONE END) AND STREAM BED (ON THE OTHER END) A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 4.0'. FLAT -SIDED BALLAST BOULDERS
z
STREAM BANK
FABRIC (NCDOT TYPE II) �v
l'2 wlDTh
SHALL BE OF SIZE 2' X 2' X I .5' OR AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
2 THE VANE 5hALL INTERCEPT THE ELEVATION RHEIGHT
ES BLISHED AT THErLBETWEEN /DE. AN
ION CONTROL POINT MAY BEA EFT OR RIGHTSTREAMBANK/VANE INTERCEPTPO NT. THE VANE
F --(D
COMPACTED SOIL
LIVE STAKES TOP
OF BANK
INTERCEPT LOCATION MAY BE OTHERWISE DESCRIBED BY ITS RELATIONSHIP TO BANKFULL STAGE OR BY THE LENGTH AND SLOPE
OF THE VANE ARM. BANKFULL IS NOT NECESSARILY THE TOP OF THE STREAM BANK SLOPE.
LIVE CUTTINGS
20° TO 30°
BALLAST BOULDER
a OR DUCK BILL ANCHORS
3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE USED TO SEAL THE GAPS BETWEEN THE LOGS AND UNDER THE COARSE BACKFILL MATERIAL OF THE
VANE. THERE SHALL BE NO FILTER FABRIC VISIBLE IN THE FINISHED WORK; EDGES SHALL BE FOLDED TUCKED, OR TRIMMED AS
\ I SMALL BRANCHES \\
— — — — — — AND BRUSH
NOTES:
-
NEEDED.0
-
1/4 MAX POOL DEPTH = �
I . OVER EXCAVATE THE OUTSIDE BEND OF THE CHANNEL. PLACE
LARGER BRANCHES AND LOGS IN A CRISS-CROSS PATTERN.
I
4. LOG VANES SHALL BE BUILT TYPICALLY AS FOLLOWS:
A. OVER -EXCAVATE STREAM BED TO A DEPTH EQUAL TO THE TOTAL THICKNESS OF THE HEADER (AND FOOTER IF SPECIFIED)
/ / / /
1/4 MAX POOL DEPTH ' NN NNI \� N �\
LOCK IN PLACE WITH FILL COVERING G IN TO 18 IN OF THE
LARGER BRANCHES/SMALL LOGS.
I
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
\\ \\
2. PLACE SMALLER BRANCHES AND BRUSH OVER THE LARGER
COARSE AGGREGATE
B. PLACE FOOTER LOG OF THE VANE ARM IF SPECIFIED. THE SLOPE OF THE VANE ARM IS MEASURED ALONG THE VANE ARM
DESIGNED:
— — — — T N/
BRANCHES/SMALL LOGS (HARDWOOD SPECIES ONLY) AND
BACKFILL (I " TO 5") �J�1
BANKFULL
WHICH IS INSTALLED AT AN ANGLE TO THE STREAM BANK AND PROF ILE.
C. INSTALL HEADER LOG OF THE VANE ARM ON TOP OF AND SLIGHTLY FORWARD OR BACK FROM THE FOOTER LOG.
�N\
\ NN , \ \ �NN \ � �\ \ \ \ \ \ �
�//�/i/�
COMPACT LIGHTLY TOGETHER. BACKFILL AND COMPACT TO
LOCK IN PLACE.
q
D. NAIL FILTER FABRIC TO THE HEADER LOG USING A GALVANIZED NAIL WITH A PLASTIC CAP. THE SIZE AND GAGE OF NAIL�
DPI
3. ACCEPTABLE LIVE CUTTINGS SPECIES A INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW
a
AND NAIL SPACING SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
D3
�/ \��
(SALIX NIGRA) AND SILKY WILLOW (SALIX SERICEA). WILLOW
E. PLACE BALLAST BOULDERS OR DUCKBILL ANCHOR ON THE VANE.
SMALL LOGS AND/OR
CUTTINGS SHOULD BE RINSED AT CUTTING POINT TO ALLOW
F. PLACE COARSE BACKFILL BEHIND LOGS ENSURING THAT ANY VOIDS BETWEEN THE LOGS ARE FILLED.
LARGE BRANCHES WITH A SECTION A -A
MIN DIAMETER OF 4".
BETTER ROOTING..
LOG VANE
G. BACKFILL REMAINDER OF VANE WITH PREVIOUSLY EXCAVATED MATERIAL.
4INSTALL EROSION CONTROL (COIR) MATTING OVER COMPACTED
SOIL PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
5. IF ANY EROSION CONTROL MATTING IS SPECIFIED FOR USE IN THE VICINITY OF THE STREAM BANK/VANE INTERCEPT POINT THE
5. INSTALL I TO 3 ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ABOVE THE LIVE
O
MATTING EDGES SHALL BE NEATLY SECURED AROUND THE LOGS.
CUTTINGS LAYER PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
LEFT OR RIGHT VANE
POOL
I ARM BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
I
"v
I
A
FVp�N
BANKFULL
BALLAST BOULDER
COIR MATTING
OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS LEFT OR RIGHT VANE ARM BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
PLAN VIEW
FLOW >
0
3% TO 707- — —t
BAN KFULL
/\ —
z —
\/\\j
CHANNEL O
STREAM BANK
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
NN \\� ti ` FL pw
POOL
OF BANK
FOOTER LOG�\ �����
HEADER LOG
HEADER LOG
TOE OF BANK FOOTER LOG
MBED
5TREAPOOL
N
PROFILE VIEW
A
CHANNEL BOTTOM
OF BANK
\/\\ �
NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE /\
FABRIC (NCDOT TYPE II) /\\
\\/X/\\\\/ /
�
O'TO/2WIDTH �V��V�/'
LOG VANE
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
BRUSH TOE
NT5
NTs
SECTION A -A
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q00
C)
0
�
N
O
co
Lo
z
O
Z)
z
O
z
O
O
IL
0-
m
m
O
Q
z
w
'
0
w
LO
Q
Q
zo
Z
O
U)LU
LLJ
U)
Q
J
W
>
J
Q
z
w
J
0
C/)
Z
Q
O
U
Q
U)
CJ
O
c
Q
Q
>
w
z
U)
0
Z
U
O
>
J
Q
0_
z
F-
F --(D
<
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D3

MINIML
DIAMETE
I
BANKFULL LIMITS OF
PROPOSED CHANNEL
PLAN VIEW
NOTES:
O
REBAR (1/2" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH EXISTING DITCH LOG 51 LL EXISTING GRADE
TYPICAL) SHOULD BE PLACED PTO 3' FROM END OF BANK EXISTING DITCH (SEE DETAIL)
LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT G' LOG STRUCTURE TOP OF BANK
OFFSETS. LA5T REBAR SHOULD BE PLACED I' TO 3' PROPOSED CONSERVATION D (SEE DETAIL) _ PROPOSED GRADE
FROM END OF LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE EASEMENT LIMITS
USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR, 2 PER LOG.
PROP05ED
FLOODPLAIN
5 U RFACE
DOWN
VALLEY
5'
5/8II REBAR
SECTIONAL VIEW A - A'
FLOODPLAIN SILL
NTS
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO G")
%-1-0,,-
A
B
/ L
BANKFULL � POINT REFERENCED IN
STRUCTURE TABLE
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO G")
FOOTER LOG
HEADER LOG
H H
O
C LOG BURIED IN
B' BANK MIN 5FT
POINT REFERENCED IN
STRUCTURE TABLE
A'
PLAN VIEW
MIN 5FT
HIG
C
LOG BURIED IN
BANK
MIN 5FT
MIN 5FT
MIN. 25' OF
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
COVER
��D�D 4% TO G%
N
\\
��
HIGH
Ow
www.res.us
0
V/DSA%
SCALE: AS SHOWN
/\//
PROFILE B -B'
HEADER LOG
INVERT ELEVATION
4' TO 8'
MIN 5.0'
(((lo
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO G") '
FOOTER
LOG
OVERLAP OF
DOWNSTREAM LOG
— NON -WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
(NCDOT TYPE II) PROFILE A -A'
PROPOSED
LIMITS
O OF GRADING
o B
N
J
Q
U
LU
IV
Q
>
HEADER LOG
INVERT ELEVATION
> f�
VARIES (TYPICALLY 20' TO 40')
PLAN VIEW
MAX ALLOWABLE
DROP OF 0.5 FT
MAX DEPTH A OF
LOG DIAMETER
• iz
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO G")
IN 3.V-
nn11\1 SFT n, nI
DOUBLE LOG DROP
NTS
PROFILE C -C'
OVERLAP OF
UPSTREAM LOG
NOTES:
I . LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY
HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 12", MIN LENGTH = 18'
3. NAIL FILTER FABRIC U51NG 3" I OD GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 1.5'
ALONG THE LOG
FILL DITCH SUCH THAT
THE DOWNSTREAM
ELEVATION TIES INTO
EXISTING GRADE OF THE
B FLOODPLAIN
GRADE AREA SUCH THAT
MAX SLOPE BELOW LOG
STRUCTURE 15 1 %
0.5%SLOPE TIE-IN TO
(MAX) — EXISTING
FLOODPLAIN
EXI5TI NG
DITCH INVERT ELEVATION
CONSTRUCT FLOW FILL DITCH AND
POOL INSTALL COIR
A A MATTING
EXISTING
GROUND
CUT
3:1 MAX SLOPE \ / 3: 1 MAX
\ SLOPE
INSTALL COIR MATTING PER �— — —
MANUFACTURER'S FILL DITCH
INSTRUCTIONS
c,F('T1nN1 R_R
DIEEUSE FLOW STRUCTURE
NTS
NOTES:
1. NO FLOODPLAIN GRADING IS ALLOWED WITHIN 10 FT OF
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL TOP OF BANK.
2. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEA5T 10'-20' LONG AND AT LEAST 8
INCHES IN DIAMETER, AND HARDWOOD.
FLOW
PROPOSED REBAR OK DUCKBILL
CHANNEL BOTTOM STREAM BED ANCHOR
OFBANK COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
COARSE BACKFILL FLOW MIN. 5.0'
NON -WOVEN POOL APPROX.
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC A 0.75' TO .5' DEEP
(NCDOT TYPE I)a( —
COARSE AGGREGATE \� �Dn� / ///\
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
\\
vv � o o MNI. 4.0' �X���������
ROOTWAD OR
BRUSHTOE
NON -WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TACK FABRIC
(NCDOT TYPE II) TO LOG
CC-
!T�a SECTION A -A
5.0'
MIN
��io nnn-r-rini�
CHANNEL TOP A POOL
OF BANK
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW (OPT 1 )
FLOW
CHANNEL BOTTOM
OF BANK
COARSE BACKFILL
FILTER FABRIC A
ROOTWAD OR
BRU5HTOE
5.0'
MIN
CHANNEL TOP A POOL
OF BANK
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW (OPT 2)
r
HEADER LO
FOOTER LO
LOG SILL
NTS
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
OVERLAP OF
DOWNSTREAM LOG
SECTION B -B (OPT 1)
PROPOSED STREAM BANK
I% TO 3%
SECTION B -B (OPT 2)
_R, 4' MIN. LENGTH) OR
DUCKBILL ANCHORS INSTALLED PER
MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS (TYP.)
REBAR (5/8" MIN. DIAMETER, 4' MIN. LENGTH) OK
DUCKBILL ANCHORS INSTALLED PER
MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS (TYP.)
NOTES:
I . LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY
HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 12", MIN LENGTH = 18'
NAIL FILTER FABRIC U51NG 3" 1 OD GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 1 .5'
ALONG THE LOG
3. DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF REBAR.
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q
00
D
0
F-
0 O
co
J
z
O
Z)
z
O
z
O
O
IL
z
o
�
LU
Q
Q
cl)
D
z
O
(n
U)
QUj
J
W
Q
>
W
J
Lu
2i
Ir
Cc
0-
Q
wz
J
0
0�
z
Q
U
�
Q
Q�
0
O
J
�
Q
Q
>
w
LIJ
0
Z
(n
0
Z
U
O
>
J
Q
c
z
F-
O
LU
O
Q
CcD
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D4

LINE POST
TOE OF BANK
I G' MAX. _ , BANKFULL
BARBED OR -
ELECTRIC
WIRE
4" TO G"
WOVEN WIRE -
GROUND LINE -
LINE POST
z
7
U
WOVEN WIRE WITH ONE BARB DETAIL
LINE POST
WOVEN WIRE:
ASTM CLA55 3 GALVANIZED.
TOP AND BOTTOM WIRES MIN. 12 GAUGE.
INTERMEDIATE AND STAY WIRES MIN.
12 112 GAUGE.
NOTES:
I . LINE POSTS (WOODEN): MIN. 4 IN. DIAM. OR 4 IN, SQUARE.
2. LINE POSTS (STEEL): STUDDED OR PUNCHED T, U, OR Y SHAPED, WITH ANCHOR PLATES.
3. MIN. WEIGHT 1.3 LBS./FT. (EXCLUDING ANCHOR PLATE). POSTS SHALL BE DRIVEN A MINIMUM
OF 16' DEEP AND MUST BE AT LEAST 5.5 FT IN LENGTH
4. SPECIES AND 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 15 PRESERVATIVE PRESSURE TREATED (0.40 LBS./CUBIC FOOT
CCA, OR EQUIVALENT NON -CCA TREATMENT). DO NOT U5E RED PINE.
CLA55 B RIP RAF
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED
PERPENDICULAR
WOVEN WIRE FENCE (NKCS DETAIL 3(52A)
NTS
15ER MAT INSTALLED
�ALLEL
;ARRIAGE BOLT
TIMBER MAT
(-IYF)
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
FLOW
FOOTER ROCK
FILTER F
20° TO 30'
B
MIN
5.0'
FLOW
NEL /3 CHANNEL /3 CH
1 WIDTH WI
BANKFULL
PLAN VIEW
STREAM BANK
5.
CRO55 VANE INVERT
CONTROL POINT
HEADER AND FOOTER
BOULDERS
FILTER FABRIC
LEFT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
LEFT OR RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
STREAM BANK
BANKFULL
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
\\/\ HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
TOE OF BANK
STREAM BED
IN POOL
FILTER FABRIC
VANE ARM BA
INTERCEPT CONTR
PO
VARIES
O' TO/3 WIDTH
SECTION A -A'
/3 CHANNEL /3 CHANNEL /3 CHANNEL
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
NOTES:
vK
VANE ARP
PLAN VIEW
INTERCEP
NT
POINT
FILTER0--
FABRIC
www.res.us
I .
TIMBER MATS SHALL BE USED FOR TEMPORARY
HEADER BOULDER
POOL
/\� \
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS TO TRAVERSE WET AND/OR MUDDY
FOOTER BOULDER
W
ARES ADJACENT TO THE STREAM AND TO CROSS THE
STREAM AND OTHER CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS.
CARRIAGE BOLT
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED
(TYP)
PERPENDICULAR
2.
THE STREAM CROSSING SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN FLOW 15
TIMBER MAT
LOW. THERE SHALL BE MINIMAL TO NO DISTURBANCE OF THE
CLASS B RIP RAPz
TOP OF BANK INSTALLED PARALLEL
T
N
CHANNEL BED AND BANKS AS A RESULT OF INSTALLING THE
O
APPROACHES OR CROSSING.
0
0 0 0
J
Lo
3.
THE LENGTH OF TIMBER MAT REQUIRED TO CR055 THE
z
O_
H
STREAM OR CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS SHALL BE SUCH
U
THAT THE TIMBER MAT EXTENDS PAST THE TOP OF BANK ON
EACH 51DE OF THE CROSSING A SUFFICIENT DISTANCE TO
EACH
X,
/\//\//\//\//\//\//\/�\//�\//�\//�//
\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\/
SUPPORT THE MAXIMUM EQUIPMENT 51ZE USING THE
CROSSING.
\/�\\///
4.
STREAM CROSSINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBER
FILTER FABRIC
MAT LENGTHS ORIENTED PERPENDICULAR TO THE TOPS OF
TOE OF BANK
THE STREAM BANKS. TIMBER MAT STREAM APPROACHES
0
(TYP)
APPROXIMATE BASE FLOW
SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBER MAT LENGTHS
WATER SURFACE
ORIENTED PARALLEL TO THE TOPS OF THE STREAM BANKS.
5.
STREAM CROSSING APPROACHES FROM DRY AREAS SHALL
z
0
BE CONSTRUCTED U51NG CLA55 B RIP RAP PLACED OVER
O
SECTION VIEW
FILTER FABRIC.
0-
G.
ALL TIMBER MATS, FILTER FABRIC, AND RIP RAP SHALL BE
m
m
COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE WHEN THE CROSSING
O
15 REMOVED.
TIMBER MAT TEMPORARY CROSSING
NTs
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
FLOW
FOOTER ROCK
FILTER F
20° TO 30'
B
MIN
5.0'
FLOW
NEL /3 CHANNEL /3 CH
1 WIDTH WI
BANKFULL
PLAN VIEW
STREAM BANK
5.
CRO55 VANE INVERT
CONTROL POINT
HEADER AND FOOTER
BOULDERS
FILTER FABRIC
LEFT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
LEFT OR RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
STREAM BANK
BANKFULL
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
\\/\ HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
TOE OF BANK
STREAM BED
IN POOL
FILTER FABRIC
VANE ARM BA
INTERCEPT CONTR
PO
VARIES
O' TO/3 WIDTH
SECTION A -A'
VARI E5
/3 CHANNEL /3 CHANNEL /3 CHANNEL
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
WIDTH WIDTH WIDTH
vK
VANE ARP
DL
INTERCEP
NT
POINT
FILTER0--
FABRIC
www.res.us
_ — Y
7;
Y FLOW
VARI E5
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
O' TO 0.8'
Main: 919.829.9909
3%TO 5%
FILTER0--
FABRIC
www.res.us
_ — Y
7;
Y FLOW
HEADER BOULDER
POOL
/\� \
FOOTER BOULDER
W
S ECT I O N S -B'
HEADER ROCK
PROFILE VIEW
ROCK CROSS VANE
NTS
i-�nocG n��oG�nrG
CULVERT O.G' UNLESS
NOTED OTHERWISE BY
ENGINEER
SECTION VIEW
PROPOSED CULVERT CROSSING
NTs
a
1 BANK
CONTROL
NOTES:
I . 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'.
G. WHEN REQUIRED, CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE PIPE MATERIAL AND COVER MEET H-20 LOADING
REQUIREMENTS.
INSTALL CLAY PLUG 2
FEET BELOW CULVERT
INVERT
COARSE AGGREGATE
O0UOUOv0v0v v
EARTH FILL COVERED OO C O_ 0.,x.0 O O /-\ O O
BY LARGE ANGULAR ' 0 C
ROCK >0C
> C
>0<
�0�
0'
0_
0
DOUOIli 0`J0 0`0"O"0
0n0n0n0C)0 n
I O' MIN.
TOP OF BANK
FLOWLOG OR ROCK SILL SET TOP
OF LOG I FOOT ABOVE
ZMIN 3'MIN 3'
CULVERT INVERT
MIN 3'
v v v vO O O 0"0 t
O O O O O O O O O O
0 C
C
� I OC
00
00
00
' 00
0 C
O OO O O O O O 0,00 C
OnO� n n _ O OnOr Oo 0r OnnOc
10' MIN.
STREAM CHANNEL / I
LOG OR ROCK SILL;
SET TOP A MINIMUM OF
O.G' ABOVE CULVERT
PLAN VIEW INVERT
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q00
o
�
N
O
J
Lo
z
O_
H
U
Z)
z
0
z
0
O
IL
0-
m
m
O
Q
z
w
0
w
LO
Q
Q
zo
Z
O
(n
LLJ
U)Lu
Lu
J
LU
Q
>
W
J
W
Q
wz
J
0
cn
101�
z
Q
O
U
Q
=
U)
O
J
Q
Q
>
w
z
U)
0
Z
U
O
2i
>
J
LuQ
�_
Z
F-
LU
z
0
0-
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D5

8
0)
45
U)
m
0
LJ
Q
J
H
W
0
�I
S
I
O
O
O
0
Q
U
c
ro
ro
ro
U)
N
J
U
z
U
2
C7
LU
rr
Iii
Q
z
LJ
J
L
Presl
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
Iii
Q
00
C)
O
�
N
O
co
J
z
O
U
Z)
z
O
z
O
O
IL
0-
it
m
O
Q
z
L1J
0
o
L1J
Q
Q
zo
z
OU)
—QLI)
LLJ
Lu
J
W
Q
>
W
J
W
7Q
z
w
�
J
0
cn
�
Z
Q
O
U
�
Q
=
�
U)
O
J
�
Q
W
F—
0
NW
I1_
z
/1
0
Z
U
O
>
J
Q2 LU
�_
z
F-
F--
(D
U)
O
Q
Ir
cr
0-
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D6

FLOW
TOE OF BANK, TYPICAL STREAM BANKS,
TYPICAL
COARSE AGGREGAT
BACKFILL (2" TO G
PLAN VIEW
TOE OF BANK FLOW �t
BAN KFULL
Ys Ct ANNEL Y3 CHANNEL Ys CHA NEL
IDTH WIDTH WID11H
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
20° TO 30'
RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT q
CONTROL POINT
B - -
MIN
5.0'
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
FLOW
FILTER FABRIC
FOOTER ROCKS
BANKFULL
O' TO 0.8'
33% TO 50/b
�Oil
v
GjPOOL
PROFILE VIEW
POOL
PLAN VIEW
ANE INVERT
LL
!VERT LOG (SEE NOTE G 1 1 )
EK FABRIC
BANKFULL STREAM BANK
COARSE AGGREGATE
/ BACKFILL (2" TO G")
HEADER LOG TOP OF BANK
FOOTER LOG, IF
SPECIFIED
FLow
0
\ \ STREAM BED IN POOL
/\ B 5DT�P
FILTER FABRIC TIE-IN TO
\\/�j `, // `//�
O' TO Ys W
SECTION A -A'
]� STREAM BANK
PROTECTION
FMIN
5 INVERT LOG
VANE ARM LOG, TYPICAL COARSE AGGREGATE BANKFULL
BACKFILL (2" TO G")
'TIONAL BALLAST BOULDER
ADER LOG
=R LOG
LOG CROSS VANE
NTS
MIN
STREAM BANK
CROSS VANE INVERT
CONTROL POINT
STEP INVERT
CONTROL POINT
HEADER AND FOOTER
BOULDERS
FILTER FABRIC
B
LEFT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
LEFT OR RIGHT VANE ARM
BANK INTERCEPT
CONTROL POINT
FL
HEADER ROCKS
HEADER LOG �� I I `POOL ELEVATION
3% TO 8%
FLOW _ CONTROL POINT
�
_ 1
;/
FLOW
POOL
FILTER FABRIC
HEADER LOG
/\ FOOTER LOG \\
BANKFULL
DUCKBILL ANCHOR
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES:
I . LOGS SHALL BE OF A MINIMUM OF 12' IN LENGTH AND 10" IN DIAMETER AND RELATIVELY STRAIGHT
HARDWOOD, RECENTLY HARVESTED.
2. A SINGLE LOG MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF A HEADER/FOOTER LOG COMBINATION, PER DIRECTION OF DESIGNER.
3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE USED TO SEAL THE GAPS BETWEEN THE LOG(5) AND THE STREAM BED, UNDER THE
COARSE BACKFILL MATERIAL. THERE SHALL BE NO FILTER FABRIC V15115LE IN THE FINISHED WORK; EDGES SHALL
BE FOLDED, TUCKED, OR TRIMMED A5 NEEDED.
4. COARSE BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED TO A THICKNE55 EQUAL TO THE DEPTH OF THE HEADER (AND ANY
FOOTER) LOGS AND SHALL EXTEND OUT FROM THE VANE ARMS TO THE STREAM BANK AND UPSTREAM.
5. A5 AN OPTION, FLAT-51DED BOULDERS MAY BE PLACED A5 BALLAST ON TOP OF THE STREAM BANK 51DE OF
THE EMBEDDED VANE ARMS. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE U5ED IN LIEU OF BALLAST BOULDERS.
G. DUCKBILL ANCHORS WITH GALVANIZED CABLE ATTACHED MAY BE USED TO SECURE LOGS INTO THE STREAM
BED AND/OR BANKS. FLAT 51DED BOULDERS CAN BE USED IN LIEU OF THE LOG INVERT/DUCKBILL ANCHOR
SYSTEM.
STREAM BANK
COAR5E AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (I " TO 5")
HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
TOE OF BANK
FILT[
VANE ARM BA
INTERCEPT CONTR
PO
STREAM BED
IN POOL
SECTION A -A'
FILTER
FABRIC
HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
SECTION B -B'
ROCK A -VANE
NT5
SRM BANK
;EPT CONTROL
I Er Caw
CONTROL
FLOW
COAR5EBACKF
STEP ELEVATION
CONTROL POINT
BALLAST BOULDER
TIE-IN TO STREAM
BANK (TYP.)
CONTROL POINT
FOOTER LOG
ANGLED LOG STEP POOL
NT5
BANK
T BOULDER
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
presi
Ys CHANNEL Y3 CHANNEL Ys CHANNEL
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
WIDTH WIDTH WIDTH No
JK
VANE
DL
INTER(
NT
POINT
www.res.us
SEAL
FILTER
FABRIC
HEADER BOULDER
FOOTER BOULDER
SECTION B -B'
ROCK A -VANE
NT5
SRM BANK
;EPT CONTROL
I Er Caw
CONTROL
FLOW
COAR5EBACKF
STEP ELEVATION
CONTROL POINT
BALLAST BOULDER
TIE-IN TO STREAM
BANK (TYP.)
CONTROL POINT
FOOTER LOG
ANGLED LOG STEP POOL
NT5
BANK
T BOULDER
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
presi
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Main: 919.829.9909
Fax: [phone]
www.res.us
SEAL
SCALE: AS SHOWN
W
Q
00
C
0
F--
N
O
co
J
Z
O
I—
Z)
Z
0
z
O
O
IL
0
O
Z
LU
0
LU
�O
Q
Q
zo
Z
O
(n
LLJ
U)
QLLI
J
W
Q
>
W
J
ED
2i
Ir
C
Q
wz
�
J
0�/
cn
Ld_
z
LD
U
�
Q
=
O
J
�
Q
Q
>
w
w
F___
0
0�
z
0
0
z
U
O
2i
Lu
J
Lu
Q
�_
Z
F—
LL
(_'3
0
3
U)
O
Q
0
PROJECT NUMBER:
0405
PROJECT MANAGER:
CSC
DESIGNED:
AFM
DRAWN:
TRS
CHECKED:
DPI
SHEET NUMBER:
D7

Appendix B —
Data/Analysis/Supplementary Information

Existing Conditions Vegetation Survey
Site: �'7 "�
11-01
Date:
Plot: V��
Latitude: NOTES: �, �
i
Longitude: ~ G? �,� Basal=71.21mA2/ha
! Stems= 162 per acre
Azimuth: �' - ry �''r`x'r`�
Personnel:
.-,
/�
Form
SEEDLINGS -
Height Classes
"� 'J -M ►" +4tC
SAPLINGS - DBH TREE - DBH Est. % Cover
Species
p
T 5 H
0-9cm 10-socm
s1-10©cm
101-137cm
(198
0-1cm 1-2.5cm 2.5-5cm 5-12.7cm >10cm = Measure Size Record s%to 100% in
3.6-19.7in
(0 3.5in} { }
39.4in {39.5-54in}
increments of s; 15% for
(0-0.4in) (0.5-lin) (1-2in) (2-5in) (>Sin)
anything below
0
� £ ;
V
y�
W
Vi
Aster ceae Fa
ily
-�`��' �►�
M01 - r�
bid
Ranu culus ab
rtivus
Ranu culus re
ens
s
I>ur
Carda nine flex
osa
,.,rex sP
vle
*List unidentified
species
starting with UNK-1;
Take pies and/or
pressings for later ID
�0'50r' wi
V
i Phytolacca americana
a4joa
ho

Existing Conditions Vegetation Sure Date: - s
g y
Latitude:
NOTES:
Site: E j t19
Plot: .:
Longitude:
Basal-66.83m^2/ha
Personnel: � _�[ j
10 4i
T
Azimuth: '-
{'
Stems=
324 per acre
Form SEEDLINGS -Height Classes
SAPLINGS - DBH
TREE -DBH
Est. %Cover
Species T $
H 0-9cm 10-s0cm 51-lob- 101-137cm
{7,9.5'
0 lcm 1-2.5cm
2.5 Scm 5-12.7cm
>10cm =Measure Size
Record 5% to 100% fn
(0-3.5in) (3.6-19.7in) (34.6-54in)
39.4in
(0-0.4in) (0.S-lin)
(1-2in) (2-5in)
(>Sin)
increments of5;<5%for
i { P O tOr— J
IZ -f --
anything below
if. opaca
-.,�v*
t'd (2 ev)
)A�
Ca,is b 5a
VkQ� V
Ham melis giniana
�, 6 i, nt 4
RVAC '
�0`
/ f
of h
�
04,100 ��� ��
Alliu vineale
VOW+- 1I0s t
P ey"e l t e k !! )
Erythr nium a ericanu
77�i�
1
I'i,
1A,
Carda -nine flexosa
-
y
5
iV4t�� 3 f.
Podo hyllum eltatjum
Stellar a media
3
�' � ''i
Q„fVLV
Ranu culus re ens
'
,
l� �, ”` ` -
1s
Aster ceae fa ily
KefO �'
,Wd
CU)IV)
Veronica persi a
Ccv`: y u 1
Trifoli m reper s
'
Duch snea mc ica
*List unidentified s
A
ies startingwith UNK-1; Take pits and/or
pressings for later
ID
�
emone quinqueo�}a Lindera benzoin
v0 �/ �1
Unknown grass #1: red
fescue (festuca rubra)
� � �,(' �� fJl�

LExisting Conditions Vegetation Survey
Date:
��3��t �
Latitude:
Longitude:
NOTES:
Basal=64.8m^2/ha
Stems=405 per acre
G7 -'�
Plot. iP
Personnel:,-
M b
Azimuth:
For
SEEDLINGS -
Height Classes
SAPLINGS - DBH
TREE - DBH
Est. % Cover
Species
T S H
0-9cm 10-50cm
51-100cm 101-137crn
{19.s-
0-1cm 1-2.5cm 2.5-5cm
5-12.7cm
>10cm=Measure Size
Record 5% to 1D0%6 in
`
(0-3.5in} (3.6-19.7in)
(39.5-54in)
39An
) ) { 1
0-0.4in 0.5-lin 1 -tin!
2-5in )
(>5in)
increments of 5;<5%far
,,• �.�
anything below
fr •
a
r•
Ge. � a-Sfv vi;
Ivy
V1
f d
f /
L
IN
�
V �C�T
tii r ;�
1 �o
qtf-J.-
7 r a
V �' �'t°'�5
Eragr stis cury
la
�a-`''�✓
Astera eae family
*List unidentified
species
starting with UNK-1; Take pics and/or
pressings for later ID

Existing Conditions Vegetation survey
Date: (Of
Latitude:
NATE$'-5�1°i' "�7J1 E C/�'��� �`C�
.moi - S elc i vt
Basal—Om^2/ha
Site:
,"
Plot: L(
Longitude:
g
-
4 `vh►'►�"► c � ' �°`+���;�`- Stems=0 per acre
_ ` —
Personnel: .
�-
�, sy
Azimuth: ��
/,7 t a�
For
SEEDLINGS - Height Classes
SAPLINGS - DBH
TREE - DBH Est. % Cover
Species
T S H
0 9cm 10 5ocm 51-100cm 101-137cm
10"o
(19.8
0-1cm 1-2.5cm 2.5-5cm
5-12.7cm >10cm = Measure Size Record 5% to 100% fn
-c'
(0-3.5in) I3.6 19.7in) 39.4in (39.5-54in)
(0-0.4in) (0.5-lin) (1-2in)
increments of 5; <5% for
(2-5in) (>Sin)
Stellari media
anything below
��. ITrOL
ri o i m repe s
Planta o major
,
V'�
•
/ J o
►
P°fin J LIP -
� w
-i
culusre ens
L
ica persi a
G
*List unidentified species starting with UNK-1; Take pits and/or pressings for later ID

Smitheys Creek: Reference Reach
Existing Conditions Vegetation Survey
Dat 4 !, F t :.
ter;
Latitude:
NOTES: Canopy Basal Area= 51mA2/ha
i _
fifG I!� - Midstory Basal= 5.4mA2/ha
1,0" Canopy stems/acre= 324
Site:, �. a ITI,E
Plot:
Longitude:
t J
.�
Midstory stems/acre = 486
Personnel: �' �E
Azimuth: p 1
Form
SEEDLINGS - Height Classes
SAPLINGS - DBH
TREE - DBH
Est. % Cover
Species
T
S
H
0-9cm
10-50cm
51-
101-
0-1cm
1-2.5cmF5-,5
>10cm = Measure Size
Record 5% to 1001/ in
increments orx<5%for
100cm
137cm
anyihmg below
7
Elf
��
_
a
" f �
�fuca
tY
�
S"JC, �. ',f,
b%
ry :PH4 ova r
ac
4
�� �
✓
i'A
1) 0
A r 44,1,00
/
1'
J1/y
S i IGiSS�`"no�
V I
vie
L ,
Eueanj+Ma
Xj
*List unidentified species starting with UNK-1; Take pics and/or pressings for later ID

Smitheys Creek: Reference Reach
Existing Conditions Vegetation Survey
Date:
/ph2�
Latitude:
NOTES:
0—
Canopy Basal= 54m^2/ha
Basal= 3.9m^2/ha
`�+� V+� t'Y.-Canopy Stems/acre= 283
Midsto Stems/acre= 769
Site: .> , - ,; ......
1�.�= ter- ,��x� �
Plot:
Longitude: t.�....
g �� •. �J-Midstory
Personnel:
C
Azimuth: o
� -
Form
SEEDLINGS - Height Classes
SAPLINGS - DBH
TREE - DBH
Est. % Cover
Species
T
S
H
0-9cm
10-50cm
51-
100cm
101-
137cm
0-icm
1-2.5cm
2.5-5cm
5-10cm
>10cm = Measure Size
Record s%totoo%in
increments ors; 5% for
anything flow
AW sll
I,�,l( �
�
�
�
a
G •7 'r
� •C!r
� orf
� � -
/ y ..
� Y,,.
!1 V
jI
f
Pe 41�'T
�
S
*List unidentified species starting with UNK-1; Take pics and/or pressings for later ID

Gideon Morphological Parameters
Description D50
Reference Reach
JN3 US UT to Hauser Creek
JN4A
Feature
Riffle
I Pool
Riffle
I
Pool
Riffle
Drainage Area ac
7.9
921
120
29
26
37
Drainage Area mit
1.2
1.44
Meander Wavelength ft
0.05
105.0
0.06
NC Re ional Curve Discharge cfs z
Meander Width Ratio 1
116.1
5.9
9.3
8.3 - I -
11.2
NC Regional Curve Discharge cfs 3
Pool -to-Pool Spacing ft
118.6
10.2
12.0
12.2
Design/Calculated Discharge (cfs)'
113-122
Additional Reach Parameters
5-7
Dimension
Valley Length ft
202
BKF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
27.7
34.7
3.0
250
4.2
2.4
BKF Width ft
17.5
18.6
5.2
5.6
6.4
BKF Mean Depth ft
1.6
1.9
0.6
1.27
1.2
0.4
BKF Max Depth ft
2.5
3.4
0.8
2.1
0.8
Wetted Perimeter ft
19.3
21.1
5.6
11.0
6.7
Hydraulic Radius ft
1.4
1.7
0.5
E3
1.0
0.4
Width/Depth Ratio
11.1
10.6
8.9
7.5
17.1
Floodprone Width ft
72.5
-
>30
-
10.2
Entrenchment Ratio
4.3
-
>4
-
1.6
Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
1 1.0
1 1.2
1.0 1
3.6
Substrate
Description D50
Gravel/Cobble
Gravel
Gravel
D16 mm
12
1.1
2.7
D50 mm
54
3.7
7.9
D84 mm
120
25
26
I Pattern
Profile
Min
Max
Min
Max Min Max
Channel Beltwidth ft
35.0
85.0
15.0
35.0 - -
Radius of Curvature ft
13.0
54.0
6.0
17.0 - -
Radius of Curvature Ratio
0.9
3.7
1.2
3.3 - -
Meander Wavelength ft
67.0
105.0
23.0
43.0 - -
Meander Width Ratio 1
2.4
5.9
4.4
8.3 - I -
Profile
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
2 NC Piedmont Regional Curve equations source: Harman et al. (1999)
3 NC Piedmont Regional Curve equations source: Doll et al. (2002)
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Riffle Length (ft)
5.6
17.0
3.5
17.9
- -
Run Length ft
6.0
17.0
2.9
8.1
- -
Pool Length ft
4.0
16.0
3.0
10.0
- -
Pool -to-Pool Spacing ft
26.0
68.0
12.0
35.0
- -
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length ft
202
146
250
Channel Length ft
230
185
260
Sinuosity
1.14
1.27
1.04
Valley Slope ft/ft
1.4
1.69
0.042
Channel Slope(ft/ft),1.2
1.3
0.044
Rosaen Classificationi
E3
i
E4b
I 134a
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data
2 NC Piedmont Regional Curve equations source: Harman et al. (1999)
3 NC Piedmont Regional Curve equations source: Doll et al. (2002)

3.3
10.1
Existing
3.2
5.6
JN4B
JN5
JN6A
JN6113
JN6C
MC2A
Pool
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle I Pool
Riffle Pool
39
198
23
38
45
3178
0.06
0.31
0.04
0.06
0.07
4.96
11.5
1 37.9
1 7.7
11.3
1 12.8 1
286.8
12.5
39.9
8.5
12.3
13.8
285.8
0.3
0.5
5
12
11-13
180
3.3
10.1
1.8
3.2
5.6
5.0
30.6 31.3
6.3
11.7
5.8
5.4
5.9
6.2
17.4 18.1
0.5
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.9
0.8
1.8 1.7
0.8
1.3
0.5
0.7
1.8
1.6
2.9 3.0
6.8
12.9
6.1
6.0
7.4
7.5
19.4 19.8
0.5
0.8
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.7
1.6 1.6
12.2
13.6
19.1
9.2
6.3
7.7
10.0 10.4
10.2
14.5
10.0
8.6
19.6
---
50.0 ---
1.6
1.2
1.7
1.6
3.3
---
2.9 ---
2.6
2.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.0 1.0
Gravel
Gravel
Sand
Cobble
Sand/Gravel
Gravel/Cobble
2.7
14
0.062
1.4
-
14
7.9
28
2.4
27
-
56
26
63
7.4
120
-
120
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min Max
260
95
401
785
791
1109
443
115
499
782
922
1288
1.70
1.21
1.25
1.00
1.17
1.16
0.047
0.043
0.045
0.045
0.019
0.007
0.035
0.010
0.043
0.039
0.024
0.008
B4
F4
135a
B3
E4b
E3

Gideon
Mitigation Type
JN3 (US)
UT to Hauser
Reach
MC2-A
JN6-C
DA (ac)
DA (sqmi)
3178
4.97
45
0.07
Ex. Conds XSs
102
165
210
492
QBKF
180
11-13
FFQ Analysis
9
10
2.8
2
Q1.1
Q1.5
Q2
Q10
203
337
418
1046
19
29
39
78
Rural Piedmont Regional Curves
15
200
371
498
670
822
NC-QBKF orig
NC-QBKF rev
— BKFcSA
VA-QBKF
287
286
64.3
200
13
14
3.7
4
USGS RR Eqns (Region 1)
Q2(1996 EQNS)
436
23
Q2(2001 EQNS)
416
21
Q2
Q5
Q10
Q25
Q50
447
806
1070
1418
1729
28
56
77
107
134
Recommended Design Flows =
Qbnkfull
250
13
Average Q1.1 & Q1.5
75% Q1.5
270
252
24
22
Reference Reach Reference Reach
JN3 (US)
UT to Hauser
921
1.44
29
0.05
113-122
5-7
102
165
210
492
15
23
31
60
116
119
28.1
62
9
10
2.8
2
185
17
174
15
200
371
498
670
822
21
42
59
82
103
134
124
19
17

Channel Stability Assessment Summary Table
MC2-A MC2-B JN4-A JN4-B JN5 JN6-A JN6-B JN6-C
I Watershed characteristics
12
4
9
6
5
4
6
7
2 Flow habit
6
4
5
5
5
5
7
7
3 Channel pattern
7
1
2
6
3
2
3
7
4 Entrenchment/channel confinement
3
3
7
6
8
4
7
4
5 Bed material
3
6
5
6
4
4
4
7
6 Bar development
6
6
8
8
4
4
6
5
7 Obstructions/debris jams
4
5
5
5
4
3
5
4
8 Bank soil texture and coherence
4
4
10
10
4
3
4
5
9 Average bank angle
6
6
8
8
10
3
5
5
10 Bank vegetation/protection
10
8
6
9
7
2
4
8
11 Bank cutting
4
4
5
6
7
1
2
4
12 Mass wasting/bank failure
4
5
4
4
6
2
4
6
13 Upstream distance to bridge
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Score
70
56
74
79
67
37
57
69
Rating
Good
Good
Fair
Fair
Good
Good
Good
Good

Stream:
Reach:
Date: (3
Location:
Stability Indicator Excellent It -3 Good (4.6)
Observers: 63 `P
Project(1114.
Drainage Area:
Stream Type:Y..LP'r•
Fair1 9
1. Watershed and Good plain activity
Stable, forested. undisturbed
Occasional minor disturbances in the
( )
Frequent disturbances in the
root [re-IL1
Continual tlisturbarin the
Score
and characteristics
watershed
watershed, including cattle activity
watershed. including came activity,
watershed. Significant wale 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 construction
deforestation. Limited agricultural
cocalruction of buildings, roads, or
of buildings, roads, or other
I
activities
other infrastructure. Urbanization over
infrastructure- Highly urbanized or
significant portion of watershed
rapidly urbanizing watershed
2. Flow habil
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 (revised)
No evidence of clnmelization
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) with
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and/or erosion
few bends. Straight, unstable reach.
around bards. Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/ channel tenement
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain abandoned, but is
Moderate confinement in valley or
Knokpoinls visible downstream;
banks; no sign of undercutting
currently rebuilding; minimal channel
channel walls; some exposure of
exposed water lines or other
infrastructure; no levess
confinement; infrastructure rot
infrastructure; terraces exist; flood
infrastructure; channel-width.to-lop-of-
exposed; levees are low and set well
plain abandoned; levees are moderate
banks ration small; deeply wnfired; no
back from the river
in size and have minimal setback from
active food plain; levees are high and
the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed material
Assorted sized lightly packed,
Moderately packed with some
Loose assortment with no apparent
Very loose assortment with no Packing.
Fs = approximate portion of sand in the
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
overlapping. Very small amounts of
overlap. Small to medium amounts of
Large amounts of malarial < 4 mm, Fs
bed
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
material <4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
material < 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
> 70%
�i
L
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and wly> 12. bars are
ForS < 0.02 and w/y> 12, bars
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bar widths
Bar widths are generally greater than
maitre, 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
antl composed of coarse gravel to
cobbles, but minimal recent growth of
cobbles and/or may be sparsely
fire 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
T. Obstructions, including bedrock
Rare or not present
Dccasloral, causkg cross currents
Moderately frequent and occasionally
Frequent and often unstable, causing a
outcrops, armor layer, LWD jams,
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions, cause
cominal shift of sediment and Pow.
grade control, bridge bed paving,
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled, causing channel
revelments, dikes or varies, Hemp
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and/or widen
behind obstructions

Stability Indicator Indicator Excellent f1 3 1 Grind f4. e1 car. n _ ok
8. Bank sod texture and coherence
Clay and silly clay, cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay loam; minor
Sandy clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sarld to sand; noncohesive
amounts of noncohesive or
unconsolidated mixtures of glacial or
material; unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures; layers may
other materials; small layers and
glacial a other materials; layers of
1
exist, but are cohesive materials
lenses of noncohesive or
lenses that include roncohesive sands
1. t
unconsolidated mixtures
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle (whore
Bank slopes < 3HAV (18") for
Banc slopes up to 2111V (27') in
Bank slopes to 1 H:1V (45°) in
Bank slopes over 45° in noncohesive or
90° is a vertical bank)
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
unconsolidated materials or over 80° in
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
materials to 0.81 (50°) in clays on
materials to 0.8:1 (60°) in clays
clays common on one or bah banks
both sides
one or occasionally bah banks
common on one or both banks
10. Vegetative or engineered bank
Wide band of woody vegetation with
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small band of woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
protection
at least 90% density and cover.
with 70-90% plant density and cover.
50-70% plan density and cover. A
depending on age and health with less
Primarily hard wood, leafy. deciduous
A majority of hard wood, leafy,
majority of sok wood, piney, conderous
than 50% plant density and cover.
trees with mature, healthy, and
deciduous bees with maturing,
trees with young or old vegetation
Primarily soft wood, piney, coniferous
diverse vegetation located on the
diverse vegetation located on the
lacking in diversity located on or near
trees with very young. old and dying,
bank. Woody vegetation oriented
bank. Wood vegetation oriented 80-
the top of bank. Woody vegetation
and/or morostand vegetation located
vertically. In absence of vegetation,
90% from horizontal with minimal root
oriented at 70-80% tan horizontal,
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
both banks are lined or heavily
exposure. Partial lining or armoring
often with evident root exposure. No
oriented at less than 7G% from
armored
of ons or both banks
lining of banks, but some armoring
torn vital with extensive root exposure.
may be in place on one bank
No lining or armoring of banks
11 Bank cutting
LUe or none evident. Infrequent raw
Some intermittently along channel
Significant and frequent on both banks.
Almost continsous cuts on both banks,
banks, insignificant percentage of
bards and at prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise large portion of
some extending over most of the
total bank
Raw banks comprise minor portion of
bank in vertical direction. Root mat
banks. Undercutting and sod -root
f 1
bank in vertical direction
overhangs
overhangs
loll
12. Mass wasting or bank fallure
No or Inde evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent and/or minor
Evidence of frequent and/or significant
Frequent and extensive mass wasting.
very small amounts of mass wasting.
mass wasting. Mostly healed over
occurrences of mass wasting that can
The potential for bank failure, as
Unil channel width over the entire
with vegetation. Relatively constant
be aggravated by higher flows, which
evidenced by tension cracks, massive
�I
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 Nghly
width quite irregular, and scalloping of
irregular, and banks are scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream distance to bridge from
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 aligned
meander impact point and alignment
aligned with river flow
flow alignment is otherwise not
with flow
centered benoath bridge
o - omye, wry - wmuno-uepm rano
Total Score

Stream: I v \ CJ
Reach: _
Date:
Weather.
Location:
StabllHv IndleaMr r. s
_Observers: n LP
Protect: ('JAt 1r
Drama a Area:
Stream Type: I ,/�,
1. Watershed and flood pain actWay
Stehle, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor disturbances In the
Frequent disturbances in the
POOP 10.12
SCOlB
and characteristics
watershed
watershed, Including cattle activity
walershad, including cattle activity,
Continued! disturbances n the
watershed. Significant cattle activity,
(grazing andtor access to stream),
landslides, channel sand or gravel
landslides, channel sand or gravel
Corstnxdion, logging, a other minor
deforestation. Limited agricultural
mining, logging, farming, or
construction of buildings, roads, or
mining, logging, farming. or construction
of buildings. roads, or other
activities
other infrastructure. Urbanization over
infrastructure, Highly urbanized Or
significant porton of watershed
rapidly orMrczing watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
behavior
Perennial stream Or ephemeral first-
Perennial or intermlHent stream with
Extremely flashy; flash floods prevalent
Order stream with slightly increased
flashy behavior
mode of discharge; ephemeral stream
I
rale of flooding
OthOr than first -order Stream
3. Channel pattern (revised)
No evidence of channefvation.
MeaMeri ng, stable channel Or
Appears to have previous) been
y
channelized. Stream is relatively
Appears to have Previously been
Appears to have Previously been
straight (step-p0o1 system, narrow
stable. Channel has some meanders
channelized, Stream is actively
adjusting (meandering); localized
channelized. Stream is actively
vall ey), stable channel.
due to Previous channel adjustment.
ng):
areas et instability and/or erosion
adjusting
t ng (laterally and/or vertically) .with
taco bells. Straight. unstable reach.
around bends. Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/ channel confinement
Active flood plain exists at top of
banks; no sign of undercutting
Active flood plain aMndon sd, but is
Moderate confinement in valley a
Kneckpolnts visible downstream;
Infrastructure; no levees
currently rebuilding; minimal charnel
confinement; infrastructure not
channel wells: some exposure of
infrastructure; terraces exist; flood
exposed water Inas Or other
Infrastructure: channel -width -b top -of -
exposed; levees are low and set well
pain abandoned; levees are moderate
banks ration small; deeply confined; on
back from the river
in size and have minimal setback from
active flood plain; levees are high and
the neer
along the channel edge
5. Bed material
Fs = approximate porton of sand in the
Assoded sized tightly packed,
ovenaDDing, and Imbricated.
Moderately packed wflh some
Loose assortment with no a operant
Vary
Very idose asslxment with no packing.
bed
possibly
Most materiel > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
ovedapping. V cry small amounts of
material < 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
overiap. Small to medium amounts of
<
Largo amounts of materiel < q mm. Fs
material 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
>
8. Bar development
Fa S <0.02 andwty> 12, Mrs ere
mature. namow relative to stream
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars
may have vegetation be
For S <0,02 and w/y> 12, bar widths
Bar widths are generally greater than
width at IoW flow, well -vegetated,
amUor
composed of coarse gravel to
tend to be wide and composed of
Mvey deposited coarse sand to small
1/2 the stream width at low flow. Bans
and composed of Coarse gravel to
cobbles. For S > 0.02
cobbles, but minimal recent growth of
Pebbles and/Or may M sparsely
are Composed of extensive d et
lira partible' up to coarse gravelvel with
and w/y are <
12, no Mrs are "dart
bar evident by lack of vegetation
vegetated. Bars forming fa S > 0.02
IM to no vegetation. No Mrs for S
on portions of the bar. For S 10.02
and wty < 12
0.02 and w/y> 12
and w/y <12, no Mrs are evident
7. Obstructions, including bedrockRare
outcrops, armor layer, LWD jams.
or not present
Occa'onal, causingcross cumene'Modera
uent and
t ety fr eg Occasiorafiy
Frequent aro often unstable. causing a
grade Control, bridge bed paving,
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructors, cause
con iiwal shift of sediment and flow.
revetmenes, dike' or varus, riprep
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled, causing channel
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and/or widen
behind obstructions

rnC.z - 6
Stability Indicator
- - - - -
8. Bank soil texture and coherence,Clay
-^-^••�••• k • -+
and silly day; cohesive material
000a to - n)
Clay loam to sandy clay loam; minor
Fair 7.9)
Sandy clay to sandy loam:
Poor (10. 12)
Score
amounts of noncohesive or
unconsolidated mixtures of glacial or
Loamy sand to earl; noncohesive
material; unconsolidated mixtures of
uroonsolidated mixtures; layers may
other materials; small layers and
Ye
glacial or other materials; fayre of
1
exist, but are cohesive materials
lenses of noncohesive or
lenses that include noncohesive sands
unconsolidated mixtures
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle (where
90° is a vertical bank)
Bank sbpes < 3H:1V (18') for
noncohesive Of unconsolidated
Bank slopes up to 2H:1V (27°) in
Bank slopes to 1H:1V (45°) in
Barak Slopes sive or
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
rolxwhesive or unconsolidated
materials to 0.8:1 (50°) in clays on
noncohesive or unconsolidated
materials to 0.6:1 (60°) in days
unconsoltedvmaterials ofno over 60° N
days common on one r both banks
both sides
one or occasionally both banks
common on one or both banks
10. VegOtalive r ergir es ed bank
protection
Wide band of woody vegetation with
at least 90% density and
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small f woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
cover.
Primarily hard wood, teary, deciduous
with 70-90% plard density and cover.
A majority U hard wood. leafy,
60-70density and cover. A
tlependirg on age and Iaallh with less
bees with mature, healthy, and
diverse
deciduous trees with maturing,
majorift woad pinsy, coniferous
trees wng or old vegetation
than 50% plats density and cover.
Primarily soft wood piney, coniferous
vegetation located on the
bank. Woody vegetation oriented
diverse vegetation located on the
bank. Wood vegetation oriented 80-
lackingersity located on or rear
the topnk. Woody vegetation
7ftm
boas with very young, old and dying,
In absence of vegetation,
both
90% from horizontal with minimal root
creat.80% from horizontal,
and/r morka xi vegetation locatedvertically.
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
banks are lined or heavily
armored
exposure. Partial lining or armring
often wideM root exposure. No
Oriented at less than 70% from
of one r both banks
lining os. bot some armoring
horonntal with extensive rootexposure.
may bece on one bank
No lining or armoring at barks
11. Bank cubing
Littler node evident. Infrequentraw
Some interim rNy along gham l
and frequent on both banks.
Almost continuous cots on both barks,
banks, insignificant percentage
Mage of
total bank
bells and at prominent conslriatbns.
s comprise large portion of
some a#ending over most of this,
Raw banks compose minx portion of
rtical direction. Root mat
banks. Undercutting and sodgoct
bank in vertical direction
=urlde,cuttirg
overhangs
12. Mass wasting or bank failure
No r little evidence of patents' er
Evidenoa of infrequent and/or minor
f frequent
Frequent and extensive mass wasting.
very small amounts of mass wash erg.
Uniform channel width over the entire
mass wading. Mostly healed over
with vegetation Relatively Constant
es of mass thatioan
mass wasting the can
The poled bl for bank failure. asm
Bch
channel width and minimal scalloping
d
ated by higher Rows, whkh
may cause undercuttirg and mass
evidenced by tension cracks, massive
undrcuffi gs, 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 from
meander impact point and alignment
More Man 35 m; bridge I. wall-
alignad with river flow
20-35 m; edge a aligned wfth flow
10.20 m; bridge is Skewed to flow, r
Less than 10 de is
m; bri 9 PoonY aligned
flow alignment is otherwise not
with flow
centered beneath bridge
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = fraction
Of sand, S = slope, w/Y = widthkto-dePth
ratio
Total Score

Stream: , 1 N '_0 -t'S P f u�5
Reach: N
Date: 0\-A -417
Location:
Stability Indicator
14 _11
Observers: 1J1/V�
Proiect: > I Its h
Drains a Area:
Stream Type: PE
-
1. Watershed and flood plain activityStable,
-----
forested, undisturbed
��t+-a
Occasional minor dishabances in the
rmr if-a/Poor(70-72)
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual dislurtsfoes in the
Score
and characteristics
watershed
watershed, including cattle activity
watershed, including calla 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 mirror
mining, logging, farming, or
miring, logging, farming, or construction
deforestation. Limited agricultural
construction of buildings, roads, or
of buldings, roads, or other
activities
other infrastructure. Urbanization over
infrastructure. Nighty urbamzed or
significant portion of watershed
rapidly urbanizing watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or ephemeral fust-
Perennial or intermilend stream with
Edremely flashy; flash floods prevalent
behavior
order stream with sightly Increased
flashy behavior
mode of discharge; ephemeral stream
C
rate of flooding
other than first -order stream
3. Channel pattern (revised)
No evidence of chanrolvation.
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) with
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and/or erosion
few bends. Straight, unstable reach.
around bonds. Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entren:hmen0 charnel confinement
Active flood pain exists at top of
Active flood plain abandoned, but is
Moderate confinement in valley or
Knickpomts visible downstream;
banks; no sign of undercutting
currently rebuilding; minimal channel
channel walls; some exposure of
BxPoand "ter lines or other
infrastructure: no levees
confinement; infrastructure not
infrastructure; terraces exist; flood
infrastructure: channl-widlhtc 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 material
Fs = approximate portion of sand in the
Assorted sized tightly packed,
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
Moderately packed with some
overlapping. Very small
Loose assortment with W apparent
Very loose assortment with no packirg.
bad
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
amounts of
material <4 mm. 20 < Fs <50%
overlap Small to medium amounts of
material <4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
Large amounts of material < 4 mm. Fs
> 70%
0. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y> 12, One are
ForS < 0.02 andw/y> 12, bars
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 1279;r 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 send 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
en portions of the bar. For S > 0.02
and w/y < 12
0.02 and wty> 12
and Wy <12. no bars are evident
7. Obstructions, including bedrock
outcrops. armor layer, LW D jams,
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross currems
Moderately frequent and occasionally
Frequent and often unstable, causing a
grade control, Midge bed paving,
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions. cause
continual shift of sediment and flow.
revotments, dikes or vans, riprap
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled, causing channl
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate andtor widen
behind obstructions

')N (-p-
Stability Indicator Ereellenf 11 .31 r.....n ra _ Al
8. Bank soil texture and cohererwe
Clay and say day; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy day loam; minor
Sandy day to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to send; norcolesive
amounts of noncohesive or
uncorsolklated mbd res of glacial or
material; unconsolidated mhdures of
unconsolidated matures; 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 mahres
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle (wMre
Bahr slopes < 3H:1 V (18°) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V (27') in
Bank slopes to 1HAV (45°) in
Bank slopes over 45° in noncohesive or
90° is a vertical bank)
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
unconsolidated materials or over 60° in
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
materials to 0.8:1 (50°) in days on
materials to 0.6:1 (60°) in clays
clays common on one or both banks
both sides
one or occasionally both banks
common on one or both banks
10. Vegetative or engineered bank
Wide band of woody vegetation with
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small band of woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
protection
at toast 90% density and cover.
with 70-90% plant density and cover.
50-70% plan density and cover. A
depending on age and health with less
Primarily hard wood, leafy, deciduous
A majority of herd wood, leafy,
majority of soft wood, piney, coniferous
than 50% plant density and cover.
trees with mature, healthy, and
deciduous trees with maturing,
trees with young a old vegetation
Primarily soft wood. piney, congerous
diverse vegetation located on the
diverse vegetation located on the
lacking in diversity located on or near
trees with very young, old and dying,
bank. Woody vegetation oriented
bank. Wood vegetation aimed 80-
the top of bank. Woody vegetation
and/or monostand vegetation located
vertically. In absence of vegetation,
90% from horizontal with minimal root
oriented at 70-80% from horizontal,
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
L
both banks are lined or heavily
exposure. Partial lining a armoring
often with evident root exposure. No
oriented at Was than 70% from
armored
of one or both banks
lining of barks, but some armoring
horizontal with extensive root exposure.
may be in place on one bank
No lining or armoring of banks
11. Bank cueing
Little or none eviler t. Infrequent raw
Some intermittently along channel
Significant and frequent on both banks.
Almost coritinwous cuts on both banks,
banks, insignificant percentage of
hands and at prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise large portion of
some extending over most of the
total bank
Raw banks comprise minor portion of
bank in vertical direction. Root mat
banks. Undercutting and sod -root
bank in vertical direction
overhangs
overhangs
I
12. Mass wading or bank failure
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent andlor minor
Evklence of frequent and/or significant
Frequent and extereive mass wasting.
very small amounts of mass wasting.
mass wasting. Mostly healed over
occurrences of mass wasting that can
The potential for bank hours, as
Uniform channel width over the entire
with vegetation. Relatively constant
be aggravated by higher flows, which
evidenced by tension cracks, massive
reach
channel width and minimal scalloping
may cause undercutting and mass
undercut ings, and bank slumping is
of barks
wasting of unstable banks. Channel
considerable. Channel width is highly
width quite aregular, and scalloping of
'magular, and banks are scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream distance to bridge from
More than 35 in; bridge is well-
20-35 in; bridge is aligned with flow
10-20 m; bridge is skewed to flow, or
Less than 10 m; bridge is poorly aligned
meander impact point and alignment
aligned with river flow
flow alignment is otherwise not
with flow
centered beneath bridge
Total Score
01R

Stream: JN4
Reach: JN4-A
Date: Apr 30, 2018
Weather: Sunny; 60
Location: 36.3951300736856. -80.8588088025161
Observers: M. Engel , E.
Teitsworth
Project: Gideon
Drainage Area:
Stream Twe: Perennial
Stahilitv Indicator Excellent /1 -3 1 Good /4 - 61 Fair 17 - 91 Poor 110 - 121
Score
1. Watershed and
Stable, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual disturbances in the
flood plain activity
watershed
disturbances in the
watershed, including cattle
watershed. Significant cattle
and characteristics
watershed, including cattle
activity, landslides, channel
activity, landslides, channel
^
activity (grazing and/or
sand or gravel mining,
sand or gravel mining,
lJ•l
access to stream),
logging, farming, or
logging, farming, or
construction, logging, or
construction of buildings,
construction of buildings,
other minor deforestation.
roads, or other
roads, or other infrastructure.
Limited agricultural
infrastructure. Urbanization
Highly urbanized or rapidly
activities
over significant portion of
urbanizing watershed
watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or
Perennial or intermittent
Extremely flashy; flash floods
behavior
ephemeral first -order
stream with slightly
stream with flashy behavior
prevalent mode of discharge;
ephemeral stream other than
increased rate of flooding
first -order stream
3. Channel pattern
Straight to meandering with low radius
Meandering, moderate
Meandering with some
Braided; primarily bed load;
of curvature; primarily suspended load
radius of curvature; mix of
suspended and bed loads;
braiding; tortuous
meandering; primarily bed
engineered channel that is
maintained
N A
well-maintained engineered
load; poorly maintained
channel
en ineered channel
3. Channel pattern
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
(revised)
Meandering, stable channel or straight
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream is
(step -pool system, narrow valley),
is relatively stable. Channel
is actively adjusting
actively adjusting (laterally
stable channel.
has some meanders due to
(meandering); localized
and/or vertically) with few
previous channel
areas of instability and/or
bends. Straight, unstable
adjustment.
erosion around bends.
reach.
Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain
Moderate confinement in
Knickpoints visible
channel confinement
banks; no sign of undercutting
abandoned, but is currently
valley or channel walls;
downstream; exposed water
infrastructure; no levees
rebuilding; minimal channel
some exposure of
lines or other infrastructure;
confinement; infrastructure
not exposed; levees are
infrastructure; terraces exist;
flood plain abandoned;
channel -width -to -top -of -
banks ration small; deeply
low and set well back from
levees are moderate in size
confined; no active flood
the river
and have minimal setback
plain; levees are high and
from the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed material
Assorted sized tightly packed,
Moderately packed with
Loose assortment with no
Very loose assortment with
Fs = approximate
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
some overlapping. Very
apparent overlap. Small to
no packing. Large amounts
portion of sand in the
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
small amounts of material
medium amounts of material
of material < 4 mm. Fs >
[
bed
< 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
< 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
70%
J

Stabilitv Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 -12) Score
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars are
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
Bar widths are generally
mature, narrow relative to stream
bars may have vegetation
bar widths tend to be wide
greater than 1/2 the stream
width at low flow, well -vegetated,
and/or be composed of
and composed of newly
width at low flow. Bars are
and composed of coarse gravel to
coarse gravel to cobbles,
deposited coarse sand to
composed of extensive
cobbles. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
but minimal recent growth
small cobbles and/or may be
deposits of fine particles up
12, no bars are evident
of bar evident by lack of
sparsely vegetated. Bars
to coarse gravel with little to
vegetation on portions of
forming for S > 0.02 and
no vegetation. No bars for S
the bar. For S > 0.02 and
w/y < 12
< 0.02 and w/y > 12
w/y <12, no bars are
evident
7. Obstructions,
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross
Moderately frequent and
Frequent and often unstable,
including bedrock
currents and minor bank
occasionally unstable
causing a continual shift of
outcrops, armor
and bottom erosion
obstructions, cause
sediment and flow. Traps
layer, LWD jams,
noticeable erosion of the
are easily filled, causing
C
grade control, bridge
channel. Considerable
channel to migrate and/or
J
bed paving,
sediment accumulation
widen
revetments, dikes or
behind obstructions
vanes, ri ra
8. Bank soil texture
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay
Sandy clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to sand;
and coherence
loam; minor amounts of
unconsolidated mixtures of
noncohesive material;
noncohesive or
glacial or other materials;
unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures;
small layers and lenses of
glacial or other materials;
0
layers may exist, but are
noncohesive or
layers of lenses that include
cohesive materials
unconsolidated mixtures
noncohesive sands and
gravels
9. Average bank
Bank slopes < 3H:1V (18°) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V
Bank slopes to 1 H:1 V (45°)
Bank slopes over 45° in
slope angle (where
noncohesive or unconsolidated
(27°) in noncohesive or
in noncohesive or
noncohesive or
90° is a vertical
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials or
bank)
both sides
0.8:1 (50°) in clays on one
0.6:1 (60°) in clays common
over 60° in clays common on
O
or occasionally both banks
on one or both banks
one or both banks
o
10. Vegetative or
Wide band of woody vegetation with at
Medium band of woody
Small band of woody
Woody vegetation band may
engineered bank
least 90% density and cover. Primarily
vegetation with 70-90%
vegetation with 50-70%
vary depending on age and
protection
hard wood, leafy, deciduous trees with
plant density and cover. A
plant density and cover. A
health with less than 50%
mature, healthy, and diverse
majority of hard wood,
majority of soft wood, piney,
plant density and cover.
vegetation located on the bank.
leafy, deciduous trees with
coniferous trees with young
Primarily softwood, piney,
Woody vegetation oriented vertically.
maturing, diverse
or old vegetation lacking in
coniferous trees with very
In absence of vegetation, both banks
vegetation located on the
diversity located on or near
young, old and dying, and/or
are lined or heavily armored
bank. Wood vegetation
the top of bank. Woody
monostand vegetation
oriented 80-90% from
vegetation oriented at 70-
located off of the bank.
horizontal with minimal root
80% from horizontal, often
Woody vegetation oriented at
exposure. Partial lining or
with evident root exposure.
less than 70% from
armoring of one or both
No lining of banks, but some
horizontal with extensive root
banks
armoring may be in place on
exposure. No lining or
one bank
armoring of banks

Stability Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 - 12)
Score
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw
banks, insignificant percentage of total
bank
Some intermittently along
channel bends and at
prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise minor
portion of bank in vertical
direction
Significant and frequent on
both banks. Raw banks
comprise large portion of
bank in vertical direction.
Root mat overhangs
Almost continuous cuts on
both banks, some extending
over most of the banks.
Undercutting and sod -root
overhangs
C
J
12. Mass wasting or
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent
Evidence of frequent and/or
Frequent and extensive
bank failure
very small amounts of mass wasting.
and/or minor mass wasting.
significant occurrences of
mass wasting. The potential
Uniform channel width over the entire
Mostly healed over with
mass wasting that can be
for bank failure, as evidenced
reach
vegetation. Relatively
aggravated by higher flows,
by tension cracks, massive
constant channel width and
which may cause
undercuttings, and bank
/�
minimal scalloping of banks
undercutting and mass
slumping is considerable.
4
wasting of unstable banks.
Channel width is highly
Channel width quite
irregular, and banks are
irregular, and scalloping of
scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream
More than 35 m; bridge is well -aligned
20-35 m; bridge is aligned
10-20 m; bridge is skewed to
Less than 10 m; bridge is
distance to bridge
with river flow
with flow
flow, or flow alignment is
poorly aligned with flow
from meander
otherwise not centered
impact point and
beneath bridge
N A
alignment
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = fraction of sand, S = slope, w/y = width -to -depth ratio
Total Score
74

Stream: JN4
Reach: JN4-B
Date: Apr 30, 2018
Weather: Sunny; 60
Location: 36.3947641197931, -80.8580196463325
Observers: M. Engel , E.
Teitsworth
Project: Gideon
Drainage Area:
Stream Twe: Perennial
Stahilitv Indicator Excellent /1 -3 1 Good /4 - 61 Fair 17 - 91 Poor 110 - 121
Score
1. Watershed and
Stable, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual disturbances in the
flood plain activity
watershed
disturbances in the
watershed, including cattle
watershed. Significant cattle
and characteristics
watershed, including cattle
activity, landslides, channel
activity, landslides, channel
activity (grazing and/or
sand or gravel mining,
sand or gravel mining,
access to stream),
logging, farming, or
logging, farming, or
construction, logging, or
construction of buildings,
construction of buildings,
other minor deforestation.
roads, or other
roads, or other infrastructure.
Limited agricultural
infrastructure. Urbanization
Highly urbanized or rapidly
activities
over significant portion of
urbanizing watershed
watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or
Perennial or intermittent
Extremely flashy; flash floods
behavior
ephemeral first -order
stream with slightly
stream with flashy behavior
prevalent mode of discharge;
ephemeral stream other than
increased rate of flooding
first -order stream
3. Channel pattern
Straight to meandering with low radius
Meandering, moderate
Meandering with some
Braided; primarily bed load;
of curvature; primarily suspended load
radius of curvature; mix of
suspended and bed loads;
braiding; tortuous
meandering; primarily bed
engineered channel that is
maintained
N A
well-maintained engineered
load; poorly maintained
channel
en ineered channel
3. Channel pattern
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
(revised)
Meandering, stable channel or straight
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream is
(step -pool system, narrow valley),
is relatively stable. Channel
is actively adjusting
actively adjusting (laterally
stable channel.
has some meanders due to
(meandering); localized
and/or vertically) with few
previous channel
areas of instability and/or
bends. Straight, unstable
adjustment.
erosion around bends.
reach.
Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain
Moderate confinement in
Knickpoints visible
channel confinement
banks; no sign of undercutting
abandoned, but is currently
valley or channel walls;
downstream; exposed water
infrastructure; no levees
rebuilding; minimal channel
some exposure of
lines or other infrastructure;
confinement; infrastructure
not exposed; levees are
infrastructure; terraces exist;
flood plain abandoned;
channel -width -to -top -of -
banks ration small; deeply
low and set well back from
levees are moderate in size
confined; no active flood
the river
and have minimal setback
plain; levees are high and
from the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed material
Assorted sized tightly packed,
Moderately packed with
Loose assortment with no
Very loose assortment with
Fs = approximate
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
some overlapping. Very
apparent overlap. Small to
no packing. Large amounts
portion of sand in the
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
small amounts of material
medium amounts of material
of material < 4 mm. Fs >
G
bed
< 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
< 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
70%
V

Stabilitv Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 -12) Score
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars are
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
Bar widths are generally
mature, narrow relative to stream
bars may have vegetation
bar widths tend to be wide
greater than 1/2 the stream
width at low flow, well -vegetated,
and/or be composed of
and composed of newly
width at low flow. Bars are
and composed of coarse gravel to
coarse gravel to cobbles,
deposited coarse sand to
composed of extensive
cobbles. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
but minimal recent growth
small cobbles and/or may be
deposits of fine particles up
12, no bars are evident
of bar evident by lack of
sparsely vegetated. Bars
to coarse gravel with little to
vegetation on portions of
forming for S > 0.02 and
no vegetation. No bars for S
the bar. For S > 0.02 and
w/y < 12
< 0.02 and w/y > 12
w/y <12, no bars are
evident
7. Obstructions,
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross
Moderately frequent and
Frequent and often unstable,
including bedrock
currents and minor bank
occasionally unstable
causing a continual shift of
outcrops, armor
and bottom erosion
obstructions, cause
sediment and flow. Traps
layer, LWD jams,
noticeable erosion of the
are easily filled, causing
C
grade control, bridge
channel. Considerable
channel to migrate and/or
J
bed paving,
sediment accumulation
widen
revetments, dikes or
behind obstructions
vanes, ri ra
8. Bank soil texture
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay
Sandy clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to sand;
and coherence
loam; minor amounts of
unconsolidated mixtures of
noncohesive material;
noncohesive or
glacial or other materials;
unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures;
small layers and lenses of
glacial or other materials;
0
layers may exist, but are
noncohesive or
layers of lenses that include
cohesive materials
unconsolidated mixtures
noncohesive sands and
gravels
9. Average bank
Bank slopes < 3H:1V (18°) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V
Bank slopes to 1 H:1 V (45°)
Bank slopes over 45° in
slope angle (where
noncohesive or unconsolidated
(27°) in noncohesive or
in noncohesive or
noncohesive or
90° is a vertical
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials or
bank)
both sides
0.8:1 (50°) in clays on one
0.6:1 (60°) in clays common
over 60° in clays common on
O
or occasionally both banks
on one or both banks
one or both banks
o
10. Vegetative or
Wide band of woody vegetation with at
Medium band of woody
Small band of woody
Woody vegetation band may
engineered bank
least 90% density and cover. Primarily
vegetation with 70-90%
vegetation with 50-70%
vary depending on age and
protection
hard wood, leafy, deciduous trees with
plant density and cover. A
plant density and cover. A
health with less than 50%
mature, healthy, and diverse
majority of hard wood,
majority of soft wood, piney,
plant density and cover.
vegetation located on the bank.
leafy, deciduous trees with
coniferous trees with young
Primarily softwood, piney,
Woody vegetation oriented vertically.
maturing, diverse
or old vegetation lacking in
coniferous trees with very
In absence of vegetation, both banks
vegetation located on the
diversity located on or near
young, old and dying, and/or
are lined or heavily armored
bank. Wood vegetation
the top of bank. Woody
monostand vegetation
oriented 80-90% from
vegetation oriented at 70-
located off of the bank.
horizontal with minimal root
80% from horizontal, often
Woody vegetation oriented at
exposure. Partial lining or
with evident root exposure.
less than 70% from
armoring of one or both
No lining of banks, but some
horizontal with extensive root
banks
armoring may be in place on
exposure. No lining or
one bank
armoring of banks

Stability Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 - 12)
Score
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw
banks, insignificant percentage of total
bank
Some intermittently along
channel bends and at
prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise minor
portion of bank in vertical
direction
Significant and frequent on
both banks. Raw banks
comprise large portion of
bank in vertical direction.
Root mat overhangs
Almost continuous cuts on
both banks, some extending
over most of the banks.
Undercutting and sod -root
overhangs
G
U
12. Mass wasting or
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent
Evidence of frequent and/or
Frequent and extensive
bank failure
very small amounts of mass wasting.
and/or minor mass wasting.
significant occurrences of
mass wasting. The potential
Uniform channel width over the entire
Mostly healed over with
mass wasting that can be
for bank failure, as evidenced
reach
vegetation. Relatively
aggravated by higher flows,
by tension cracks, massive
constant channel width and
which may cause
undercuttings, and bank
/�
minimal scalloping of banks
undercutting and mass
slumping is considerable.
4
wasting of unstable banks.
Channel width is highly
Channel width quite
irregular, and banks are
irregular, and scalloping of
scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream
More than 35 m; bridge is well -aligned
20-35 m; bridge is aligned
10-20 m; bridge is skewed to
Less than 10 m; bridge is
distance to bridge
with river flow
with flow
flow, or flow alignment is
poorly aligned with flow
from meander
otherwise not centered
impact point and
beneath bridge
N A
alignment
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = fraction of sand, S = slope, w/y = width -to -depth ratio
79
Total Score

Stream: JN5
Reach: JN5
Date: Apr 30, 2018
Weather: Sunny; 60
Location: 36.3947194861587, -80.8575468231746
Observers: M. Engel , E.
Teitsworth
Project: Gideon
Drainage Area:
Stream Twe: Perennial
Stahilitv Indicator Excellent /1 -3 1 Good /4 - 61 Fair 17 - 91 Poor 110 - 121
Score
1. Watershed and
Stable, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual disturbances in the
flood plain activity
watershed
disturbances in the
watershed, including cattle
watershed. Significant cattle
and characteristics
watershed, including cattle
activity, landslides, channel
activity, landslides, channel
activity (grazing and/or
sand or gravel mining,
sand or gravel mining,
access to stream),
logging, farming, or
logging, farming, or
construction, logging, or
construction of buildings,
construction of buildings,
other minor deforestation.
roads, or other
roads, or other infrastructure.
Limited agricultural
infrastructure. Urbanization
Highly urbanized or rapidly
activities
over significant portion of
urbanizing watershed
watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or
Perennial or intermittent
Extremely flashy; flash floods
behavior
ephemeral first -order
stream with slightly
stream with flashy behavior
prevalent mode of discharge;
ephemeral stream other than
increased rate of flooding
first -order stream
3. Channel pattern
Straight to meandering with low radius
Meandering, moderate
Meandering with some
Braided; primarily bed load;
of curvature; primarily suspended load
radius of curvature; mix of
suspended and bed loads;
braiding; tortuous
meandering; primarily bed
engineered channel that is
maintained
N A
well-maintained engineered
load; poorly maintained
channel
en ineered channel
3. Channel pattern
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
Appears to have previously
(revised)
Meandering, stable channel or straight
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream
been channelized. Stream is
(step -pool system, narrow valley),
is relatively stable. Channel
is actively adjusting
actively adjusting (laterally
stable channel.
has some meanders due to
(meandering); localized
and/or vertically) with few
previous channel
areas of instability and/or
bends. Straight, unstable
adjustment.
erosion around bends.
reach.
Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain
Moderate confinement in
Knickpoints visible
channel confinement
banks; no sign of undercutting
abandoned, but is currently
valley or channel walls;
downstream; exposed water
infrastructure; no levees
rebuilding; minimal channel
some exposure of
lines or other infrastructure;
confinement; infrastructure
not exposed; levees are
infrastructure; terraces exist;
flood plain abandoned;
channel -width -to -top -of -
banks ration small; deeply
low and set well back from
levees are moderate in size
confined; no active flood
the river
and have minimal setback
plain; levees are high and
from the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed material
Assorted sized tightly packed,
Moderately packed with
Loose assortment with no
Very loose assortment with
Fs = approximate
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
some overlapping. Very
apparent overlap. Small to
no packing. Large amounts
portion of sand in the
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
small amounts of material
medium amounts of material
of material < 4 mm. Fs >
bed
< 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
< 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
70%
�}

Stabilitv Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 -12) Score
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars are
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12,
Bar widths are generally
mature, narrow relative to stream
bars may have vegetation
bar widths tend to be wide
greater than 1/2 the stream
width at low flow, well -vegetated,
and/or be composed of
and composed of newly
width at low flow. Bars are
and composed of coarse gravel to
coarse gravel to cobbles,
deposited coarse sand to
composed of extensive
cobbles. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
but minimal recent growth
small cobbles and/or may be
deposits of fine particles up
/I
12, no bars are evident
of bar evident by lack of
sparsely vegetated. Bars
to coarse gravel with little to
vegetation on portions of
forming for S > 0.02 and
no vegetation. No bars for S
the bar. For S > 0.02 and
w/y < 12
< 0.02 and w/y > 12
w/y <12, no bars are
evident
7. Obstructions,
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross
Moderately frequent and
Frequent and often unstable,
including bedrock
currents and minor bank
occasionally unstable
causing a continual shift of
outcrops, armor
and bottom erosion
obstructions, cause
sediment and flow. Traps
layer, LWD jams,
noticeable erosion of the
are easily filled, causing
grade control, bridge
channel. Considerable
channel to migrate and/or
bed paving,
sediment accumulation
widen
revetments, dikes or
behind obstructions
vanes, ri ra
8. Bank soil texture
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay
Sandy clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to sand;
and coherence
loam; minor amounts of
unconsolidated mixtures of
noncohesive material;
noncohesive or
glacial or other materials;
unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures;
small layers and lenses of
glacial or other materials;
layers may exist, but are
noncohesive or
layers of lenses that include
cohesive materials
unconsolidated mixtures
noncohesive sands and
gravels
9. Average bank
Bank slopes < 3H:1V (18°) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V
Bank slopes to 1 H:1 V (45°)
Bank slopes over 45° in
slope angle (where
noncohesive or unconsolidated
(27°) in noncohesive or
in noncohesive or
noncohesive or
90° is a vertical
materials to < 1:1 (45°) in clays on
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials to
unconsolidated materials or
bank)
both sides
0.8:1 (50°) in clays on one
0.6:1 (60°) in clays common
over 60° in clays common on
O
or occasionally both banks
on one or both banks
one or both banks
10. Vegetative or
Wide band of woody vegetation with at
Medium band of woody
Small band of woody
Woody vegetation band may
engineered bank
least 90% density and cover. Primarily
vegetation with 70-90%
vegetation with 50-70%
vary depending on age and
protection
hard wood, leafy, deciduous trees with
plant density and cover. A
plant density and cover. A
health with less than 50%
mature, healthy, and diverse
majority of hard wood,
majority of soft wood, piney,
plant density and cover.
vegetation located on the bank.
leafy, deciduous trees with
coniferous trees with young
Primarily softwood, piney,
Woody vegetation oriented vertically.
maturing, diverse
or old vegetation lacking in
coniferous trees with very
In absence of vegetation, both banks
vegetation located on the
diversity located on or near
young, old and dying, and/or
are lined or heavily armored
bank. Wood vegetation
the top of bank. Woody
monostand vegetation
oriented 80-90% from
vegetation oriented at 70-
located off of the bank.
horizontal with minimal root
80% from horizontal, often
Woody vegetation oriented at
exposure. Partial lining or
with evident root exposure.
less than 70% from
armoring of one or both
No lining of banks, but some
horizontal with extensive root
banks
armoring may be in place on
exposure. No lining or
one bank
armoring of banks

Stability Indicator Excellent (1 -3 ) Good (4 - 6) Fair (7 - 9) Poor (10 - 12)
Score
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw
banks, insignificant percentage of total
bank
Some intermittently along
channel bends and at
prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise minor
portion of bank in vertical
direction
Significant and frequent on
both banks. Raw banks
comprise large portion of
bank in vertical direction.
Root mat overhangs
Almost continuous cuts on
both banks, some extending
over most of the banks.
Undercutting and sod -root
overhangs
7
12. Mass wasting or
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent
Evidence of frequent and/or
Frequent and extensive
bank failure
very small amounts of mass wasting.
and/or minor mass wasting.
significant occurrences of
mass wasting. The potential
Uniform channel width over the entire
Mostly healed over with
mass wasting that can be
for bank failure, as evidenced
reach
vegetation. Relatively
aggravated by higher flows,
by tension cracks, massive
constant channel width and
which may cause
undercuttings, and bank
minimal scalloping of banks
undercutting and mass
slumping is considerable.
wasting of unstable banks.
Channel width is highly
Channel width quite
irregular, and banks are
irregular, and scalloping of
scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream
More than 35 m; bridge is well -aligned
20-35 m; bridge is aligned
10-20 m; bridge is skewed to
Less than 10 m; bridge is
distance to bridge
with river flow
with flow
flow, or flow alignment is
poorly aligned with flow
from meander
otherwise not centered
impact point and
beneath bridge
N A
alignment
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = fraction of sand, S = slope, w/y = width -to -depth ratio
Total Score
67

Stream:�'v`,Q — 3 ;FNA4 Observers
Reach: Project: (,,I&
_Date: Drainage Area:
Weather.
Stream Type:
Location:
Stability Indicator Bccenert 11 a 1 r_....w r.
1. Watershed and flood plain activity
Stable, forested undisturbed
----r– -r
Occasonal minor disturbances in the
.a�rp-a/
Frequent disturbances in the
noon pu-l[)
CONinual tlisturbarces in Nue
Score
and characteristics
watershed
watershed including calve 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 construction
deforestation. Limited agricultural
construction of buildings, roads, or
of buildings. roads, or other
activities
other Infrastructure. Urbanization over
infrastructure. Highly orbanized or
significant portion or watershed
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
made of discharge; ephemeral stream
rate of flooding
other than first -order stream
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) with
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and/or erosion
few bends. Straight, unstable reach.
around bends. Straightened, stable
channel.
4. Entrenchment/ channel confinement
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood pain abandoned but is
Moderate confiremem in valley or
Knokpoints visible downstream;
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-lo-top-cf-
exposed Wass 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 thermal edge
5. Bed material
= approximate portion of sand in the
Assorted sized tightly packed.
overlapping, and imbricated.
Moderately packed with some
Loose assortment with no apparent
Very loose assortment with co packing.
be
be
Possibly
overlapping. Very small amounts of
overlap. Small to medium amounts of
Large amounts of material <4 mm. Fs
i I.
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
material < 4 mm, 20 < Fs < 50%
material < 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
> 70%
5. Bar development
Far S < 0.02 andw/y> 12. bars are
For S <0.02 andw/y> 12, bars
For S < 0.02 and w/y 112, 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 andfor 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 W vegetation. No bars for S <
12, no bars are evident
on portions of the bar. For S > 0.02
and wly < 12
0.02 and w/y > 12
and w/y <12. no bars are evident
7. Obstructions, including bedrock
Rare or net present
Occasional, causing cross currents
Moderately frequent and occasionally
Frequent and often unstable, causing a
outcrops, armor layer, LWD jams,
grade control, bridge bed
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions, cause
continual shift of sediment and flow.
paving,
revetments, dikes or vanes, riprap
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled causing channel
( _
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and/or widen
v,
behind obstructions
J

� r) c' —�3
Stability Indicator Excellent 11 -31 c:....rl re - At c.,, n _ e.
8. Bank soil texture and coherence
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay loam; mirror
Selly clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to sand; nonoohesive
amounts of noncohesive or
unconsolidated mixtures of glacial or
material; unconsolidated m Beres of
unconsolidated mixtures; layers may
other malermis, small layers and
glacial or other materials; layers of
exist, but are cohesive materials
lenses of noncohesive or
lenses that include norcehesive sands
unconsolidated mixtures
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle (where
Bank slopes < 3HAV (18') for
Bank slopes up to 2HAV (27') in
Bank slopes to iHAV (45') in
Bank slopes over 45' in noncohesive or
90' is a vertical bank)
noncohesive a unconsolidated
noncohesive or urconsolidi ted
noncohesive or unconsolidated
unconsolidated materials or over 60' in
materials to < 1:1 (45') in clays on
materials to 0.8:1 (50') in clays on
materials to 0.61 (00') in clays
Gays common on one or both banks
both sides
one or occasionally bah banks
common on one or both banks
10. Vegetative or engineered bards
Wide band of woody vegetation with
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small band of woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
protection
at least 90% density and cover.
with 70-90% plant density and cove.
50-70% plant density and cover. A
depending on age and health with less
Primarily hard wood, leafy, deciduous
A majority of hard wood leafy,
majority of soft wood piney, coniterous
than 60% plant density and cover.
trees with mature, healthy, and
deciduous trees with maturing,
trees with young or old vegetation
Primarily soft wood, piney, coniferous
diverse vegetation located on the
diverse vegetation located on the
lacking in diversity located on or near
trees with very young, old and dying,
bank. Woody vegetation oriented
bank. Wood vegetation orented 80-
the lop of bank. Woody vegetation
and/or monostand vegetation located
I
vertically. In absence of vegetation.
90% from horizontal with minimal root
oriented at 7080% from horizontal,
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
both banks are lined or heavily
exposure. Partial lining or armoring
often with evident root exposure. No
oriented at less than 70% from
armored
of one or both banks
lining of banks, but some armoring
horizontal with extensive root exposure.
may be in place on oro bank
No lining or armoring of banks
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw
Some intermittently along channel
Signilicant and frequent on both banks.
Almost continuous cuts on both banks,
banks. insignificant percentage of
bends and at prominent constrictions.
Raw banks comprise large potion of
some extending over most of the
total bank
Raw banks comprise minor portion of
bank in vertical direction. Root mat
banks. Undercutting and sod -root
bank in vertical direction
overhangs
overhangs
12. Blass washing or bank failure
No or little evidence of potential or
Evidence of infrequent and/or minor
Evidence of frequent and/or significam
Frequent and extensive mass wasting.
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 endre
wth vegetation. Relatively constant
be aggravated by higher flows. which
evidenced by tension cracks, massive
reach
channel width and minimal scalloping
may cause undercutting and mass
undercutings, and bank slumping is
of banks
wasting of unstable banks. Channel
considerable. Channel width is highly
width quite Irregular, and walloping of
Irregular, and banks are scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream distance to bridge from
More than 35 m; Midge is well-
20-35 m; bridge is aligned with flow
1020 m; bridge is skewed to flow, or
Less than 10 an; bridge is poorly aligned
meander impact point and alignment
aligned with river flow
flow alignment is otherwise not
with flow
centered beneath bridge
Total Score..-

Stream: I IV U/ C, SbXJST-ha A -n (V Observers,,
Reach: Reach: Project ( Id4gi
Data: �j a,D I Drainage Area:
Weather: Stream Type: 1C✓
Lowson: —r
Stability Indicator F..- III r� _a
------ --' �'
1. Watershed and flood plain activity
-1
Stable, forested, undisturbed
in
Occasional minor disturbances in the
air (7 - el
Fraq uenl disturbances in the
Poor 10 - 121
Score
and character
characteristics
watershed, including cattle activity
watershed, including cattle activity,
Continual disturbances in the
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
deforestation. Limited agricultural
mining, logging. farming, or
mining, logging, farming, or construction
construction of buildings, roads, or
of buildings, roads, or other
achvlies
other infrastructure. Urbanhatron over
kdrastructure. Highly urbanized or
significant portion of watershed
rapidly urbanizing watershed
2. Flow habft
Perennial stream with no flashy
behavior
Perennial stream or ephemerel first-
Perennial or inintermitlent stream with
Extremely flashy, flash floods prevaen4
order stream with slightly increased
flashy behavior
mode of discharge; ephemeral stream
�7
rate of flooding
other than first -order stream
f
3. Channel Pattern (revised)
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously been
PPears to have previously been
Appears to have previously been
Meandering, stable channel or
straight (step -pool system, narrow
channelized. Stream is relativity
stable. Channel has some meanders
channelized. Stream is actively
adjusting (meandering); localized
channelized. Stream is actively
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and/or erosion
adjusting (laterally and/or vertically) with
few bells. Straight, unstable reach.
�1
around bends. Straightened, stable
I
chamol.
4. EMrerrohment/ chancel LroMromeM
Active flood plain exists of top of
Active flood lain abandoned, but a
Mnderete condnenlem in valley ar
T-kpoints visible downstream;
banks; no, sign of undercutting
infrastructure; no levees
currently rebuilding; minimal channel
channel walls; some exposure of
exposed water lines or other
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 sman; 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 material
Fs = approximate portion M sand in the
Assorted sized tightly packed.
overlapping, and possibly Imbricated.
Moderaten7 packed with some
Loose assortment with no apparent
Very boss assortment with ne packing.
bed
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
overlapping. Vary small amounts of
material <4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
overlap. Small to medium amounts of
Large amounts of materiel <4 mm. Fs
material <4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
> 70%
S. Bar development
For S <0.02 ant wty> 12, bars are
For S < 0.02 and w/y> 12. berg
For S < 0.02 and w/y> 12, --bar
Bar widths are generally than
mature, narrow relative to stream
width at low flaw, well -vegetated,
may have vegetation and/or be
tend to be wide and composed of
greater
1/2 the stream width at low flow. Bars
and composed of coarse gravel to
composed of coarse gravel to
cobbjes, but minimal recent growth of
navy deposited coarse sand to small
cobbles and/or may be sparsely
are composed o! extensive deposits of
fine
cpbdes. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
12. no bars are evident
bar evident by lack of vegetation
vegetated. Bars farming for S > 0.02
particles up to coarse gravel with
little to ne vegetation. No bars far
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 bedrock
outcrops, armor layer, LWD jams,
Rare or not presam
Occasional, causing cross currents
Moderated frequent and occasionell
YY
F
Frequent and often causing a
bridge bed paving,
grade contrencs.
and mirror back and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions, cause
continual shift M sediment and flow.
sediment a
d
revetments, dikes or vanes, ricrac
noticeable erosion channel,
Traps are easilyfiled,widen causing channel
`
f f
C era
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and/or widen
L/I
behind obstructions
i j/

3/\J(, -.c
Stability Indicator c......n__. r. .
-
8. Bank soil texture and cohererx'a
-
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
orae r-0)
Clay loam to sandy clay loam; robot
Fair (7-9)
$and da to sand loam;
Y Y
POOr 10.12
Score
amounts of noncohesive Or
y
uoWnfi lidated mixt res of glacial Or
Loamy. -M to sand; nencOheawe
material; unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures; layers may
Other materials; small layers and
glacial a other materials; layers of
mist, but are cohesive materials
lamas of Mncomilye or
unconsolidated
leavens that Include noncohesive sands
(�
mixtures
and gravels
J
9. Average bank slope angle (where
900 is a vertical bank)
Back slopes c 3HAV (18°) for
noncohesive Or uncansdidated
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V (27°) in
Banc some to 1HAV (45o) in
Bank Wopas over. 45° in nerooheak e a
materials to c 1;1 (45°) in days on
both aid"
noncohesive or unconsolidated
materials to 0.8:1 (50°) in days on
one or occasionally both banks
noncohesive a unconsolidated
materiels to 0.61 (606) in clays
common on one a both banks
unconsolidated materials or over 60° in
days common on care or both bank
10. Vegetative or engineered bamc
Protection
Wide band of w'uedY vegetation with
least
Medium band d woody vegetation
Small woody vegetation wilt
Woody vegetation band may vary
at 90% density and cover.
Primarily hard wood, leafy, deciduous
with 70-90% plant density and cove.
A majority of hard wood, leafy,
50-70density and cove. A
depending on age and heafth with less
trees with mature, healthy, and
deciduous trees with maturing,
majorift wood, piney, coniferous
trees wng a old vegetation
than 50% plant density, and cover,
Primarily soft wood, piney, coniferous
diverse vegetation located on the
bank. Woody vegetation Oriented
diverse vegetation located on the
bank. Wood vegetation oriented 80-
lackingersify located on a near
7daru
the
trees with very young, old and dying.
vertically. Inabsenceofvegetation,
both banks are lined m heavily
90% from hrorizontal with minimal root
exposure. Partial lining
lopk. Woody vegetation
mism.80% from horizontal,
andlor morestaMvegetation located
off of the bank. Woody ve9eation
armored
a armoring
often wdent red exposure. No
oriented at less than 70% from
of one or both banks
lining os, bm some armoring
horizontal with extensive root exposure.
may bce on one bank
No lining or armoring of banks
11. Bank cutting
Lade Or tone evident. Infrequent raw
Some intermltanlhy aloe channel
mma m and
�g frequent on bond barks.
Almost cortinuprs kxts on both banks.
banks, insignificant percentage of
total bank
tends and at prominam corsfric0ons.
Raw banks comprise large portion d
some extending over most d the
Raw bents comprise miner portion d
bank in vertical tlkectlon
bank in vertical direction. Rod mat
overhangs
Dank, Undercutting and sod -root
overhangs
1,1
1
12. Mass wastkg a bark failure
No a little evoence f wt 4011 or
Evil... of infrequent t andlor moor
Evidence of frequent andxa sgntflraM
Frequent and eAenelve mass wasting.
very small amounts of mass wasting.
Uniform chi width over the entire
mass wasting. Mostly healed over
with vegetation. Relatively
Occurrences of mass wasting that can
The Potential for bank failure, as
reach
constant
channel width and minimal scalloping
be aggravated by higher flows, which
may cause undercutting and mass
evidenced by tension cracks. massive
underculHngs, and bank slumping is
of banks
wasting of unstable banks. Channel
width quite irregular, and scalloping of
considerable. Chantel width is highly
irregular,
co
banks is evident
and banks are scalloped
13. Upstream distance to bridge from
meander impact Point and alignmem
Mae than 35 in bdbridge is well
aligned with river flow
20-35 in bridge is aligned with flow
10-20 in bridge is skewed to flow, or
Less than 10 m; bride is
9 POoriY aligned
flaw alignment is otherwise net
wilt How
centered beneath bridge
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = frwCw
of sand, S = slope, w/y - widO "Orith
ratio
rota) Score

.•�
y�
,a0.t•r� �a+
5h 5
a
VIM. y

Upstream Downstream
Reach MC2-A
101
100
99
0 98
R
Lu 97
96
95
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
--o—Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

M. � • T�'N h
Y ' 4i -JV� � '1.��t �b
J,+R. A.
�t-
`
r.K, .c•-
�+moo^'!
'I-M
�! x ,
`
r.K, .c•-
�+moo^'!

5
Upstream
Downstream
Reach JN6-C
97
96.5
96
95.5
95
C
0
94.5
W 94
93.5
93
92.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
--o—Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
97.5
Reach JN6-C
97
l
tl
9
95.5
95
0
�
}
5
Upstream
Downstream
97.5
Reach JN6-C
97
96.5
96
95.5
95
0
>
94.5
94
w
93.5
93
92.5
92
0
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
--a—Ground Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Appendix C —Site Protection Instrument

February 23, 2018
Cara Conder
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Dear Ms. Conder,
Unique Places
To Save
This letter confirms that Resource Environmental Solutions has agreed to engage Unique Places to Save
("UP2S"), a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization located in the State of North Carolina, as the conservation
easement grantee and long-term steward for the Gideon ("Site") located in Surry County, North Carolina. As the
conservation easement grantee and long-term steward, UP2S has agreed to and shall be responsible for periodic
inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are enforced and
maintained. Specific responsibilities include:
• Monitoring of Site is conducted on an annual basis.
• An on-site inspection is conducted once per year.
• Visits to Site are coordinated with landowner when possible.
• Annual monitoring reports are sent to the landowner when possible.
• Signage for the easement boundary is maintained.
• Violations and potential violations of the conservation easement deed are promptly communicated to
the landowner.
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX), LLC shall act as Bank Sponsor of the Site. UP2S shall receive a
stewardship endowment in the amount of $40,953.71 to ensure annual Site inspections occur and that the terms
of the conservation easement are legally defended into perpetuity.
As the bond obligee for the construction and monitoring phase of the Gideon Site, we agree to abide by the
terms of the bond agreement(s) in the event that Resource Environmental Solutions fails to perform or no
longer exists. The fee for this is $2000 for construction bond and $1000 for the monitoring bond.
David Harper, Executive Director
Unique Places To Save
1/25/2018
Representative Signature Resource
Environmental Solutions
Printed Name
NII Iv?W-��
Date
PO Box 1183 • Chapel Hill, NC 27514 � 585-472-9498 info(@uniqueplacestosave.orq

Unique Places to Save Annual Monitoring and Legal Defense Endowment
Gideon Mitigaton Easement -CONFIDENTIAL
Annual Monitoring
Staff time to monitor mitigation easement, including file
review, travel time, on site time, post visit report production
Staff time needed to address minor violations or issues
Mileage
Meal Costs
Insurance
Accepting and Defending the Easement in Perpetuity
Staff time for major violations
Legal Counsel
Other Incidentals
Units
Hours
Cost/Unit Frequency
Annual Cost
8 acres
8
$
60.00 Annual
$ 480.00
N/A
10
$
600.00 Once every 10 yrs.
$ 60.00
268
N/A
$
0.54 Annual
$ 143.38
1
N/A
$
20.00 Annual
$ 20.00
N/A
N/A
$
100.00 N/A
$ 100.00
Total Annual Funding Amount
$ 803.38
Capitalization Rate
3.50%
Monitoring Endowment
$22,953.71
N/A
50
60 N/A
$ 3,000.00
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
$ 10,000.00
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
$ 5,000.00
Monitoring Endowment
$ 18,000.00
Monitoring
DefenseTotal
and Legal

Unique Places
To Sage
Unique Places To Save
Property Monitoring Report 2017
I. PROPERTY INFORMATION
• NAME OF PROPERTY:
• PROPERTY ACREAGE:
DATE EASEMENT GRANTED:
• DATE OF ANY EASEMENT AMENDMENT(S):
• OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFORMATION
• GENERAL PROPERTY LOCATION
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (acreage, general biophysical characteristics, land/resource use):
• DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN, FEATURES OR RESTRICTIONS (building envelopes, areas of intensive
management, riparian areas, access points, historic, etc.)
II. MONITORING INFORMATION
DATE(S) OF INSPECTION:
• GENERAL WEATHER CONDITIONS (temp, cloud cover, precip):
• IF AVAILABLE, APPROXIMATE PRECIPITATION TOTAL FOR PREVIOUS YEAR:
LIST ALL PERSONS ATTENDING INSPECTION:
TIME SPENT ON INSPECTION: hours
• WAS THE OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACTED PRIOR TO INSPECTION? Y N
Unique Places
I To Save
Owner
Manager/Representative
Name(s)
Address
City, State, Zip
Phone
Email
• GENERAL PROPERTY LOCATION
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (acreage, general biophysical characteristics, land/resource use):
• DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF SPECIAL CONCERN, FEATURES OR RESTRICTIONS (building envelopes, areas of intensive
management, riparian areas, access points, historic, etc.)
II. MONITORING INFORMATION
DATE(S) OF INSPECTION:
• GENERAL WEATHER CONDITIONS (temp, cloud cover, precip):
• IF AVAILABLE, APPROXIMATE PRECIPITATION TOTAL FOR PREVIOUS YEAR:
LIST ALL PERSONS ATTENDING INSPECTION:
TIME SPENT ON INSPECTION: hours
• WAS THE OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACTED PRIOR TO INSPECTION? Y N
Unique Places
I To Save

DID THE OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE ACCOMPANY MONITOR? Y N
WAS THE EASEMENT REVIEWED PRIOR TO INSPECTION? Y N
WAS THE PROPERTY TRANSFERRED SINCE THE LAST REPORT? Y N
o IF YES: DEED FROM: DEED TO:
IS THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY FOR SALE?
r=011
III. MONITOR OBSERVATIONS
• NATURAL AND/OR AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITIES OBSERVED. Note any rare species.
• DESCRIBE CURRENT MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE WITHIN THE EASEMENT:
• LIST AND DESCRIBE ANY MANAGEMENT CHANGES SINCE LAST INSPECTION. Describe the activity or alteration. Note
location and extent. Document with maps, photos, and/or illustrations.
♦ AGRICULTURAL/OPERATIONAL CHANGES:
♦ LAND USE CHANGES:
♦ ECOSYSTEM/SPECIES PRESERVATION:
♦ SCIENTIFIC (research, surveys, etc.):
♦ RECREATIONAL OR EDUCATIONAL:
♦ WILDLIFE OR HABITAT MANAGEMENT/RESTORATION:
♦ EXOTICS OR DISEASE CONTROL:
♦ OTHER:
• LIST AND DESCRIBE ANY MAN -INDUCED ALTERATIONS SINCE LAST INSPECTION. Describe the activity or alteration.
Note location and extent. Document with maps, photos, and/or illustrations.
♦ CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS, STRUCTURES OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENTS:
♦ EROSION OR OTHER SOIL DISTURBANCE:
♦ OHV/ORV USE:
♦ FERAL ANIMALS AND/OR EXOTIC PLANTS:
♦ TRESPASSING AND/OR BOUNDARY ENCROACHMENT:
♦ TRASH DUMPING AND/OR VANDALISM:
Unique Places
To Sage

♦ CONTINUAL OVERUSE:
♦ DISEASE (plant or animal):
♦ POLLUTION:
♦ DEFERRED REQUIRED MAINTENANCE:
♦ OTHER:
• DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES AND/OR ACTIVITIES PERMITTED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE EASEMENT. Such as
construction of buildings, facilities, general improvements, roads, water infrastructure. Include all reserved rights
exercised since last inspection. Note location and extent and any changes and/or activities and attach maps, photos,
and/or illustrations as necessary.
• DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES AND/OR ACTIVITIES WHICH MAY BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF THE EASEMENT.
Such as construction of buildings, facilities, general improvements, roads, water infrastructure. Note location and
extent and any changes and/or activities and attach maps, photos, and/or illustrations as necessary.
• NOTE ANY OBSERVED CHANGES IN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERSHIP OR CONDITION. NOTE ANY CONTACT WITH
NEIGHBORING LANDOWNERS.
• LANDOWNER/REPRESENTATIVE COMMENTS. Include any landowner/representative comments specifically related to
the terms of the conservation easement and changes in land use or management.
IV. SUMMARY, STATUS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• SUMMARY. Provide a brief narrative. Information from previous reports must be incorporated if available. Include
impressions of long-term trends and conditions of the site.
• STATUS OF COMPLIANCE.
o NO VIOLATION(S) OF EASEMENT TERMS OBSERVED
o UNSURE DUE TO THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR EVALUATION
o SOME EVIDENCE OR ACTIVITIES WERE OBSERVED WHICH MAY BE IN VIOLATION OF THE EASEMENT
• SUGGEST ANY ACTIONS THAT SHOULD BETAKEN ASA RESULT OF THIS SITE MONITORING VISIT:
INFORMATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR 2013 MONITORING VISIT:
V. MONITOR CONTACT INFORMATION
NAME:
TITLE:
Unique Places
To Sage

ADDRESS:
PHONE:
EMAIL:
SIGNATURE OF MONITOR: DATE:
*This report is a record of one person's observations during one visit. It is not intended to be a statement of landowner compliance of the conservation
easement.
VI. DESCRIPTION OF ENCLOSURES AND ATTACHMENTS
Indicate the number of the following items accompanying this report:
Aerial photos
Ground photos
Maps and Illustrations
Additional documentation
Other
If attachments are separated from this report, note their location:
Unique Places
ON I To Save

VIII. PHOTODOCUMENTATION LIST
Fill in the table below for all photos taken during the monitoring site visit. Also attach a map showing the location where the
photo(s) were taken.
UTM Northing UTM Easting
Photo # Photopoint Description (meters) (meters)
Unique Places
I To Save

Unique Pisces
— TO Save
Unique Places To Save
Stewardship Monitoring Procedures and Guidelines
Unique Places To Save (UP2Save) is dedicated to upholding and defending the
conservation values of the easements it holds. An important aspect of achieving this is to
conduct our stewardship monitoring practices in a professional, accurate, and efficient
manner. The following procedures and guidelines will help ensure that staff will have the
guidance and expertise to properly monitor UP2Save's conservation easements.
UP2Save's stewardship monitoring procedures and guidelines are separated into three
stages: (1) pre -monitoring due diligence; (2) monitoring of the easement property; and (3)
post -monitoring due diligence. Each stage in the monitoring process is crucial in
employing sound monitoring practices and creating accurate and reliable documentation.
Pre -monitoring Due Diligence:
Pre -monitoring due diligence includes components that prepare the monitor for the
impending field work and documentation of their stewardship activities. The following
procedures shall be followed prior to all conservation easement monitoring visits:
1. Contact the landowner to schedule a monitoring visit at least one to two weeks
prior to the scheduled visit either by phone, email, or letter (make an effort to
group monitoring visits to multiple easements in the same general area in one
trip).
2. Make an effort to invite the landowner to be involved in the monitoring process.
Usually having the landowner available for questions or discussion of issues
before and after monitoring is fine. It is not necessary that the landowner
accompany the monitor around the property unless the landowner prefers to do
So.
3. If unknown, acquire any information needed to access the property (e.g. lock
combinations, gate locations, road/trail locations, contact information for land
managers and neighboring landowners).
4. A few days prior to the monitoring visit, make an effort to contact the landowner
to confirm the monitoring date.
5. Prior to the monitoring date, review the conservation easement deed, baseline
documentation report, most recent monitoring report, and any other pertinent
information (e.g. landowner correspondence, older monitoring reports).
6. Create a monitoring map of the property using aerial imagery or a topo map as
the base layer. Ensure that the property boundary is clearly depicted on the map
as well as any building envelopes or other important boundaries or landscape
features (e.g. stream buffers, forest management plots, property points of access).
7. Enter the property boundary and BDR photopoint locations (if available) into a
GPS unit for field reference.

8. Inform at least two staff members of your schedule and destination(s). Have an
emergency contact phone number available at the office.
9. Monitoring material that is needed on the monitoring visit includes:
a. Stewardship Binder
b. Monitoring map
c. GPS unit (with extra batteries)
d. Compass
e. Camera (with extra batteries)
f. Notepad
10. Prepare for your field work. Bring necessary field equipment to conduct a safe
and effective monitoring visit. Field equipment should include:
Required
a.
Sunscreen
b.
Extra water
c.
Extra clothing
d.
Extra food
e.
Extra cash
f.
Topo map of greater area
g.
First Aid/Survival Kit
h.
Blanket(s)
i.
Shovel
j.
Spare tire(s)
k.
Cell phone
1.
Flares
in.
Bolt cutters
n.
Crowbar
Optional
a.
Tent
b.
Sleeping bag
c.
Firearm(s)
d.
Stove
e.
Laptop computer
f.
Bear spray
Approximate pre -monitoring due diligence completion time: 3 hours
Monitoring of the Easement Property
The field portion of the monitoring effort should be interpreted as (1) an opportunity to
maintain and improve relations with landowners and/or landowner representatives; (2) a
small-scale duplication effort of the baseline documentation report; (3) an opportunity to
enhance, alter, or correct any deficiencies or errors in past monitoring efforts; and (4) a
check on the activities within and conditions of the property under easement.
The following procedures and guidelines will help ensure the efficiency, accuracy, and
safety of a monitoring visit:
1. The monitor should have a clear strategy of how the property will be monitored
prior to the site visit.

2. Meet with the landowner if possible prior to engaging in field work. Ask about
land management activities (past, present or future), activities on adjacent lands,
and any other issues related to the terms of the conservation easement.
3. Invite the landowner to accompany the monitor in the field. This is not necessary,
but it is polite to ask.
4. Enact the monitoring strategy laid out prior to the visit using all tools available
(e.g. GPS, compass, maps, photos).
5. Use GPS to track the monitoring route and take coordinates of photopoint
locations. Use the compass to take azimuth readings at the photopoint locations
(direction photo was taken). All photopoint coordinates must be taken in UTM
coordinates, Zone 13. All azimuth reading must be taken using the 3 -digit method
(0 to 360°) to decrease ambiguity as opposed to using quadrants. For example, recording
a bearing of 192° is much clearer than 12° W of S, or S12°W.
6. Walk or drive as much of the property as possible making an effort to visit all access
points, boundary lines, and property corners. Pay special attention to building envelope
areas and other areas that may have more restrictive covenants (e.g. stream corridors, no -
timbering zones, high quality habitat areas).
7. Duplicate the photopoint locations that are depicted in the BDR. If new photopoint
locations are required; develop the new photopoint locations based upon current
landscape conditions and activities. Document these new locations in the monitoring
report and make notes that future monitoring efforts should follow the new photopoint
format. Note: the original photopoints portrayed in the BDR must always be replicated
unless the BDR is amended to not include certain photopoint locations.
8. TAKE FIELD NOTES! Do not rely on memory to complete the monitoring report.
9. Make an effort to meet with the landowner after the field visit to discuss any minor, non -
violation issues or other observations made while conducting the field visit. Do not,
under any circumstances, discuss potential minor or major violations to the
conservation easement with the landowner. UP2Save has specific procedures to
follow when addressing potential violations (see UP2Save's Conservation Easement
Violations Policy).
Approximate monitoring completion time: 4-16 hours depending upon driving time and
size/complexity of property.
Post -monitoring Due Diligence: -
Post -monitoring due diligence primarily consists of developing documentation of the
monitoring visit. This documentation consists of -
1 .
£
1. Filling out the monitoring report
2. Creating a monitoring map including the photopoints, access points, monitoring track,
and any other points of interest.
3. Writing a letter to the landowner that summarizes the monitoring visit and also states that
the landowner is in compliance with the terms of the conservation easement. If the
landowner is not in compliance with the terms of the conservation easement, then staff
will follow the UP2Save's Conservation Easement Violations Policy.
4. Properly duplicate the monitoring report and file all copies according to the
UP2Save's Stewardship Records Management Policy.

Mail the signed monitoring report and compliance letter to the landowner and any
representatives listed in the baseline or that have received monitoring reports in the past.
Schedule the next monitoring visit based upon observations in the field and seasonal
access to the property.
Approximate completion time: 3 hours

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
PERMANENT CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT ("Conservation Easement") made this
day of , 201_ by and between
("Grantor") and ("Grantee").
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,
their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine,
feminine or neuter as required by context.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying and
being in County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property");
WHEREAS, Grantee is a charitable, not-for-profit or educational corporation,
association, or trust qualified under § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue
Code, the purposes or powers of which include one or more of the purposes (a) — (d)
listed below;
(a) retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -space aspects of real

property;
(b) ensuring the availability of real property for recreational, educational,
or open -space use;
(c) protecting natural resources;
(d) maintaining or enhancing air or water quality.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the conservation, scenic, natural, or
aesthetic value of the property in its natural state, which includes the following
natural communities: add or delete as appropriate: wetlands, streams and riparian
buffers. The purpose of this Conservation Easement is to maintain streams, wetlands
and riparian resources and other natural values of approximately _acres, more or
less, and being more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and
incorporated fully herein by reference (the "Conservation Easement Area"), and
prevent the use or development of the Conservation Easement Area for any purpose
or in any manner that would conflict with the maintenance of its natural condition.
WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the Conservation
Easement Area is a condition of the approval of the Mitigation Banking Instrument
(MBI) and Mitigation Plan for the Mitigation Bank, Department of the
Army (DA) Action ID Number SAW- , entitled "Agreement to Establish
the Mitigation Bank in the River Basin within the State of
North Carolina", entered into by and between acting as the Bank Sponsor
and the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers (Corps), in consultation with the North
Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT). The Mitigation Site has been
approved by the Corps for use as a mitigation bank to compensate for unavoidable
stream and wetland impacts authorized by DA permits.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of enforcement
shall be held by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District ("Third -Party," to
include any successor agencies), and may be exercised through the appropriate
enforcement agencies of the United States, and that these rights are in addition to, and
do not limit, the rights of enforcement under the Department of the Army instrument
number SAW- ("Mitigation Banking Instrument"), or any permit or
certification issued by the Third -Party.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and
representations contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby
unconditionally and irrevocably grants and conveys unto Grantee, its heirs, successors
and assigns, forever and in perpetuity a Conservation Easement of the nature and
character and to the extent hereinafter set forth, over the Conservation Easement Area
described on Exhibit B, together with the right to preserve and protect the conservation
values thereof, as follows:

ARTICLE I.
DURATIONOF EASEMENT
This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. This Conservation Easement is
an easement in gross, runs with the land and is enforceable by Grantee against Grantor,
Grantor's personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, lessees, agents and
licensees.
ARTICLE II.
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
Any activity on, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area inconsistent with
the purpose of this Conservation Easement is prohibited. The Conservation
Easement Area shall be preserved in its natural condition and restricted from any
development that would impair or interfere with the conservation values of the
Conservation Easement Area.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities and
uses are expressly prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated hereunder:
A. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change disturbance, alteration or
impairment of the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any
introduction of non-native plants and/or animal species is prohibited.
B. Construction. There shall be no constructing or placing of any building,
mobile home, asphalt or concrete pavement, billboard or other advertising
display, antenna, utility pole, tower, conduit, line, pier, landing, dock or any other
temporary or permanent structure or facility on or above the Conservation
Easement Area.
C. Industrial, Commercial and Residential Use. Industrial, residential and/or
commercial activities, including any rights of passage for such purposes are
prohibited.
D. Agricultural, Grazing and Horticultural Use. Agricultural, grazing, animal
husbandry, and horticultural use of the Conservation Easement Area are prohibited.
E. Vegetation. There shall be no removal, burning, destruction, harming,
cutting or mowing of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation in the Conservation Easement
Area except as provided in the Mitigation Plan. Mowing of invasive and herbaceous
vegetation for purposes of enhancing planted or volunteer trees and shrubs approved
in the Mitigation Plan is allowable once a year for no more than five consecutive years
from the date on page 1 of this Conservation Easement, except where mowing will
negatively impact vegetation or disturb soils. Mowing activities shall only be performed
by and shall not violate any part of Item L of Article II.
F. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails or walkways
on the Conservation Easement Area; nor enlargement or modification to existing

roads, trails or walkways.
G. Signage. No signs shall be permitted on or over the Conservation Easement
Area, except the posting of no trespassing signs, signs identifying the conservation
values of the Conservation Easement Area, signs giving directions or proscribing rules
and regulations for the use of the Conservation Easement Area and/or signs identifying
the Grantor as owner of the Conservation Easement Area.
H. Dumping or Storage. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage,
waste, abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery or hazardous substances, or toxic or
hazardous waste, or any placement of underground or aboveground storage tanks or
other materials on the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.
I. Excavation, Dredging or Mineral Use. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat,
minerals or other materials, and no change in the topography of the land in any
manner on the Conservation Easement Area, except to restore natural topography or
drainage patterns. For purposes of restoring and enhancing streams and wetlands
within the Conservation Easement Area, is allowed to perform grading,
filling, and excavation associated with stream and wetland restoration and
enhancement activities as described in the Mitigation Plan and authorized by
Department of the Army Nationwide Permit 27.
J. Water Quality and Drainage Pattern. There shall be no diking, draining,
dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or related activities, or
altering or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or
alteration of the restored, enhanced, or created drainage patterns. In addition,
diverting or causing or permitting the diversion of surface or underground water into,
within or out of the easement area by any means, removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides is
prohibited.
K. Development Rights. No development rights that have been encumbered
or extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be transferred pursuant to a
transferable development rights scheme or cluster development arrangement or
otherwise.
L. Vehicles. The operation of mechanized vehicles, including, but not limited to,
motorcycles, dirt bikes, all -terrain vehicles, cars and trucks is prohibited other than for
temporary or occasional access by the Enter Sponsor Name, the Grantee, its
employees and agents, successors, assigns, and the Corps for purposes of
constructing, maintaining and monitoring the restoration, enhancement and
Dreservation of streams. wetlands and riaarian areas within the Conservation
Easement Area..
M. Other Prohibitions. Any other use of, or activity on, the Conservation
Easement Area which is or may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant,
the preservation of the Conservation Easement Area substantially in its natural

condition, or the protection of its environmental systems, is prohibited.
ARTICLE III
GRANTOR'S RESEVERED RIGHTS
The Grantor expressly reserves for himself, his personal representatives, heirs,
successors or assigns, the right to continue the use of the Conservation Easement Area
for all purposes not inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, including, but not
limited to, the right to quiet enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area, the rights
of ingress and egress, the right to hunt, fish, and hike on the Conservation Easement
Area, the right to sell, transfer, gift or otherwise convey the Conservation Easement
Area, in whole or in part, provided such sale, transfer or gift conveyance is subject to
the terms of, and shall specifically reference, this Conservation Easement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor, its
successors and assigns, including acting as the Bank Sponsor, the right to
construct and perform activities related to the restoration, enhancement, and
preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within the Conservation
Easement Area in accordance with the approved Mitigation Plan, and the
Mitigation Banking Instrument described in the Recitals of this Conservation
Easement.
ARTICLE IV.
GRANTEE'S RIGHTS
The Grantee or its authorized representatives, successors and assigns, and the
Corps, shall have the right to enter the Property and Conservation Easement Area at all
reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the Conservation Easement Area to
determine if the Grantor, or his personal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns,
is complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes of this Conservation
Easement. The Grantee, Enter Sponsor Name, and its authorized representatives,
successors and assigns, and the Corps shall also have the right to enter and go upon the
Conservation Easement Area for purposes of making scientific or educational
observations and studies, and taking samples. The easement rights granted herein do
not include public access rights.
ARTICLE V
A. To accomplish the purposes of this Easement, Grantee, and the Corps are
allowed to prevent any activity on or use of the Conservation Easement Area that is
inconsistent with the purposes of this Easement and to require the restoration of such
areas or features of the Conservation Easement Area that may be damaged by such
activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by
Grantor that comes to the attention of the Grantee, the Grantee shall notify the
Grantor in writing of such breach. The Grantor shall have 30 days after receipt of such
notice to correct the conditions constituting such breach. If the breach remains
uncured after 30 days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by

appropriate legal proceedings including damages, injunctive and other relief.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without
notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief if
the breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation
Easement. The Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that under such circumstances
damage to the Grantee would be irreparable and remedies at law will be inadequate.
The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection
with this Conservation Easement. The costs of a breach, correction or restoration,
including the Grantee's expenses, court costs, and attorneys' fees, shall be paid by
Grantor, provided Grantor is determined to be responsible for the breach. The Corps
shall have the same rights and privileges as the said Grantee to enforce the terms and
conditions of this Conservation easement.
B. No failure on the part of the Grantee to enforce any covenant or provision
hereof shall discharge or invalidate such covenant or any other covenant, condition,
or provision hereof or affect the right to Grantee to enforce the same in the event of
a subsequent breach or default.
C. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be construed to
entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the
Conservation Easement Area resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, war, acts of God or third parties, except
Grantor's lessees or invitees; or from any prudent action taken in good faith by Grantor
under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to life,
damage to property or harm to the Conservation Easement Area resulting from such
causes.
ARTICLE VI
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Warranty. Grantor warrants, covenants and represents that it owns the
Property in fee simple, and that Grantor either owns all interests in the Property which
may be impaired by the granting of this Conservation Easement or that there are no
outstanding mortgages, tax liens, encumbrances, or other interests in the Property
which have not been expressly subordinated to this Conservation Easement. Grantor
further warrants that Grantee shall have the use of and enjoy all the benefits derived
from and arising out of this Conservation Easement, and that Grantor will warrant and
defend title to the Property against the claims of all persons._
B. Subsequent Transfers. The Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms of this
Conservation Easement in any deed or other legal instrument that transfers any
interest in all or a portion of the Conservation Easement Area. The Grantor agrees to
provide written notice of such transfer at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of the
transfer. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement
shall survive any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Conservation

Easement Area or any portion thereof and shall not be amended, modified or
terminated without the prior written consent and approval of the Corps.
C. Assignment. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this
Conservation Easement are in gross and assignable provided, however that the
Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event it transfers or assigns this
Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a qualified
holder pursuant to 33 CFR 332.7 (a)(1), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 501 (c)(3)
and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and
agrees that the terms of the transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or
assignee will be required to continue in perpetuity the conservation purposes
described in this document.
D. Entire Agreement and Severability. The Mitigation Banking Instrument: MBI
with corresponding Mitigation Plan, and this Conservation Easement sets forth the
entire agreement of the parties with respect to the Conservation Easement and
supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or agreements relating to
the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be void or unenforceable by a
court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder shall continue in full force and effect.
E. Obligations of Ownership. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes,
assessments, fees, or charges levied upon the Property. Grantor shall keep the Property
free of any liens or other encumbrances for obligations incurred by Grantor, except
those incurred after the date hereof, which are expressly subject and subordinate to the
Conservation Easement. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any
kind related to the ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the
Property, except as expressly provided herein. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor
of the obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits
that may apply to the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
F. Long -Term Management. If livestock operations will be maintained on the
property, Grantor is responsible for all long-term management activities associated
with fencing to ensure livestock do not have access to the Protected Property. These
activities include the maintenance and/or replacement of fence structures, as deemed
necessary by the Grantee, to ensure the aquatic resource functions within the
boundaries of the Protected Property are sustained.
G. Extinguishment. In the event that changed conditions render impossible the
continued use of the Conservation Easement Area for the conservation purposes, this
Conservation Easement may only be extinguished, in whole or in part, by judicial
proceeding.
H. Eminent Domain. Whenever all or part of the Conservation Easement Area
is taken in the exercise of eminent domain so as to substantially abrogate the
Restrictions imposed by this Conservation Easement, Grantor and Grantee shall join in
appropriate actions at the time of such taking to recover the full value of the taking,
and all incidental and direct damages due to the taking.

I. Proceeds. This Conservation Easement constitutes a real property interest
immediately vested in Grantee. In the event that all or a portion of the Conservation
Easement Area is sold, exchanged, or involuntarily converted following an
extinguishment or the exercise of eminent domain, Grantee shall be entitled to the fair
market value of this Conservation Easement as determined at the time of the
extinguishment or condemnation.
J. Notification. Any notice, request for approval, or other communication
required under this Conservation Easement shall be sent by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, to the following addresses (or such address as may be hereafter
specified by notice pursuant to this paragraph):
To Grantor:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Grantee:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Sponsor:
To the Corps:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District Regulatory Division
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
K. Failure of Grantee. If at any time Grantee is unable or fails to enforce this
Conservation Easement, or if Grantee ceases to be a qualified grantee, and if within a
reasonable period of time after the occurrence of one of these events Grantee fails to
make an assignment pursuant to this Conservation Easement, then the Grantee's
interest shall become vested in another qualified grantee in accordance with an
appropriate proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction.
L. Amendment. This Conservation Easement may be amended, but only in
a writing signed by all parties hereto, and provided such amendment does not
affect the qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee
under any applicable laws, and is consistent with the conservation purposes of this
grant.
M. Present Condition of the Conservation Easement Area. The wetlands, scenic,
resource, environmental, and other natural characteristics of the Conservation
Easement Area, and its current use and state of improvement, are described in Section
of the Mitigation Plan,_prepared by Grantor and acknowledged by the Grantor
and Grantee to be complete and accurate as of the date hereof. Both Grantor and
Grantee have copies of this report. It will be used by the parties to assure that any
future changes in the use of the Conservation Easement Area will be consistent with
the terms of this Conservation Easement. However, this report is not intended to
preclude the use of other evidence to establish the present condition of the

Conservation Easement Area if there is a controversy over its use.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually unto Grantee for
the aforesaid purposes.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
(Signatures of the Grantor and Grantee in appropriate form)

Appendix D — DWR Stream Identification
Forms

NC DWQ Stream Identification
Form
Summary
6
REACH
MC2-A/B
JN4-A/B
JN5
JN6-A/B
JN6-C
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =)
28
23
20.5
21.5
15
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
3
2
3
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3
3
3
3
2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,
3
2
3
3
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
3
2
3
3
1
5. Active/relict floodplain
3
3
2
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
3
3
2
3
1
7. Recent alluvial deposits
3
3
0
2
1
8. Headcuts
2
2
2
1
0
9. Grade control
0.5
1.5
1
1.5
0.5
10. Natural valley
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
3
0
0
0
3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =)
9.5
8.5
6
7.5
8.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
3
3
3
2
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
0
0
0
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
1.5
1
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
1.5
1
1
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
3
j 3
j 0
j 3
j 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
6
8.75
12
6
3.75
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
2
2
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
3
3
1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
1
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
2
2
0
0
22. Fish
0
0
1
0
0
23. Crayfish
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1.5
0
0
25. Algae
0
0
0
0
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
0.75
0
0
0.75
Total Points (Subtotal=) 43.5 40.25 38.5 35 27.25

NC DWQ Stream Identification Farm Version 4.11 416
Date: 4 F Project/Site. I u„ Latitude:
Evaluator: r, Caun S
'k.. ty: ,, Longitude:
Total Points:
at Stream is perennial
intermittent Stream Determination circle one) Other
I� eranermenerennial e.
if z 19 or rennra! if >_ 34` ✓ - 5 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial 9. Quad Name:
`7 Y
H. veomor holo {Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1! Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
i
2
3
3 fn -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool se sequence
0
1
2
03
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
Notes:
B. Headcuts
D
3
9. Grade control
0
0.
17,
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
No = 0
Yes:
r+• __ - - arc i IQl ' acc Vi uJJI IIJ Irl IIIGlIVGI ��
R_ Hvdminnv tSuhtntal - 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
1
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5 1
U23
3
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
2
3
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0 0.5
No = 0
1.5
lam_ OI IJI[JUV • _�IJKIIIJ1A11 = i 17 1
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
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae IA 1.
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 (Other =
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: q !
ProjectfSite:��
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County:
Longitude:
0
1
14. Leaf litter
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (cir
Other fir+ L/
D
I.IO�LS
if a 19 or renMal If i 30'
Ephemeral Intermitten erennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geonnor holo (Subtotal= Z3
Absent
Weak
Mo ate
Strong
1 "'Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
14. Leaf litter
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
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
2
c3D
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
23
1.5
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
38.
Headcuts
0
1
39.
Grade control
0
0.5
EE
1.510.
Natural valley
0
05
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
arnnaai ditches are nm rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = b, S_
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5 1
coff
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 .5
3
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 .5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
0.5
es = 3
G. BiologV (Subtotal = K , rf•S ) �--�
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.
24. Amphibians
0
.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FA CW .70
OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: M = 1r,o-i s,w k> c_ t441 t,
4 �D+vEF
CJtS
N GNC 4 -
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 ' `f 0 r,
Date: y I e
Project/Site: A0§9S
Latitude:
Evaluator: V'TT-
County:
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Streams e2nnial ifaatleastl>_ 30' intermittent �Q� y
i!>_ 19 or ! V
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
15Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
(23
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
1
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
1
1,5
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
Other = 0
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
Q9 1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o =
Yes = 3
Sketch:
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal=
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1 2
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1 2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5 1 0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
01 0. 1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0. 1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0 Yes = 3
1
C. Biolo Subtotal = 17, ,O
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1,5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
no
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:
a
Sketch:
51

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 �'�' 6�.l 6
Date:L y
Project/Site:
Latitude:
Evaluator: n .
Count
Longitude:
Total Paints:
?
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
�-` � ,
if _ 79 orperennial if? 30' F
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
s1 1 r --
A.
- -
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = of I' > )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
I", Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
0
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
01'
No = 0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
1.5
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
OBL = 1.5 Pther =
3
9. Grade control
0
T5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
o = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = Z �_ )
12. Presence of Basefiow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
5
C21i
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
C121.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
1
es = 3
C. Biology {Subtotal = � �) } LJ
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0 `
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
p"
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1.5 Pther =
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 J 1 U"
Date: Y130 Ilk
Project/Site: G
Latitude:
Evaluator: % cc-
County: SLkr2l,,
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent �l as`
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
Ns 19 or emnnial H >_ 3
2:30' 7
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
Ire
A. Geomorphology ( Subtotal = 1 a
Absent
Weak
Mo
to Strong
to Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2j
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
No = 0
2
1.5
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0Y
LAM = 0.7
2
3
9. Grade control
0
M
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = WS )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
1.5
C. Biology Subtotal = 5r J �)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
LAM = 0.7
BL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Appendix E — USACE District Assessment
Methods/Forms

Stream Qualit Assessment Worksheet Summa
MC2-A
MC2-B
JN4-A
JN4-B
JN5
JN6-A
JN6-B
JN6-C
1
Presence of flow/ persistent
4
4
4
4
5
3
3
3
pools in stream
2
Evidence of past human
0
5
3
2
4
5
5
3
alteration
3
Riparian zone
0
2
3
2
2
4
3
2
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical
0
3
4
1
1
4
3
2
discharges
R
5
Groundwater discharge
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
V
N
T
L
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
4
3
2
2
2
0
0
4
IL
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
3
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
9
Channel sinuosity
2
4
3
1
3
2
2
2
10
Sediment input
1
2
1
0
3
4
3
2
11
Size & diversity of channel bed
4
4
4
1
5
4
4
1
substrate
12
Evidence of channel incision or
1
2
2
2
2
4
3
1
widening
13
Presence of major bank failures
1
3
1
3
2
5
5
1
T
R
14
Root depth and density on banks
1
2
3
3
5
3
2
2
y
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock,
0
2
0
5
3
4
3
1
or timber production
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool
4
5
3
2
6
5
3
1
complexes
17
Habitat complexity
0
4
4
4
5
4
5
2
R
R18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0
2
3
3
4
5
5
2
x
19
Substrate embeddedness
5
4
3
3
3
4
3
1
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
2
2
4
3
4
1
1
0
21
Presence of amphibians
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
0
op0
22
Presence of fish
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
23
Evidence of wildlife use
2
2
2
2
4
3
3
2
Total Score: 31 1 59 1 53 1 44 1 71 1 66 1 58 1 41

Site: Gideon
M LZ -PC
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
V-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
a-1
0-3
0-4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
0
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Cristal
Piedmont
Mountain
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max ints
0-5
10
1
Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
11
no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = max points)
0-5
0 -- 4
0-5
fine, homogenous = 0• large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
NA*
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
0-5
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points
13
Presence of major bank failures
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
O
F
no buffer = 0; conn nous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
0-3
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-3
17
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints)
18
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
V
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0— 4
0— 4
0— 2
Ll
no flood Iain = 0• extensive floodplain = max points)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
>4
Entrenchment / floodplain access
a' 7
0-5
0-4
0-2
Presence of amphibians
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max ints
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max ints
0-4
Pretence of ndincent wntlnnrlr
22
Presence of fish
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
V-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
a-1
0-3
0-4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
0
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
u —'0
9
Channel sinuosity
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max ints
0-5
10
Sediment input
0-5
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine, homogenous = 0• large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
NA*
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
,>4
deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
0-5
a
13
Presence of major bank failures
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
F
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max Dints
0-3
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
0-5
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-3
17
Habitat complexity
0—
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
0-5
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
dee I embedded = 0; loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
>4
no evidence = 0; common numerous t3Ws = maxpoints)
0-4
0
21
Presence of amphibians
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max ints
0-4
04
22
Presence of fish
0-4
no evidence = 0, common, numerous Vpes = maxpoints)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
V-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
a-1
0-3
0-4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
0

Si MqB
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
no wetlands = 0; large gacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4
0-2
`
V
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
w
flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = max oinis
0-5
0-4
0-5
V(no
2
Evidence of past human alteration
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
a
extensive alteration — 0; no alteration = max oints
0-6
0 — 5
0-5
3
Riparian zone
0 — 4
0-5
0—S
no buffer= 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)0-6
fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes = max oints
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(extensive dischar as = 0; no dischar es = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
5 Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0— 4
G
no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints)
0-5
0 — 5
0-5
�.., Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
no floodplain = 0• extensive floodplain = max]pts 0-4
0-4
0-2
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access 0 -- 5 0-4 0-2
Root depth and density on banks
dee I entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max ints
0-4
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
$
Presence of adjacent wetlands
no wetlands = 0; large gacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4
0-2
`
V
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
w
extensive channelization — 0; natural meander = max points)
l0
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
a
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA
0-4
0—S
fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes = max oints
1
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
�+
(deeply incised = 0, stable bed & hanks = maxpoints)
a
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 — 5
0-5
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints)
IS
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
substantial impact -0; no evidence = maxpoints)
16
Presence of riffle-poot/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0— 5
0-6
E
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
y
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
,,2
Substrate embeddedness
NA *
0-4
0 — 4
(-/19
dee ! 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 = maxpoints)
,7
U
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max ints
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
F22Presence
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oints
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
-
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

Evaluator: MDE & EWT
Site: Gideon L^ Sr Date: 4/30/2018
F/t
,j TREAM QUALITfASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
I
no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = maxpoints)0-5
0 — 4
0-5
2
Evidence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)J
0-6
0-5
0— 5
2
3
Riparian zone
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max oints
0-5
0 — 4
0-4
045
Groundwater discharge
_]
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. =max Dints)
0-3 0-4 0-4
V
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4 0-4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max oints)
0-2
7
Entrenchment/ floodplain access
a'
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
0-5 0 — 4 0 — 2
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0-6 0 — 4 0-2
('
9
Channel sinuosity
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints)0-5
0 — 4 0 — 3
j
10
Sediment input
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max Dints)0-5
0 — 4 0-4
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
NA* 0-4 0-5
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
Hdee
I incised = 0, stable bed & banks — maxpoints)0
— 5 0-4 0 — 5
13
Presence of major bank failures
a
`."
severe erosion — 0,- no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
0 5 0 5 0 5
M
14
Root depth and density on banks
E -M
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
0 3 0-4 0-5
Fin
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
0-5 0-4 0-5
(�
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max oints
0-3 0--5 0-6
Q'
17
Habitat complexity
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
0-6 0-6 0-6
M
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
=no
sang vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points
0-5 0-5 0-5
19
Substrate embeddedness
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max
NA* 0-4 0-4
3
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es =max Dints
0-4 0 — 5 0-5
21
Presence of amphibians
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points
0-4 0-4 0— 4
C
22
Presence of fish
0— 4 0-4 0-4
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oink
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
0 — 5 0-5
Total Points Possible
100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
e
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

Site: Gideon
V t4 LA—,b
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
�i
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
Q
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding – maxpoints)
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4
0-5
Presence of adjacent wetlands
2
Evidence of past human alteration
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4 0-2
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max poin. s
0-6
0-5
0-5
0-4 0-3
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
10
Sediment input
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4
0 – 4
5
Groundwater discharge
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
NA*
0-4 0 – 5
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max oints
0-3
0-4
0-4
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
6
rreaence ur auJaceni reooaplam
0-4
0-4 0-2
y,
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = maxpoints)
�i
Entrenchment 1 floodplain access
Q
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding – maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-2
j
i
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4 0-2
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4 0-3
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints)
10
Sediment input
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-4
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
NA*
0-4 0 – 5
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
�+
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed &banks =max Dints
0-5
0-4 0-5
a13
Presence of major bank failures
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
0-5
0-5 0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints)
0-3
0-4 0-5
I -S
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-5
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
F
no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)0-3
0 – 5 0-6
2
Q
17
Habitat complexity
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
0-6
0-6 0-6
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
0-5
0-5 0-5
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4 0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max pDints
0-4
0-5 0-5
3
21(
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4 0-4
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous ypes = maxpoints)
O
22
Presence offish
0-4
0-4 0-4
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
JO–
23
Evidence of wildlife use
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points
0-6
0 – 5 0-5
Z
Total Points Possible
100
100 100
7 ':
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2

Site: Gideon
JN5
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = maxpoints)
0-4
x
I
no flow or saturation = 0; strongflow = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
j
2
Evidence of past human alteration
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = maxpoints)
0-6
0-5
0-5
Channel sinuosity
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5
Z
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)0-5 0 — 0-4
/
045
Groundwater discharge
0-3
no discharge — 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = maxpoints)
0-4
x
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = maxpoints)0
— 5
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
0-5
10
Sediment input
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
0-5
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
NA*
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints
0-5
,�•,
13
Presence of major bank failures
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
E„
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints)
0-3
15
impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
0-5
16
Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes
E
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-3
17
Habitat complexity
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
0-6
M
I8
Canopy coverage over streambed
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = maxpoints)
0-5
19
Substrate embeddedness
(dee 1 embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
NA*
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
7„
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = maxpoints)
0-4
U
21
Presence of amphibians
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
0-4
04 0
22
Presence of fish
0-4
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es =max ints
23
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
0-6
Total Points Possible
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
0-4
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-3
0-4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
I

Site: Gideon
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
4;
--: ' ?
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont Mountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = maxpoints)
0-4
0-5
2
Evidence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = maxpoints)0-6
0
— 5 0-5
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4
0-4
,.a
5
Groundwater discharge
Uno
discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
0-3
0
— 4 0-4
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0— 4
0—
4 0— 2
O
�+
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
x
7
Entrenchment/ floodplain access
0— 5
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max points)
0—
4 0— 2
$0-6
Presence of adjacent wetlands
}
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-4
0-2
f
9
Channel sinuosity
S
0
— 4 0 — 3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander — max points)0
10
Sediment input
0-5
0—
4 0-4
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
I
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
f
�
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max pints
0-5
0 —
4 0-5
0-0
I3
Presence of major bank failures
0
severe erosion — 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)0-5
—
5 0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
0 —
4 0-5
F„
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints)0-3
CA
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
0-5
0 —
4 0-5
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-5
0-6
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
,x
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canoRy = maxpoints)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
yy
no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = maxpoints)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0—
4 0-4
O(no
evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
04
22
Presence of fish
0— 4
0—
4 0— 4
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points)`
23
Evidence of wildlife use
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints)
0-6
0-5
0-5
Total Points Possible
100
100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
III
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

Site: Gideon
C) t4 '0-5 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
# CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
SCORE
Coastal Piedmont Mountain
1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
no flow or saturation — 0; strong flow = maxpoints)
0-5 0-4 0-5
2 Evidence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max poin s
0-6 0-5 0-5
no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide buffer = max points)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
3
Ktpartan zone
0— b
0— 4 0— 5
no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
extensive discharges — 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-4
3
04
5
Groundwater discharge
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
0 3
0-4 0 — 4
U
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
0_ 4
0— 4 0— 2
Entrenchment / floodplain access
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max pDints)
0-5
0--4 0-2
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
0-6
0-4 0-2
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4 0-3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4 0-4
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints)
I 1
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine, homogenous — 0; large, diverse sizes — max pDints
NA*
0-4 0-5
12
.Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
0-4 0-5
,..,
] 3
Presence of major bank failures
a
rr
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints
0-5
0-5 0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
F,
no visible roots — 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints)
0-3
0-4 0-5
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4 0-5
16
Presence of riffle-poot/ripple-pool complexes
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-3
0-5 0-6
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6 0-6
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
raw(no
shadingvegetation = 0; continuous canopy= max points
0-5
0-5 0-5)
19
Substrate embeddedness
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)NA*
0-4 0 — 4
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
>
no evidence = 0 common numerous types = maxpoints)
0-4
0-5 0-5
U
21
Presence of amphibians
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
0-4
0-4 0-4
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4 0-4
R23
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points)
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 -- 5 0-5
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints)
Total Points Possible
100
100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
s
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

Sit Gideon
N �0-c-
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Evaluator: CC
Date: 4/30/2018
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
sive channelization = 0; nat
(extenural meander =max points)
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
10
Sediment input
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = maxpoints)0-5
0 - 4
0-5
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
12
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = maxpoints)
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max p2ints
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
0ai
4
no buffer = 0; conn wows, wide buffer = maxpoints)
0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throw hoot = maxpoints)
0-3
15
F, 5
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
0-5
0-4
0-4
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
0-5
Groundwater discharge
16
Presence of riffle -pool ripple -pool complexes
E
Uno
discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints)
0-3
0-4
0-4
Habitat complexity
6
Presence of adjacent floodplainCOD
0- 4
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
0-6
y,
no flood lain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
0- 4
0- 2
Canopy coverage over streambed
�+ 7 Entrenchment / floodplain access
Q
0-5
0-4
0-2
0-5
(deeply entrenched 4 0; frequent flooding = maxpoints)
19
Substrate embeddedness
Prncpnre of ndi§rent wPt1%ndc
dee I embedded = 0; loose structure = max
NA*
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
U-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
U-"2
0-3
0--4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
A
�1
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints
-0)
9
Channel sinuosity
sive channelization = 0; nat
(extenural meander =max points)
0-5
10
Sediment input
0-5
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment - maxpoints)
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
I I
fine, homogenous = 0, large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
NA*
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max p2ints
0-5
3
Presence of major bank failures
0ai
4
(severe erosion - 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
0-5
14
Root depth and density on banks
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throw hoot = maxpoints)
0-3
15
F, 5
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
0-5
16
Presence of riffle -pool ripple -pool complexes
E
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = maxpoints)
0-3
Q
1
Habitat complexity
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints)
0-6
1$
Canopy coverage over streambed
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy - maxpoints)
0-5
19
Substrate embeddedness
dee I embedded = 0; loose structure = max
NA*
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = max points
0-4
(�
21
Presence of amphibians
Q
no evidence - 0; common, numerous types = max points
0-4
22
Presence of fish
0-4
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)-
0 6
Total Points Possible
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2
U-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
U-"2
0-3
0--4
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-5
0-6
0-6
0-5
0-4
0-5
0-4
0-4
0-5
100
A
�1

Appendix F —Wetland JD Forms

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2017-01462 County: Surry U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Bottom
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner:
RES
Jeremv Schmid
Address:
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh. NC 28605
Telephone Number:
919-926-1473
E-mail:
ischmidAres.us
Size (acres) 27.8 Nearest Town Dodson
Nearest Waterway Mill Creek River Basin Upper Yadkin
USGS HUC 03040101 Coordinates Latitude: 36.39654
Longitude: -80.8584
Location description: The proiect site Gideon Mitigation site is located on Ed Nixon Road, near Thurmond, North Carolina and
is adjacent to and associated with SAW -2017- 01507 Little Sebastian Mitigation site.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 10/27/2017. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

SAW -2017-01462
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DDS We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below on DATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact William Elliott at 828-271-7980 ext 4224 or
William.a.elliottCa� usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the PJD 'urisdictional determination form dated 5/22/2018.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Atte: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by DATE.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division O "ce if you do not obj the de tion in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: _William Elliott '
Date of JD: 5/22/2018 Expiration Date of JD: NONE

SAW -2017-01462
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/Pp=13 6:4:0
Copy furnished:
Byron Thomas Shaw II, Mary Beth Shaw, 227 Hawthorne Road, Elkin, NC 28621
Christopher Edward Nixon & Gwyn Dobbins Nixon, Jimmy Edward Nixon & Vivian J. Life Estate, 611 Ed Nixon Road, Thurmond, NC 28683
Stephen & Amy Shore, 433 Ed Nixon Road, Thurmond, NC 28683

NOTM, CA-URDIAEADMINBTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AT
-
REQUEST FOR.APPEAIL
Applicant: RES, Jeremy Schmid File Number: SAW -20_17-01462 Date: 5/22/2018
Attached is: See Section below
LL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission) A
ERED PERMIT Standard Permitor Letter of ermission) B
T DENIAL C
VED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
MINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
5 f C'TI 'N 1- The fol l owing identities your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or
1� tv � .usae .arm ..zui Ti�issi ri, vii ilW+orksJRegLilato[y rop-rarnandPennits.asoN or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR
Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer
for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is
authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its
entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional
determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may
request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the
district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,
or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will
evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to
address some of your objections, or (c) not modify. the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as
previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your
reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer
for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is
authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its
entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional
determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions
therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the
division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal
Process by completing Section H of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide
new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days
of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety,, and waive all rights to appeal the
approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer.
This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding
the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be
appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.. Also you may provide new information for further
consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
SECTION Il - REQUES., FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to ar
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where
your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum
for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has
determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information of
analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is
already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
appeal process you may contact:
may also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory. Division
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: William Elliott
CESAD-PDO
Asheville Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10Ml.5
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government'
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a
15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the o ortunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 5/22/2018
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: RES, Jerem 'Schmid, 302 Jefferson Street, Suite
110.Raleigh, NC 28605
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, NCDMS OLF- Gideon Mitigation
Site, SAW -2017-01462
D. PROJECT LOCATIONS) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project site. Gideon Mitigation site is
located on Ed Nixon Road, near Thurmond, North Carolina and is adjacent to and associated with SAW -2017- 01507
Little Sebastian Mitigation site.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Surry City: Dodson
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 36.39654 Longitude: -80.8584
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest water body: Mill Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): February 27, 2018
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEWAREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount of
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority to
Latitude (decimal
Longitude (decimal
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
degrees)
degrees)
review area {acreage
wetland vs. non -
may be„ subject (i.e.,
and linear feet, if
wetland waters)
Section 404 or Section
applicable
10/404)
See
Attached
Table

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification_ requiring "pre- construction :notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD
before accepting the terms and conditions of the. permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD
constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity, USGS, NWI Soil, Existing Conditions,WOUS
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Cc
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:.
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date): UNK
or ❑Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Cores and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
William Elliott
Signature and date of RK Uatory
staff member completing PJD
5/22/2018
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable)1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

Site
Little Sebastian
Little Sebastian
Gideon
Gideon
Gideon
Gideon
Little Sebastian
Little Sebastian
Little Sebastian
Gideon
Gideon
Gideon
Gideon
Gideon
Little Sebastian
Reach/Wetland ID
WA
WB
WC
WD
WE
WF
BS -1
JN -2
JN -3
JN -4
JN -5
JN -6
JN -7
Mill Creek
Mill Creek
Latitude Longitude
-80.859778 36.398586
-80.859642 36..397907
-80.855978 36.398336
-80.856767 36.396847
-80.856836 36.396359
-80.856058 36.394861
-80.851484 36.396111
-80.863542 36.399251
-80.859211 36.398372
-80.858733 36.395122
-80.857693 36.394568
-80.856718 36.396846
-80.855351 36.394343
-80.857033 36.394489
-80.861609 36.397017
Length (LF) /Area'(ac)
0.42
0.48
0.01
0.04
0.36
0.42
1424
1792
1363
634
78
2024
55
1855
3146

Appendix G —Invasive Species Plan

INVASIVE SPECIES PLAN
Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished
project. These site inspections may identify the presence of invasive vegetation. RES will treat invasive
species vegetation within the project area and provide remedial action on a case-by-case basis. Common
invasive species vegetation, such as Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora),
tree -of -heaven (Ailanthus altissima), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), will be treated to
allow native plants to become established within the conservation easement. Invasive species vegetation
will be treated by approved mechanical and/or chemical methods such that the percent composition of
exotic/invasive species is less than 5% of the total riparian buffer area. Any control methods requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules
and regulations. If areas of invasive species exist within the easement, they will be monitored yearly as part
of the monitoring protocol, and treated if necessary. If required, problem areas will continue to be treated
until the project easement shows overall trending towards meeting all monitoring requirements.

Appendix H —Regulatory Agency Scoping
Letters

fires
January 4, 2018
Mr. Vann Stancil
Habitat Conservation Biologist
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
215 Jerusalem Church Road
Kenly, NC 27542
Subject: Project Scoping for Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank in Surry County.
Dear Mr. Stancil,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with
respect to fish and wildlife associated with a potential stream restoration project on the attached site (USGS
site maps with approximate property lines and areas of potential ground disturbance are enclosed). The
Gideon Site (36°23'47.9"N 80°51'25.2"W) has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
(RES) to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts. The proposed project involves
the restoration and enhancement of approximately 4,092 linear feet of stream. Current stream conditions
along the proposed restoration reaches demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts
from agricultural land use, water diversion, and cattle intrusion. Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor
condition throughout most of the project area.
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 [e-mail] with any questions that
you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth I Ecologist
res.us

L6\ -
arl � 3188.03 acresrne
ke
fo
C
�! 3e
Proposed Easement
Watershed
� �Iountai
I
USGS Map Date: 12/29/2017
w Drawn by: MDE
Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank
res
0 1,000 2,000
Surry County, North Carolina
Feet

From: Stancil, Vann F
To: Eric Teitsworth
Subject: RE: [External] Project Scoping for Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank in Surry County
Date: Friday, January 12, 2018 11:36:51 AM
Hey Eric,
I see that this mitigation project is adjacent to the Little Sebastian Stream Mitigation Site. Is RES still
moving forward with the Little Sebastian project? I've taken my response for that project and
modified it for Gideon.
The Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank is located in Surry County on Mill Creek and 2 of it's tributaries.
Mill Creek is a tributary to the Mitchell River. While there are no records of listed aquatic species in
Mill Creek, there are records for brook floater, Alasmidonta varicosa, in the Mitchell River upstream
and downstream of the Mill Creek confluence. Brook floater is a state endangered species. I've
consulted with our aquatic biologists about the possibility of brook floaters in Mill Creek. There are
no records from Mill Creek, but we don't have any records of collection efforts there either. So
brook floaters may inhabit Mill Creek, near the area proposed for restoration. Our biologist plan to
investigate Mill Creek to see if there are brook floaters present or if the habitat there is likely to
support them. If brook floaters, or another listed aquatic species is found, additional measures will
be needed to protect these species if restoration efforts are likely to impact them. While restoration
efforts are likely to improve habitat conditions in the long term in Mill Creek, and potentially
improve conditions downstream in the Mitchell River as well, there may be short term impacts to
aquatic species and habitats during restoration. Additional measures during restoration may be
needed to minimize these short term impacts.
Regarding terrestrial species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recently listed the northern
long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Davie &
Surry counties are within the range
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf) of the northern
long-eared bat and may be present or in the vicinity of the project site. As such, consultation with
the USFWS may be required. For more information, please see
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/ or
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/NLEB_RFO.html or contact the Asheville office of the USFWS to ensure
that potential issues related to this species are addressed.
I'll let our biologists know that this project has expanded, but it looks like this just fills in a gap on Mill
Creek between Little Sebastian locations. Please let me know if I can assist further.
Thanks,
Vann
From: Eric Teitsworth [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2018 10:15 AM
To: Stancil, Vann F <[e-mail]>

Cc: Cara Conder <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Project Scoping for Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank in Surry County
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to reoort.spamna nc.gov.
Hello Mr. Stancil,
Resource Environmental Solutions is requesting a review for fish and wildlife species at a prospective
mitigation bank site in Surry County. Please see the attached letter and map for more details and
feel free to contact me with any further questions.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth
Ecologist
RESP res.us
Mobile: [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Stancil, Vann F <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 1:17 PM
To: Matthew DeAngelo
Subject: RE: [External] Mockingbird Mitigation Site
Matt,
Thanks for the opportunity to review these 3 mitigation project for issues related to fish and wildlife.
The Mockingbird Stream Mitigation Site is located on Hauser Creek and its tributaries in Davie
County. Hauser Creek is a direct tributary to the Yadkin River. There's an existing easement
downstream of this new mitigation site. There are no records for any listed aquatic species in the
vicinity of this project.
The Catbird Stream Mitigation Site appears to be located on an unnamed tributary to the Yadkin River
located east of Hauser Creek in Davie County. There are no records for any listed aquatic species in the
vicinity of this project.
The Little Sebastian Stream Mitigation Site is located in Surry County on Mill Creek and 3 of it's
tributaries. Mill Creek is a tributary to the Mitchell River. While there are no records of listed aquatic
species in Mill Creek, there are records for brook floater, Alasmidonta varicosa, in the Mitchell River
upstream and downstream of the Mill Creek confluence. Brook floater is a state endangered
species. I've consulted with our aquatic biologists about the possibility of brook floaters in Mill
Creek. There are no records from Mill Creek, but we don't have any records of collection efforts there
either. So brook floaters may inhabit Mill Creek, near the area proposed for restoration. Our biologist
plan to investigate Mill Creek to see if there are brook floaters present or if the habitat there is likely to
support them. If brook floaters, or another listed aquatic species is found, additional measures will be
needed to protect these species if restoration efforts are likely to impact them. While restoration
efforts are likely to improve habitat conditions in the long term in Mill Creek, and potentially improve
conditions downstream in the Mitchell River as well, there may be short term impacts to aquatic species
and habitats during restoration. Additional measures during restoration may be needed to minimize
these short term impacts.
Regarding terrestrial species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recently listed the northern
long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Davie & Surry
counties are within the range
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf) of the northern long-
eared bat and may be present or in the vicinity of the project site. As such, consultation with the USFWS
may be required. For more information, please see
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/ or
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/NLEB RFO.html or contact the Asheville office of the USFWS to ensure
that potential issues related to this species are addressed.
Please let me know if I can assist further. Also, feel free to follow up on the results of survey efforts in
Mill Creek if you have not yet heard from me.
Thanks,
Vann

From: Matthew DeAngelo [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 12:50 PM
To: Stancil, Vann F <[e-mail]>
Cc: Brad Breslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Mockingbird Mitigation Site
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you verify that the attachment and content are safe. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail].
Dear Mr. Stancil,
The Mockingbird Stream Mitigation Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
(RES) to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts through the
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The purpose of this letter is to request, review, and
comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to fish and wildlife associated with a
potential stream restoration project on the attached site (USGS site maps with approximate property
lines and areas of potential ground disturbance are enclosed along with a KMZ file). 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 [e-mail] with any questions that you may
have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Matt DeAngelo
Ecologist
RES I res.us
Direct: 984.255.9133 1 Mobile: [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Matthew DeAngelo
To: 'Russ. W. Thomas"
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
Date: Friday, April 6, 2018 4:04:00 PM
No worries. Thank you for the extra info. And yes, our activities will be in the pasture upstream.
Starting at about 4,500 ft. upstream of the Mitchell River confluence, we will be doing Enhancement
activities such as bank stabilization, buffer plantings, and fencing out cattle. Then, about 2,000 ft.
above that is where our full -on restoration begins. Then some more Enhancement activities above
that. So, we'll see ... maybe those floaters will make their way up some day.
From: Russ, W. Thomas [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 6, 2018 3:00 PM
To: Matthew DeAngelo <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
Sorry for the short reply. Here is a little more: lower Mill Creek is actually in decent shape, and
where it enters Mitchell River is a good population of Brook Floaters. Is the restoration upstream in
the cattle pasture? It looked really bad there, it and the Mitchell would benefit greatly.
TR
From: Matthew DeAngelo [mailto:mdeangeloCcDres.us]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2018 2:52 PM
To: Russ, W. Thomas <thomas.russPncwildlife.org>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
ATMExternal email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an
att'JOWt to Report Spam.
Ok thanks for passing that along.
From: Russ, W. Thomas[mailto:thomas.russ(@ncwildlife.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 11:32 AM
To: Matthew DeAngelo <mdeangelo(@res.us>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
Yes, we surveyed it last week, no mussels, have at it.
William
On Apr 5, 2018 10:29 AM, Matthew DeAngelo <mdeangelo(@res.us> wrote:
Send all suspicious email as an 1
attachment to Report Spam.
Hey Russ,

Have you thought any more about when to do an assessment of Mill Creek?
Thanks,
From: Russ, W. Thomas[mailto:thomas.russ(@ncwildlife.org]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 8:41 AM
To: Matthew DeAngelo <mdeangeloPres.us>
Cc: Perkins, Michael <michael.perkins(@ncwildlife.org>; Stancil, Vann F <vann.stancil(@ncwildlife.org>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
Matt, we should be able to assess Mill Creek in mid March. When do you plan to start the project?
TR
William T. Russ // Foothills Coordinator, Aquatic Wildlife Diversity Program
Division of Inland Fisheries
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
645-A Fish Hatchery Road
Marion, NC 28752
office: 828-803-6035
mobile: [phone]
[e-mail]
ncwildlife.ora
The Wildlife Diversity Program depends on the NC Tax Check -off for Nongame and Endangered Wildlife
on line 31 of your NC income tax form. Learn more about the Wildlife Diversity Program.
Get NC Wildlife Update -- news including season dates, bag limits, legislative updates and more --
delivered to your Inbox from the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
From: Matthew DeAngelo [mailto:mdeangelo(@res.us]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 2:16 PM
To: Stancil, Vann F <[e-mail]>; Russ, W. Thomas <thomas.russ(@ncwildlife.org>;
Perkins, Michael <michael.perkinsCcDncwildlife.org>
Subject: [External] RE: Mill Creek restoration site
�•L�rnal email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an�
eport Spam.
Hello all,

I wanted to follow-up with you guys to see if you still intend to perform a survey for brook floater at
our site. We are ramping up our Mitigation Plan for the project and are interested in the status of
this species. Let me know if you have any plans in mind, and we can coordinate an effort
accordingly.
Thank you. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
From: Stancil, Vann F[mailto:vann.stancil(@ncwildlife.org]
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 3:25 PM
To: Russ, W. Thomas <thomas.russCcDncwildlife.org>; Perkins, Michael
<michael.perkins(@ncwildlife.org>
Cc: Matthew DeAngelo <mdeangelo(@res.us>
Subject: Mill Creek restoration site
T.R. & Michael,
I've attached information on the Little Sebastian stream mitigation site on Mill Creek, Mitchell River
trib. I emailed Matt DeAngelo about the possibility of brook floaters in Mill Creek and your plans to
check it out in the near future and copied him here. He is happy to assist with that survey effort and
can help with access to Mill Creek near the mitigation site if you'd like to sample there. Just let me
know how it goes...
The Little Sebastian Stream Mitigation Site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions,
LLC (RES) to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the North
Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The purpose of this letter is to request, review, and
comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to fish and wildlife associated with
a potential stream restoration project on the attached site (A USGS site map with approximate
property lines and areas of potential ground disturbance are enclosed along with a KMZ file). We
thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the comment to my
attention at the address listed in the attached letter or via email. Please feel free to contact me at
mdeangelo(@res.us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Matt DeAngelo
Ecologist
RES I res.us

fires
January 4, 2018
Mrs. Janet Mizzi
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Project Scoping for Gideon Mitigation Project in Surry County
Dear Mrs. Mizzi,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) requests review and comment from the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) on any possible concerns they may have with regards to the implementation of
the Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank Project (36°23'47.9"N 80°51'25.2"W). The proposed project involves
the restoration and enhancement of approximately 4,092 linear feet of stream. The Site is currently in
agricultural use, specifically as pasture.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (accessed 29 December 2017) lists one endangered
species for Surry County, North Carolina: Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and two
threatened species: Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and Small whorled pogonia (Istoria
medeoloides). No protected species or potential habitat for protected species was observed during
preliminary site evaluations. A review of the NHP database that there are known occurrences of the Brook
floater (Alasmidonta varicose) in the Mitchell River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of the Project
area. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to federally protected species are anticipated as a result
of the proposed project. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to federally protected species are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered species,
migratory birds, or other trust resources from the planting of a stream enhancement 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 [e-mail] with any questions that
you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth I Ecologist
res.us

ua
FTM &AVTLIHIFE
United States Department of the InteriorSERVIUE
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa StreetFl
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
January 30, 2018
Mr. Eric Teitsworth
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
Dear Mr. Teitsworth:
Subject: Gideon Mitigation Site; Surry County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-18-120
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence received via email dated January 4, 2018. We submit the following comments in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to your correspondence, you are seeking our scoping comments to inform a NEPA
document for a proposed mitigation bank near Union Hill, North Carolina. The proposed bank
would entail restoration and enhancement of approximately 4,092 linear feet of Mill Creek and
its unnamed tributaries. The proposed project would be located approximately 0.8 river miles
upstream from the Mitchell River. Adjacent land use is dominated by pasture and row crops.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project
area for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). However, the
final 4(d) rule (effective as of February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared
bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site,
and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1
— July 31). Based on the information provided, the project (which may or may not require tree
clearing) would occur at a location where any incidental take that may result from associated
activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we encourage you to avoid
any associated tree clearing activities during the maternity roosting season from May 15 —
August 15.
You indicated that no potential habitat for protected species was observed during a site
reconnaissance. Additionally, the Service has no record of federally protected species or
respective habitats in the project vicinity. Based on this information, we do not believe the
proposed project would impact federally protected species.

However, the proposed project would occur less than one river mile upstream from a reach of the
Mitchell River with recent occurrences for the brook floater mussel (Alasmidonta varicosa). The
brook floater is a federal species of concern and is not currently afforded legal protection under
the Act. However, incorporating proactive conservation measures may help preclude the need to
list this species in the future. Like most freshwater mussels, this species is a sessile benthic
filter -feeder that is highly sensitive to aquatic habitat modifications. Eutrophication- and
sedimentation -mediated impacts are likely among this species' greatest threats. Agricultural
runoff may transport toxins that impact both juveniles and adults. Attenuating these threats may
benefit this species.
The Service supports responsible and sustainable stream restoration activities and we offer the
following comments in the interest of protecting fish and wildlife resources:
Stream Buffers
Natural, forested riparian buffers are critical to the health of aquatic ecosystems. They
accomplish the following:
1. catch and filter runoff, thereby helping to prevent nonpoint-source pollutants
from reaching streams;
2. enhance the in -stream processing of both point- and nonpoint-source
pollutants;
3. act as "sponges" by absorbing runoff (which reduces the severity of floods)
and by allowing runoff to infiltrate and recharge groundwater levels (which
maintains stream flows during dry periods);
4. catch and help prevent excess woody debris from entering the stream and
creating logjams;
5. stabilize stream banks and maintain natural channel morphology;
6. provide coarse woody debris for habitat structure and most of the dissolved
organic carbon and other nutrients necessary for the aquatic food web; and
7. maintain air and water temperatures around the stream.
Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100 feet wide
along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100 -year floodplain, whichever is greater])
should be created and/or maintained along all aquatic areas. Within the watersheds of streams
supporting endangered aquatic species, we recommend undisturbed, forested buffers that are
naturally vegetated with trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation and extend a minimum of
200 feet from the banks of all perennial streams and a minimum of 100 feet from the banks of
all intermittent streams, or the full extent of the 100 -year floodplain, whichever is greater.)
Impervious surfaces, ditches, pipes, roads, utility lines (sewer, water, gas, transmission, etc.), and
other infrastructures that require maintained, cleared rights-of-way and/or compromise the
functions and values of the forested buffers should not occur within these riparian areas.
Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated bed load (sediment) while maintaining channel features and neither degrading
(accelerating the erosion of banks and scour of the channel bed) nor aggrading (accelerating the
2

deposition of sediment within the channel). Alterations to the dimension (cross-sectional view of
the channel), pattern (the sinuosity of the channel), or profile (longitudinal slope) of the stream
channel as well as changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input
can significantly alter this equilibrium. Accordingly, we recommend the following:
Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. The amount of disturbance to in -stream and
riparian areas should not exceed what can be stabilized by the end of the workday.
Restoration plans should account for the constraints of the site and the opportunities to
improve stream pattern, dimension, and profile with minimal disturbance.
2. All reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are
based on the bank -full, or channel -forming, stage of the stream. Bank -full stage
maintains the natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time
(Doll et al. 2003). Natural channel conditions should be identified using a reference
reach (nearby stream reaches that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design
should match the pattern, dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the
project's success. The Service is available to assist with the identification of reference
reaches.
3. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable. When practical, a pump -around operation
shall be used to divert flow during construction.
4. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.
5. Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Biodegradable erosion -control materials may be incorporated into
bank -restoration design in order to stabilize soils as vegetation becomes established.
Live dormant stakes (such as black willow) may be used to reestablish root structure in
riparian areas. In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole -tree
revetment or rock may be used as a stabilization treatment (small rock, gravel, sand, and
dirt are not recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the
bank -full elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep -rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.
3

6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground -disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non -cohesive and erosion -prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions (Miller and
Kochel 2010). Therefore, reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas
would be stabilized with seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion -control
matting prior to the end of each workday. No erosion -control matting or blankets should
contain synthetic (netting) materials. Matting should be secured in place with staples;
stakes; or, wherever possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to
temporary seed establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect
water quality along slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be
covered with plastic or other geotextile material).
7. Woody debris, detritus, and other vegetative materials are the main sources of nutrients
and carbon necessary for primary productivity in stream ecosystems. Removal of this
material can impact the production of higher trophic levels, including fish. The Service
does not recommend the removal of woody debris within the stream channel or
floodplain unless it is causing a debris blockage (logjam) or will affect the ability to
achieve bank stability along a specific reach of stream. Woody debris that must be
removed should be chipped on the site.
8. At each restoration site, cross-sections (at intervals based on restoration reach size),
longitudinal profiles, and stream -pattern plans should be measured and mapped prior to
and immediately following any channel work. In addition, photographs should be taken
to document the condition of the project site prior to initiating the work and upon
completion of the work. However, since a project's restoration success does not
necessarily equate to biological success, the ecological goals of the project should be
clearly defined and assessed for improvement after construction is completed (Palmer
et al. 2005).
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-18-120.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

References
Doll, B.A., G.L. Grabow, K.R. Hall, J. Halley, W.A. Harman, G.D. Jennings, and
D.E. Wise. 2003. Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, North Carolina State University.
128 pp.
Hall, K. 2003. Recommended Native Plant Species for Stream Restoration in North
Carolina. Raleigh: North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, North Carolina
State University.
Miller, J.R., and Kochel, R.C. 2010. Assessment of channel dynamics, in -stream
structures and post -project channel adjustments in North Carolina and its
implications to effective stream restoration. Environmental Earth Sciences, 59(8),
pp. 1681-1692.
Palmer, M.A., E.S. Bernhardt, J.D. Allan, P.S. Lake, G. Alexander, S. Brooks, J. Carr,
S. Clayton, C.N. Dahm, J. Follstad Shah, and D.L. Galat. 2005. Standards for
ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42(2),
pp. 208-217.
5

a
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona h1. Bartos, Administrator ,
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Harm ton
November 7, 2017
Daniel Ingram
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, #110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Re: RES Yadkin 01 Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank, ER 17-1991
Dear Mr. Ingram:
Thank you for your letter of July 7, 2017, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Depiny Secretary Kevin Cherry
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 or
[e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above -referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
in
at"bJur
amona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Senice Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

From: DCR - Environmental—Review
To: Eric Teitsworth
Subject: RE: [External] Project Scoping for Gideon Mitigation Project in Surry County
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 11:23:31 AM
Attachments: ER 17-1991.odf
Hi Eric,
We have already received and reviewed this project as part of a bigger umbrella bank. We also get
the from ACOE since they require an ACOE permit. Please check to see if we have already reviewed
these projects before submitting them.
Thank you. Renee
From: Eric Teitsworth [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2018 10:15 AM
To: DCR - Environmental—Review <[e-mail]>
Cc: Cara Conder <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Project Scoping for Gideon Mitigation Project in Surry County
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to reaort.spam(@nc.gov.
Hello Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
Resource Environmental Solutions is requesting a review of any issues with respect to archaeological
or cultural resources at a prospective mitigation bank site in Surry County. Please see the attached
letter and map for more details and feel free to contact me with any further questions.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth
Ecologist
RES1 res.us
Mobile: [phone]

fires
January 4, 2018
Renee Gledhill -Earley
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-4617
Dear Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
The Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank site has been identified by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
(RES) to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts. The proposed
project involves the restoration and enhancement of approximately 4,092 linear feet of stream.
RES requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to archaeological
or cultural resources associated with a potential stream mitigation project on the Gideon Site (36°23'47.9"N
80°51'25.2"W) (a USGS site map with approximate limits of conservation easement is attached).
A review of the N.C. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS Service database
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/; accessed December 29, 2017) was performed as part of the site due diligence
evaluation. The database did not reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological resources
on the proposed properties. In addition, the majority of the site has historically been disturbed due to cattle
grazing.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of any historic
properties. We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the
comment to my attention at the address below, or via email. Please feel free to contact me at
eteitsworthgres.us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth I Ecologist
res.us

L6\ -
arl � 3188.03 acresrne
ke
fo
C
�! 3e
Proposed Easement
Watershed
� �Iountai
I
USGS Map Date: 12/29/2017
w Drawn by: MDE
Gideon Stream Mitigation Bank
res
0 1,000 2,000
Surry County, North Carolina
Feet