20020434 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20020325

a,
F ?
j
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John R. Dornev, Division of Water Quality
Dept. of Environment and Natural Re sour es
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinato
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 19, 2002
SUBJECT: Review of 404/401 Application by Buck Engineering for The Communities
Group, Peters Creek Restoration Plan, DWQ 020434, Forsyth County
The applicant is requesting a 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field
biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are
provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.)
and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
Buck Engineering proposes to restore two sub-reaches of Peters Creek using bioengineering
techniques. Stream restoration will be 1,995 linear feet. Priority levels 2, 3, and 4 (developed by
Dave Rosgen) will be utilized for the project. Non-native and invasive plants will be removed
from the project area so that native species can be planted. The submittal indicates that this
project will not be used for mitigation credits.
Based on our review of the project, we will not object to issuance of a 404 Permit and 401
Certification. We recommend that naturalized (forested) buffers be protected for both water
quality and habitat benefits. Restored buffer areas should be preserved in conservation
easements or other similar protective covenants.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc: Tim Smith, USACOE
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]
p?0? W A r?RQG
o ?
April 9, 2002
DWQ# 02-0434
Forsyth County
Janet DeCreny
TCG Development Services
2101 N. Trade St.
Winston-Salem, NC, 27105
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Dear Ms. DeCreny:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to restore and/or stabilize 2,412 linear feet of
streams in order to construct the Peters Creek Stream Restoration Project in Forsyth County, as you described in your
application received by the Division of Water Quality on March 25, 2002. After reviewing your application, we have decided
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3375 and 3353, which can be viewed on our web site
at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nc%vetlands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 14 and 27 when
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers- In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you
go ahead with your project including (but rrrA limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge
and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the General CertificaJon.
This approval is only valid for the purpos2 and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us in wring and you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the
property is sold, the new owner must be gin a copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory
mitigation may be required as described in i5A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certificatirn-
If you do not accept any of the conditiccis of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act
within 60 days of the date that you receive tiis letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina Gener_9 Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh,
N.C. 27611-74A7. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the uivision of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have
any questions, please telephone Cyndi Ka:-,4y in our Central Office at 919-733-9721.
incerely,
r ory J. Thorpe, Ph.D
?j
Attachments
cc: Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatccl Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
Andrew Bick, 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27511
020434
Michael F. Easley
Govemor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of WaterCLeS:ty, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit.
105o Mail Service C=_ Baer, Raley-_ NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd-- Raleigh, NC 27604-2250 (Location)
519-733-1726 (pl.crF). 919-733=irS (fax), httpJ/h2o.enrstate.nc.us/rrxegands/
I
I I
I I ' ' I i
? I I I

I to
I I I I I iii
I I
I I I I(A
? I I ICI
, I I I r
rm l
I -il
ICI r
I I I r^'
, I I I-?I
I of
ml I I I I
, I I I I
I NI
I --II
I I
I I I I I I
, I I I I
I I I I I
?
I I
I

-- ? I I I I
I
- '----------'
---------- --? --? ---------,
i
I I /
I
I I
! I I
-
I
I __-
I I / /
I I
I I
I I I
I I I ; //

I I //// 0
?? I I C3 to
I I ;u
m
co rjo
n m i
l
N
I
I
O+ z
Imp
I
I I O n I I ? ? -?
O? I///
/ ?
I I I
?

I n r
I
I I
y I
l d
I I p
I I
I I
0 I I ?A
I I y
I I

I I
I I
Z
I I
I I
I i
I I

-? .- -

.- ---- I I
_--
--1-? \---- GLENN AVE
- -------------------
?? I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
' I
I I
I I
I I
I I
rl
5
mI
l
I GI
? ml
I
I
-BURTON ST_^1
I
I
I
I
I
I
NW CRAWFORD PL
0-0
Z O
?c(n)
n m
m?
-C ?
O .?
cn

Z
A
,.- WATFn

;_ _.... j pCD jp? TY ISECTI^vti

Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form
For Section 404 and/or Section 10 Nationwide, Regional and General Permits, Section 401
General Water Quality Certifications, and Riparian Buffer and Watershed Buffer Rules
phis form is to he used for projects qualifying for any of' the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE)
Nationwide, Regional or General Permits as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Ilarhors Act, and for the North Carolina Division of Water Qualitv"S
(DWQ) associated General 401 Water Quality Certifications. This form is also to be used for any
project requiring approval under any Riparian Buffer Rules implemented by the N.C. Division of Water
Quality. This form should not be used if you are requesting an Individual 404 Permit or Individual 401
Water Quality Certification. The USACE Individual Permit application form is available online at
htttT//w//www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands/Perm app.htm.
The USACE is the lead regulatory agency. To rcvicw the requircmcnts for the use of' Nationwide.
Regional or General permits, and to determine which permit applies to your project, please go to the
USACE website at http://ww_-w.SIW.usace.army_mil/wetl-?inds/1-C ItOur.htm_, or contact one of' the field
offices listed at the end of this application. The website also lists the responsible project manager for
each county in North Carolina and provides additional information regarding the identil'ication and
regulation of wetlands and waters of'the U.S.
The DWQ issues a corresponding Certification (General or Individual), and cannot tell the applicant
which 401 Certification will apply until the 404 Permit type has been determined by the USACE.
Applicants are encouratIed to visit DWQ?s 401/Wetlands Unit website at
httL)://h?o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwctlands to read about current requirements for the 401 Water Quality
Certification Program and to determine whether or not Riparian 13111fer Rules are applicahle. The
applicant is also advised to read the full text of the General Certification (GC) matching the specific 404
Permit requested. In some cases. written approval for Some General Certifications is not rcquircd,
provided that the applicant adheres to all conditions of' the GC. Applicants lackino access to the Internet
should contact DWQ's Central Office in Raleigh at [phone].
Trout Waters Coordination - Spccial coordination with the North Carolina Wildlil'c Rcsollrces
Commission (NCWRC) is also required for projects occurrint-, in any of North Carolinas t\v,enty-f,ivc
counties that contain trout waters. In such cases. the applicant Should contact the appropriate NCWRC'
re-ional coordinator (listed by county on the last page ol- this application).

CAMA Coordination - If the project occurs in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on
the last page ol' this application) the applicant should also contact the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (DCM) at [phone]. DCM will determine whether or not the projcct involves a
designated Area of' Environmental Concern. in which case DCM will act as the lead permitting agency.
In such cases. DCM will require a Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) Permit and will coordinate
the 404/401 Permits.
USACE; Permits - Submit one copy of' this form, along with supporting narratives, maps, data Dorms,
photos, etc. to the applicable USACE Regulatory Field Office (addresses are listed at the end of' this
application). Upon receipt of an application, the USACE will determine il'the application is complete as
soon as possible, not to exceed 30 days. This PCN form is designed for the convenience of the applicant
to address information needs for all USACE Nationwide, Regional or General permits, as well as
information required for State authorizations, certil'ications, and coordination. Fully providing the
information requested on this form will result in a complete application for any of the USAC1?
Nationwide, Regional or General permits. To review the minimum amount of information that must be
provided fora complete PCN for each USACE Nationwide permit, see Condition 13, 65 Fed.Reg. 12893
(March 9, 2000), available at httn_//www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands/nwpfin?ilFedRedf.
Processing times vary by permit and begin once the application has been determined to be complete.
Please contact the appropriate regulatory field office for specific answers to permit processing periods.
401 Water Quality Certification or Buffer Rules - All information is required unless otherwise stated
as optional. Incomplete applications will be returned. Submit seven collated copies of all USACE
Permit materials to the Division of Water Quality, 401/Wetlands Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. If written approval is required or specifically requested for a 401
Certification, then a non-refundable application fee is required. In brief, if project impacts include less
than one acre of cumulative wetland/water impacts and less than 150 feet cumulative impacts to
streams, then a Ice of $200 is required. If either of these thresholds is exceeded, then a fee of $475 is
required. A check made out to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, with the specific name of
the project or applicant identil'ied, should be stapled to the front of the application package. For more
information, see the DWQ website at http://li2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/fees.html. The fee must be
attached with the application unless the applicant is a federal agency in which case the check may be
issued from a separate office. In such cases, the projcct must be identifiable on the U.S. Treasury check
so that it can be credited to the appropriate project. 11' written approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules,
the application 1'ec does not apply, and the applicant should clearly state (in a cover letter) that only
Buffer Rule approval is sought in writing. Wetlands or waters of the U.S. may not be impacted prior to
issuance or waiver of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Upon receipt of a complete application
for a 401 Ccrtil'ication, the Division of Water Quality has 60 days to prepare a written response to the
applicant. This may include a 401 Certification, an on-hold letter pending receipt of additional
requcsted information, or denial.
PaL,c '_ ol 12
Office Use Only: - ----- - ---- Form Version April 2001
USAGE Action ID No. I)WQ No.
if any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
i. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification '' -
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit NLlmher(s) Requested: NW 27, NW 14
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Ms. Janet DeCreny
Mailing Address: TCG Development Services
2101 N. Trade St.
Winston-Salem. NC 27105
Telephone Number: 336-748-3592
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
Fax NUmher: 336-748-3598
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must he
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Andrew Bick, PE
Company Affiliation: Buck Engineering
Mailing Address: 8000 Regency Parkway Suite 200
Cary, NC 27511 Telephone Number: 919-459-9006 Fax Ninnber: 919-463-5490_ _-
E-mail Address: [e-mail]__ -----------
Pagc 3 ail I
111. Project Information
Attach it vicinity map clearly showing the location cal, the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
houndarics and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must he included. If possihle, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
houndarics outlined. Plan drawimzs, or other maps may he included at the applicant's discretion,
so lone as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to he suhmitted on sheets no la1_(_1er than I 1 by 17-inch format:
however. DWQ may accept paperwork of any sine. DWQ pref'crs full-size construction
drawings rather than it sequential sheet version of the full-sine plans. 11' full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is ille,"ihle, the applicant will he informed that
the project has peen placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Peters Creek Strcam Restoration
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Propcrly Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A _
4. Location
County: Fors th _ ___--_-_ Nearest Town:_ Winston-Salem
Subdivision name (include phase/lot numher):__KimherlcvPark
Directions to site (include road numhers, landmarks, ctc.): From BUS 40, take the N. Main St.
exit. Travel north for approximately- I mile. 't'urn left oil W. 8`' St. and right on Trad_e_St.
Travel north on Trade St. for 1 miles to Glenn Ave. Project limit is at "Trade and Glenn.
5. Site coordinates, if availahle (U TM or Lat/Long):-___
(Note - 11' project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach if sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing cif a distinct watcrhody.)
6. Dcscrihc the existim, land use or condition of the site at the ti?nc of this application:
Multi-famiJy residential
7. Property size (acres):-_-- --__-
8. Nearest holy of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake):. Peters Creek --
9. Rivcr Basin: Yaclkin-Pee Dec
(Note - this must he one of' North Carolina's seventeen designated major river hasins. The
Rivcr Basin map is available at
1);q, C -t of I
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: To improve water duality and aquatic habitat
by reducin7 sedimentation; improve stream stability; and improve riparian and iloodplain
functionality. "This is not a mitigation project.
11. List the type of cduipment to he used to construct the project: Track excavator; bulld0/CI';
loader; dump truck. hand lahor. --------------
12. Describe the kind use in the vicinity of this project: urban residential
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have heen requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
butler impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). if this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, alone with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future'? It' so. describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
_ --
application:- N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicants (o?- agent's) responsibility to determine, dclinente and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must he listed herein, and must be clearly identifiahle on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must he shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should he included as appropriate. Photographs may he
included at the applicants discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII bclow. If additional space is needed for
listing or description. please attach a separate sheet.
Page 5 of 12
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on mal - --
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) - Located within
100-year I.'loodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
'T'ype of Wetland***
----
- - _

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include. hilt are not limited to: mcchanved clearing. grading, till.
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams. separately list impacts duc to both structure wid flooding.
** 100-Year Iloodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FFMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or 'EMA-approved local Iloodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at hit rjW// ss_.Icma.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes Welland to be imparted (c g.. freshwater/saltwater marsh. forested %vctland, beaver pond.
Carolina Bay, hog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property
Total area of wetland impact proposed:- N/A _
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and percrInial streams
N/A
Stream Impact
Site Number
a)
(indicate on m
'hype of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet-)
Stream Name**
_ Avcrage Width
of Stream
Before Im act Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please secif )
_
Reach I _
Restoration 417 Peters Creek 23 ft Perennial
Reach 2 Restore/Stabilize 1,995 Peters Creek 28 ft Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Imparts include. but arc not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap.
dams (separate]), list impacts due to both structure and flooding). relocation (include linear feet before and alter. and net loss/gain).
stabilization activities Yemen( wall. rip-rap. crib wall. gahions. etc.). excavation, ditrhine/straightening. etc. II stream relocation is
proposed. plans and proliles showing the linear footprint I'm both the ori,-inal and relocated streams must be included.
** Suram names can he fixmd on t)SGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed trihutary) to the nearest
downstream named suram into v,hich it Ilows. USGS maps are available through the USGS al 1-800-358-9616. or online at
www.usgs.gov Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (c g.. www.topozone.com.
.%V\v N'. miLnttlCSLcom, etc.).
Cllrnl11at1VC Impacts (linear distance in feet) to all sLrcams on site: 2,412
Pasc 6 of 12
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact,- - - Ca of Name ofWaterbody Type of' W terbody
Site Number 't'ype of Impact* Impact (if applicable) (lake. pond, estuary, Sound,
(indicate on map) (acres) bav, ocean, etc.)
* List each impact separately and identity tempotaty impacts- Impacts include, but are not limited to fill, ewavation. dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? strewn ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, ---
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.(,., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond:- Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The project constitutes a positive impact since it will enhance stream stability byprolecting
streambanks, providin- orade control, improving bed features and reducing sediment
concentrations in the stream. Construction practices will follow guidelines from the NC Erosion-
and Sediment Control Planning and-Design Manual.- The new Culvert proposed is necessary to
maintain vehicular access to the adjacent development.
PaL,c 7 of' I?
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500. mitigation ntav be required by the NC
Division of' Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear fcct of, total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the final Notice of' Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Pcderal Rcgister on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environmcnt are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may he appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated huffel's to protect open waters such as streams: and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating.;, restorino, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider- the application complete for processing. Any application
lackim-1 a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
littp://h2o.cnr.state.nc.us/nc:wetl?inds/strm«icle.hUnl.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if off:site), affected stream and river hasin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.(,., deed restrictions, conservation casement, ctc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
Parc S of I ,
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
You would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must he
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit 11' payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP wehsite at hi110.9hzu.cnr.Slaw nC..LISAVI VinLlcx.litM. 11'
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
IX.
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear fcet):__-___
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):_
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):_
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/statc/local I
land'?
Yes ® No ?
X.
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)'?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse'? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or wient's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local huffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All huffers must he shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may he included as appropriate. Photographs may also he included at the
applicant's discretion.
Yes ? No ® If you answered "ycs". provide the following information:
Will the project impact protcctcd riparian huffers identified
(NCUSe), 15A NCAC 213 .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2I3
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify
within 15A NCAC 2I3 .0233
.0250 (Randleman Rules and

Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitioation is rcyuircd calrulatc the required amount of mitioation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(syualc feet) Miti ?aUun
2 1.5
-- Total --
* "Lone I extends out "0 feet perpendicular from near hank ol'channel: 7.one 2 extends an
additional 20 feel from the cdte ol'Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is rcyuircd, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within I5A NCAC 213 .0242 or.0260.
N/A --
XI. Stormwater (UWQ Only)
Describe impervious acrea(_'c (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Redevelopment of the Kimherley Park complex will involve construction of multi-family units
cast of Oak Street and South of Glenn Avenue. None of the new construction will take place
immediately adjacent to the stream project. Stormwater from the development will be
discharged to the west side of Oak Street. Planned stormwater controls include Morass swales and
level spreaders.
X11. Sewage Disposal (UWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A - --
XI11. Violations (UWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetl,?nd Rules (15A NCAC 211 .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Page 10 of 12
FROM : THE COMMUNITIES GROUP FAX NO. : 2026673035 Mar. 22 2002 11:13AM P2
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No Z
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
A+icant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only

authorisation letter from the applicant is provided.)
1 zG 3
Date
US Army Corps Of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Cherokee lredell Mitchell Union
Us Army Corps of Engineers Avery Clay Jackson Polk Watauga
151 Patton Avenue Buncombe Cleveland Lincoln Rowan Yancey
Room 208 Burke Gaston Macon Rutherford
NC 28801-5006
Asheville Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
,
Telephone- [phone] Caldwell Haywood McDowell swain
Fax: [phone] Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alamance Durham Johnston Rockingham Wilson
Y
dki
Us Army Corps Of Engineers Allegehany Edgecombe Lee Stokes a
n
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Ashe Franklin Nash Surry
Suitc 120 Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
NC 27615
Raleigh Chatham Granville Orange Wake
,
Telephone: [phone] Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Fax: [phone] Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones Pitt
Us Army Corps of Engineers Bertic Dare Lenoir Tyrrell
Yost Office Box 1000 Camden Gales Martin Washington
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico Wayne
Telephone: [phone] Chowan
C Hertford
de
H Pasquotank
Perquimans
*Croatan National Forest Only
Fax: [phone] raven y
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Anson Duplin Onslow
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bladen Harnett Pender
Post Office Box 1890 Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Page 11 of 12
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Carteret Montgomery Robeson
'telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
Fax: [phone] Cumberland New Ilanover Scotland
US Fish and Wildlife Service / National Marine Fisheries Service
(IS Dish and Wildlife Service US Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Scrvicc
Raleigh Field Office Asheville Field Office Ilabitat Conservation Division
Post Office Box 33726 160 ZiIIicoa Street Pivers Island
Raleii?h, NC 27636-3726 Asheville. NC 28801 Beaufort, NC 28516
'telephone: [phone] 'telephone: [phone] 'telephone: [phone]
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Restoration Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. NC 27699-1619
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Slate Ilistoric Preservation Office
Department Of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
LAMA and NC Coastal Counties
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan I lertford I'asquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertie Craven I lyde fender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Cunituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow "Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gatcs Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ash, Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Sorry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe I lenderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] I1aywood McDowell Yancey
Prix 12 0l 12
A
WQC #3353
STREAM RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT AND STABILIZATION AND WETLAND AND
RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND CREATION ACTIVITIES CERTIFICATION
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR STREAM RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT AND
STABILIZATION PROJECTS AND WETLAND AND RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND
CREATION ACTIVITIES INCLUDING THOSE ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 13 (BANK STABILIZATION) AND 27 (WETLAND AND
RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND CREATION) AND REGIONAL PERMIT 197800080
(CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF BULKHEADS)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401, Public
Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality Regulations in 15A NCAC 2H .0500 and 15A NCAC 213 .0200 for the discharge of fill
material to waters as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (13) and (27) of the Corps of
Engineers regulations (i.e. Nationwide Permit Numbers 13 and 27) and Regional Permit
197800080. The category of activities shall include stream bank stabilization or stream
restoration activity as long as impacts to waters or significant wetlands are minimized. This
Certification replaces Water Quality Certification (WQC) Number 1663 issued on September 8,
1983; WQC No. 1272 issued November 10, 1978; WQC No. 2665 issued on 21 January 1992;
WQC No. 2102 issued on February 11, 1997, and WQC Nos. 3256, 3257 and 3258 issued on
November 22, 1999. This WQC is rescinded when the Corps of Engineers reauthorize
Nationwide Permits 13 or 27 or Regional Permit 197800080 or when deemed appropriate by the
Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with the conditions set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Wetland and/or riparian area restoration and creation projects (not including projects
that only involve stream restoration or enhancement work described in condition
nos. 2 and 3) that are proposed under this General Certification require written
application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality except as specified
below;
Wetland and riparian area restoration and creation projects (not including projects
that involve work in or impacts to streams) which are not for compensatory
mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit proposed under this General
Certification do not require written application to and approval from the Division of
Water Quality. In these cases, the applicant is required to notify the Division in
writing with three copies of project specifications before the impact occurs. If the
Division determines that the project would not result in an ecologically viable wetland
and riparian area, then the Division shall notify the applicant in writing within 30 days
of receipt of the notification. In such cases, the applicant will be required to submit a
formal application and pay of the appropriate fee, and DWO will be required to
process the application through normal procedures;
2. Proposed stream restoration projects (as defined and limited below), that do not
disturb wetlands and that are not being conducted for compensatory mitigation or
compensatory mitigation credit do not require written application to and approval
from the Division of Water Quality, and, therefore, do not require payment of an
application fee to the Division of Water Quality.
Stream restoration is defined as the process of converting an unstable, altered or
degraded stream corridor, including adjacent riparian zone and floodprone areas to
WQC #3353
its natural or referenced, stable conditions considering recent and future watershed
conditions. This biological and chemical integrity, including transport of water and
sediment is produced by the stream's watershed in order to achieve dynamic
equilibrium. The applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three
copies of detailed restoration plans and specifications before the impact occurs. If
the Division determines that the project does not meet the above definition of stream
restoration, then the Division shall notify the applicant in writing within 30 days of
receipt of the application. In such cases, the applicant will be required to submit a
formal application and pay of the appropriate fee, and DWQ will be required to
process the application through normal procedures;
Stream enhancement projects (as defined and limited below), that do not disturb
wetlands and that are not being conducted for compensatory mitigation or
compensatory mitigation credit and do not include any stream channel relocation, do
not require written application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality,
and, therefore, do not require payment of an application fee to the Division of Water
Quality.
Stream enhancement is the process of implementing stream rehabilitation practices
in order to improve water quality and/or ecological function. These practices must
only be conducted on streams that are not experiencing severe aggradation or
erosion. Stream enhancement does not include the relocation of the stream channel.
Stream enhancement bank stabilization techniques include the use of woody
vegetation as the primary means of long term stability, and "soft" techniques such
as root wads that encourage the establishment of dense woody vegetation. Stream
enhancement techniques do not typically include the use of stream bank or bed
hardening techniques such as rip-rap or other rock, gabion, block or concrete
structures. However, enhancement activities may also include the placement of in
stream habitat or grade control structures such as cross vanes, j-hook vanes, and
wing deflectors that do not affect the overall dimension, pattern, or profile of a stable
stream.
The applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three copies of detailed
enhancement plans and specifications before the impact occurs if the stream
enhancement project disturbs greater than 500 feet of stream bank or if the project
proposes the use of in stream structures. If the Division determines that the project
does not meet the above definition of stream enhancement, then the Division shall
notify the applicant in writing with an explanation within 30 days of receipt of the
notification to require application and payment of the appropriate fee;
4. Stream stabilization projects that include the use of any structure or fill in the existing
stream bed or disturb greater that 500 feet of stream bank that are proposed under
this General Certification require written application to and approval from the
Division of Water Quality.
Stream stabilization is defined as the in-place stabilization of an eroding stream
bank using measures that consist primarily of "hard" engineering, such as but not
limited to concrete lining, rip rap or other rock, and gabions. The use of "hard"
engineering will not be considered as stream restoration or enhancement;
Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins
(or any other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in
effect at the time of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification
from DWQ in accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0200. Activities listed as "exempt"
from these rules do not need to apply for written concurrence under this
Certification. New development activities located in the protected 50-foot wide

WQC #3353
riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not) within the Neuse and Tar-
Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within and constructed in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be located,
designed, constructed, and maintained to have minimal disturbance to protect water
quality to the maximum extent practicable through the use of best management
practices;
6. In order for the above conditions to be valid, any plans not requiring written
concurrence to use this Certification must be built according to the plans provided to
the Division of Water Quality. If written concurrence is required, then the project
must be built and maintained according to the plans approved by the written
concurrence and Certification from the Division of Water Quality;
7. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment
Control Planning and Design Manual" or "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual"
whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of Land Resources at the
DENR Regional and Central Offices) shall be designed, installed and maintained
properly to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by DWQ; 25 NTUs in
all saltwater classes and all lakes and reservoirs; 10 NTUs in DWQ-classified trout
waters);
8. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be
removed and the original grade restored after the Division of Land Resources or
delegated program has released the project;
Any rip-rap shall be of such a size and density so as not to be able to be carried off
by wave or current action and consist of clean rock or masonry material free of
debris or toxic pollutants. Rip-rap shall not be installed in the streambed except in
specific areas required for velocity control and approved by the Division of Land
Resources and Water Quality. However rock vanes, wing deflectors, and similar
structures for grade control and bank protection are acceptable;
10. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact
with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
11. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a Finding
of No Significant Impact or Record of Decision is issued by the State
Clearinghouse;
12. Additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects which require written
concurrence under this Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable
water quality and effluent standards;
13. Concurrence from DWQ that this Certification applies to an individual project shall
expire three years from the date of the cover letter from DWQ or the notification sent
to DWQ.
Non-compliance with or violation of the conditions herein set forth by a specific project shall
result in revocation of this Certification for the project and may also result in criminal and/or civil
penalties.
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a
formal application for individual Certification for any project in this category of activity that requires
WQC #3353
written concurrence under this certification, if it is determined that the project is likely to have a
significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing uses of the
wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a
Certification decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.
Effective date: December 2002
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
By
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
WQC # 3353

4

WQC #3375
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBER 14 (ROAD CROSSINGS) AND REGIONAL GENERAL
PERMIT 198200031 (WORK ASSOCIATED WITH BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE
OR REPAIR CONDUCTED BY NCDOT OR OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES)
AND RIPARIAN AREA PROTECTION RULES (BUFFER RULES)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401,
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500 and 15A NCAC 213.0200 for
the discharge of fill material to waters and adjacent wetland areas or to wetland areas that are not
a part of the surface tributary system to interstate waters or navigable waters of the United States
(i.e., isolated wetlands) as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (14) of the Corps of
Engineers regulations (Nationwide Permit No. 14 and Regional General Permit 198200031) and
for the Riparian Area Protection Rules (Buffer Rules) in 15A NCAC 2B .0200. The category of
activities shall include any fill activity for road crossings and is limited to fill less than one-third
acre in tidal waters and less than one-half acre in non-tidal waters. This Certification replaces
Water Quality Certification Number 2177 issued on November 5, 1987, Water Quality Certification
Number 2666 issued on January 21, 1992, Water Quality Certification Number 2732 issued on
May 1, 1992, Water Quality Certification Number 3103 issued on February 11, 1997, and Water
Quality Certification Number 3289 issued on June 1, 2000. This WQC is rescinded when the
Corps of Engineers re-authorizes Nationwide Permit 14 or Regional General Permit 198200031 or
when deemed appropriate by the Director of DWQ.
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with the conditions hereinafter set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Enumerating and Reporting of Impacts:
Streams - Impacts to streams as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall be
measured as length of the centerline of the normal flow channel. Permanent and/or
temporary stream impacts shall be enumerated on the entire project for all impacts
regardless of which 404 Nationwide Permits are used. Stream relocations and stream
bed and/or bank hardening are considered to be permanent stream impacts. Any
activity that results in a loss of use of stream functions including but not limited to
filling, relocating, flooding, dredging and complete shading shall be considered
stream impacts. Enumeration of impacts to streams shall include streams enclosed
by bottomless culverts, bottomless arches or other spanning structures when a 404
Permit is used anywhere in a project unless the entire structure (including
construction impacts) spans the entire bed and both banks of the stream, is only
used for a road, driveway or path crossing, and is not mitered to follow the stream
pattern. Impacts for dam footprints and flooding will count toward the threshold for
stream impacts, but flooding upstream of the dam will not (as long as no filling,
excavation, relocation or other modification of the existing stream dimension, pattern
or profile occurs) count towards mitigation.
Wetlands - Impacts to wetlands as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall
be measured as area. Permanent and/or temporary wetland impacts shall be
enumerated on the entire project for all impacts regardless of which 404 Nationwide
Permits are used. Any activity that results in a loss of use of wetland functions
including but not limited to filling, draining, and flooding shall be considered wetland
impacts. Enumeration of impacts to wetlands shall include activities that change the
hydrology of a wetland when a 404 Permit is used anywhere in a project.
WQC #3375

Lakes and Ponds - Lake and Pond Impacts Enumeration- Impacts to waters other
than streams and wetlands as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall be
measured as area. Permanent and/or temporary water impacts shall be enumerated
on the entire project for all impacts proposed regardless of which 404 Nationwide
Permits are used. Any activity that results in a loss of use of aquatic functions
including but not limited to filling and dredging shall be considered waters impacts;
2. Proposed fill or substantial modification of wetlands or waters (including streams) under
this General Certification requires application to and prior written concurrence from the
Division of Water Quality;
3. Application to and payment of a fee to DWQ is not required for construction of a driveway
to a single family lot as long as the driveway impacts less than 25 feet of stream channel
including any in-stream stabilization needed for the crossing;
4. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins (or
any other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at
the time of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification from DWQ in
accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0200. Activities listed as "exempt" from these rules do not
need to apply for written concurrence under this Certification. New development activities
located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not)
within the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within
and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be
located, designed, constructed, and maintained to have minimal disturbance to protect
water quality to the maximum extent practicable through the use of best management
practices;
Irrespective of other application thresholds in this General Certification, all impacts to
perennial waters and their associated buffers require written approval from DWQ since
such impacts are allowable as provided in 15A NCAC 2B. 0212 (WS-1), 213.0213 (WS-II),
2B .0214 (WS-III) and 2B .0215 (WS-IV). Only water dependent activities, public projects
and structures with diminimus increases in impervious surfaces will be allowed as outlined
in those rules. All other activities require a variance from the delegated local government
and/or the NC Environmental Management Commission before the 401 Water Quality
Certification can be processed. In addition, a 30 foot wide vegetative buffer for low
density development or a 100 foot wide vegetative buffer for high density development
must be maintained adjacent to all perennial waters except as allowed in the Water
Supply Rules. For the purposes of this condition, perennial waters are defined as those
shown as perennial waters on the most recent USGS 1:24,000 topographic map or as
otherwise determined by local government studies;
6. Additional site-specific stormwater management requirements may be added to this
Certification at DWQ's discretion on a case by case basis for projects that have or are
anticipated to have impervious cover of greater than 30 percent. Site-specific stormwater
management shall be designed to remove 85% TSS according to the latest version of
DWO's Stormwater Best Management Practices manual at a minimum.
Additionally, in watersheds within one mile and draining to 303(d) listed waters, as well as
watersheds that are classified as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW), water supply waters
(WS), trout waters (Tr), high quality waters (HOW), and outstanding resource waters
(ORW), the Division shall require that extended detention wetlands, bio-retention areas,
and ponds followed by forested filter strips (designed according to latest version of the NC
DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual) be constructed as part of the
stormwater management plan when a site-specific stormwater management plan is
required.
WQC #3375
Alternative designs may be requested by the applicant and will be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis by the Division of Water Quality.
Approval of stormwater management plans by the Division of Water Quality's other
existing state stormwater programs including appropriate local programs are sufficient to
satisfy this Condition as long as the stormwater management plans meet or exceed the
design requirements specified in this condition. This condition applies unless more
stringent requirements are in effect from other state water quality programs.
• Unless specified otherwise in the approval letter, the final, written stormwater
management plan shall be approved in writing by the Division of Water Quality's
Wetlands Unit before the impacts specified in this Certification occur.
• The facilities must be designed to treat the runoff from the entire project, unless
otherwise explicitly approved by the Division of Water Quality.
• Also, before any permanent building or other structure is occupied at the subject site,
the facilities (as approved by the Wetlands Unit) shall be constructed and operational,
and the stormwater management plan (as approved by the Wetlands Unit) shall be
implemented.
• The structural stormwater practices as approved by the Wetlands Unit as well as
drainage patterns must be maintained in perpetuity.
• No changes to the structural stormwater practices shall be made without written
authorization from the Division of Water Quality.
7. Compensatory stream mitigation shall be required at a 1:1 ratio for all perennial and
intermittent stream impacts equal to or exceeding 150 feet and that require application to
DWQ in watersheds classified as ORW, HOW, Tr, WS-1 and WS-II unless the project is a
linear, publicly-funded transportation project, which has a 150-foot per-stream impact
allowance;
8. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute Section 143-215.3D(e), any
application for a 401 Water Quality Certification must include the appropriate fee.
If a project also requires a CAMA Permit, one payment to both agencies shall be
submitted and will be the higher of the two fees;
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) compensatory mitigation may be required for
impacts to 150 linear feet or more of streams and/or one acre or more of wetlands. For
linear public transportation projects, impacts equal to or exceeding 150 feet per stream
may require mitigation. In addition, buffer mitigation may be required for any project with
Buffer Rules in effect at the time of application for buffer impacts resulting from activities
classified as "allowable with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer
Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A determination of buffer, wetland
and stream mitigation requirements shall be made for any Certification for this Nationwide
Permit. The most current design and monitoring protocols from DWQ shall be followed
and written plans submitted for DWQ approval as required in those protocols. When
compensatory mitigation is required for a project, the mitigation plans must be approved
by DWO in writing before the impacts approved by the Certification occur, unless
otherwise specified in the approval letter. The mitigation plan must be implemented and/or
constructed before any permanent building or structure on site is occupied. In the case
of public road projects, the mitigation plan must be implemented before the road is
opened to the travelling public. Projects may also be implemented once payment is made
to a private mitigation bank or other in-lieu fee program, as specified in the written
concurrence of 401 Certification for a project. Please note that if a stream relocation is
conducted as a stream restoration as defined in The Internal Technical Guide for Stream
Work in North Carolina, April 2001, the restored length can be used as compensatory
mitigation for the impacts resulting from the relocation;
Vol,
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County,
North Carolina
Prepared tor.
The ('0111Muniticti GrOup
Prepared by:
Buck En`_>incerin`7, P('
BUCK-,
BUCK.,
1 N t] I N li 1: IN I N (l
A N D 12 E W 13 1 C K, P. E
March 2002

it II II It , n II U
I I I "; i t \I I I ? n II i t .. ? ?I I
i ? I I I ?? l V '? 1I ? I I ?, t 1 ?I it

Peters Creek Restoration Plan
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
March 2002
Prepared For:
The Communities Group
Attention: Mr. Peter Behringer
1012 N Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
[phone]
Prepared By:
Buck Engineering, PC
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, North Carolina 27511
[phone]
William A. arman
Principal In-Charge
6L'6t'- &4
Andrew Bick, P.E.
Project Manager
Executive Summary
The Peters Creek Basin covers approximately 5.7 square miles in the central portion of'
Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The hasin is entirely within F'orsvth County and the
Winston-Salem municipal city limits. The basin is largely urhanizcd with it mixture of
high density residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The project site is located
in the eight-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101.
"Phis project will focus on the upper portions of'the Peters Creek Basin. The drainage area
of the study reach is 1.23 square miles. The stream restoration work is it part of a larger
project to rebuild a low income urban residential area. Much of the existing stream flows
in underground culverts. The goals o1 the stream restoration project are to restore a stable
stream that will act as a focal point for the new neighborhood and to reduce flooding
problems in the project area. Restoration will also reduce bank erosion and sediment
pollution from the project area, improve the aquatic habitat, and protect water quality.
Sections of culverted stream will be daylighted and existing degraded sections will be
restored to a stable dimension. The project is not intended for mitigation.
For design purposes, the project reach was divided into two sub-reaches. Reach l
contains approximately 345 feet of open channel and 72 feet of culverted stream for a
total reach length of 417 feet. Reach 2 contains approximately 1,297 feet of open channel
and 698 feet of culverted stream, for a total reach length of 1,995 feet. Reaches 1 and 2
are both classified as Rosgen -F- stream types, with the downstream end of Reach 2
evolving toward a "C" stream in terms of cross section (e.g. the entrenchment ratio is
increasing). Both reaches are characterized by moderate to deep channel incision and
active streambank erosion.
The stream bed is dominated by shallow riffles and runs. Pools in most areas arc
relatively shallow and are generally the results of scour obstructions, such as downed
trees and bedrock outcrops. The substrate consists mainly of' sand and gravel sized
particles. Bedrock outcrops are present in several locations and act as grade control for
the stream bed.
This report describes the recommended restoration approach, including detailed
descriptions of channel geometry modifications, structure installations, and riparian
vegetation. The table below lists the existing and proposed stream lengths, restored
buffer area and restoration approach.
Reach Existing Restored Restored Restoration Approach
Len th (ft) Length (ft) Buffer (acre)
1 417 694 0.8+/- Priority 2
2 1,995 2,115 2.9+/- Priority 2, 3 and 4
Peters Creek Restoration Plan i fhc ('cunmunities GrMll)
Table of Contents
11111 oductiOn ........................................................................................................... ......
1.1 PIo,Icct Dcscl-il)t1o11 ........................................................................................ ...... 1
1.2 Goals and )hleClIves ................:.................................................................... ...... 1
2 Existing Condition Survcy .................................................................................... ......4
2.1 Summary Information for Existing Rcachcs ................................................. ......4
I? Geology and Soils ......................................................................................... ......5
2.3 Land Use ....................................................................................................... ......5
24 Rcach I .......................................................................................................... ......5
2.4.1 Channel Morphology ............................................................................. ...... 5
24? Vegetation Assessment ......................................................................... ......6
2.5 Rcach 2 .......................................................................................................... ......6
2.5.1 Channel Morphology ............................................................................. ......6
2.5.2 Vegetation Assessment ......................................................................... ......7
3 Reference Reach Analyses ................................................................................... .......8
4 BankfUll Stage Verification .................................................................................. .......9
5 Natural Channel Design ....................................................................................... ..... 10
5.1 Desion Summary .......................................................................................... ..... 10
5.2 Reach 1 Morphological Restoration ............................................................. ..... 10
5.3 Reach 2 Morphological Restoration ............................................................. ..... 11
5.4 Riparian Buffer Restoration - Reaches i and 2 ........................................... ..... 13
6 Sediment Transport Analysis ............................................................................... ..... 14
6.1 Competency Analysis ................................................................................... ..... 14
6.1.1 Aggradation Analysis Thr01-1011 Critical Depth and Slope Calculation ..... 16
6.1.2 Aggradation Analysis Throu(,h Boundary Shear Stress and Shicld's C urve
Comparison .......................................................................................................... ..... 17
6.1.3 Degradation Analysis ........................................................................... ..... 18
6.2 Capacity Analysis ......................................................................................... ..... 18
6.3 Sediment Transport Analysis Sunllnary ....................................................... ..... I9
7 Rcfercnces ............................................................................................................ ..... 20
Peters Oeck kc>loialion Plan ii I he (')imnunilics (;ruu
Appendices
Appcndix I Existing Condition Profiles, Cross Sections. Photographs and Bed Material
Analysis
Appendix 2 Design Cross Sections and ProflIcs
Appendix 3 Planting Specifications
Appendix 4 Reference Reach Data
List of Figures
Figw-e 1.1 Peters Creek Pro.jcct Location
Figure 1.2 Peters Creek Drainage Area
Figure 4.1 Bankfull Stagc Verification for Peters Creek
Figure 6.1 Pavement/Suhpavenlcnt Analyses
Figure 6.2 Shields Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported Particle 111 Relation to
Critical Shear Stress
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Selected existing condition parameters
'f'able 5.1 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 1
Table 5.2 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 2
Table 6.1 Boundary shear stresses for existing and design riffle cross sections
Sheets
Sheet I Title Sheet
Sheet 2-A Typical Pool and Riffle Cross Sections, Details
Sheet 2-B Structure Details
Sheet 3 Existing Conditions
Sheet 4 Proposed Stream Design
Peters Creek Restoration Plan - - iii The ('onln1LIMOCS ("niup
I Ilitroduction
1.1 Project Description
The Communities Group and the City of Winston-Salem propose to restore a section of
Peters Creek as part of the Ilope VI revitalization project. The goals of' the stream
restoration project are to construct a stable stream that will serve as a focal point for a
new community housing development and to reduce Iloodin(T problems in the project
area. The project is not intended to he used for stream mitigation credit.
Peters Creek is located in the City oI' Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
and is part of' the Yadkin-Pee Dec River Basin. The Peters Creek watershed upstream of
the project site has a total drainage area of 1.23 square miles and is located in the eight-
digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101. The proposed restoration area is near the
headwaters of' Peters Creek. The project location is shown on Figure 1.1 and the
watershed delineation is shown on Figure 1?.
For design purposes, the project reach was divided into two sub-reaches. Reach I consists
ol' approximately 345 ft of open channel and 72 ft of culverted stream, for a total reach
length of 417 f't. Reach 2 consists of approximately 1,297 ft of open channel and 698 ft of'
culverted stream, for a total reach length of 1,995 N. Both Reaches I and 2 arc classified
as Rosgcn "F" stream-types over most of their lengths with moderate to deep channel
incision. Bank height ratios range from 1.6 to 2.6. The downstream end of Reach 2 is
evolvinL, toward a "C" stream. Bankfull cross-sectional area ranges from about 45 square
feet in Reach I to about 60 square feet at the end of' the Reach 2. Areas of active
streambank erosion are common throughout both reaches. Stream sinuosity is about 1.0
I'm Reach I and about 1.1 for Reach 2.
1.2 Goals and Objectives
The goals of this project are to:
1. Restore Peters Creek to a natural, stahlc form,
2. Develop the restored stream as a community focal point,
3. Improve floodplain i'unctionality,
4. Reduce flooding in the project area.
5. Restore native floodplain vegetation throuL111 a forested riparian huller, and
6. Improve aquatic habitat and the natural aesthetics of the stream corridor.
Pctcr. ('reek Rest nation Ilan I The U mmunitics (inwh
Figure 1.1 Peters Creek Project Location

1

l
F
1
S I 711
T^
l h
tt 'i

t V/
'1 V ?
M Uam ` x
Dim
CO
+-
m y`+
n i i
/ Stanleyvllle: ``
N36' 1-2'

?
/
' ,
\\ S1 Itz
?
1
am ?
r
- M II ,d LsL I ;
DDD D 111 '
?: C

rMalla d L N.
1
L ens
LAe Dam i I
b6
Camp ..'.
i
\

. Bet
area ,I - ? .
H dW
? i
?
? I
L,e
eLte nam I
.

1
-N36* 10-

d

%/d In s(1 or ? ? I I. r{

I
f
L.-IN
/ LV.

DupYOUnp, ?\
p.j.. NO3
_-_ \
•? ` ?- 1JOpbuln Slat on-
/
? , ((( Ir ?
I
? \
J '

?
•

` \
?
/l-
S h I .n
.1 L 4 D
I
.
`I
\, v
`nizV aup ?
}
F -,,t N-III 1 / / .1 ?
)
1(
r

! f M }1 eh
RE£TOFf:T1014 FROJE?'T ?, -
?? ?
{ '

'
-, `'
/? ' \
'' 1 ?? ? 1
Id t7
s I a l t aN e m D as ?i
.. ..y eon^
_
`
`
Ow r wn cwn'

'MIT D r ?
/
Ne\vnole. a.M1 _- oru w nslon '. (., //)
F MTenl
``
ce
! \
,r
r
? f `` IJt- '
? fey "`
/ •
Cit L ?v

N36 6.-
_. -?---
f/_ r mew _ ' --- Inston lem--
d n N pnl ndsr Y t I
?
'
1'
s I m
LN, Gam c\
-`,. :I

- n /
ti ?
I
- I Winston-Salem `
_ 4
?

`
A 73 ` cola nrNrplse'"; l?
_ - SIN
I '
? ,/ I tl6 ? I 1. :y-
` `? P,Pd
er
W t I' ?•
o f //?ll

I D\

?+? //
IN . I
ai
M M.d,cal eaM .. I 1 ^
III
Nofl ilal I - I\ , ?? .
10, 1?
?/. }

_
j tl

1`I1 4111
1 11 1
v;' - A , SCUl6-YUgon.5b11on .• I ,?
N36-, 4'
-
<< - sl V e
?E `tt
`O r \
Nld
? y.
\ /.
r f/.
-fill `_1'\ ( l 1 f i.

0
of Mown roi ont 1 qp .1

Y klV Vr ... , .,.. .r•'',•

rr
k
L
CA D

/ ?

?
M1?
ar
/
N36 2
M dd4 Cla ? .
i
N L M Da It
\'?
? i \ iiv
1 W? r , L n WWWFk
1
Y
r _ -J }. . 1.
_qF+.,?,. `V\ -? M„ 4 4,1,
` ?\
l
20 UpoQud. CpppW lU 1999 Dd- Yw-dK ME INN i 25M t9 ga,: 1: 57,900 Deb& 11.0 D d- WCSRI
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 2 The Communities Group
r---I 647 N Sete: 1 : 51,500 Dmdl: 11-0 DM-- W.%%
Peters Creek Restoration Plim The ('(Nllnlunities OrouP
Figure 1.2 Peters Creek Drainage Areas
2 Existing Condition Survey
2.1 Summary Information for I:xisling Reaches
Summary information for the existin,,, Reaches 1 and 2 is presented helow in Tahlc 2.1.
Narrative descriptions describing the cxistino conditions arc presented in sections 2.4 and
2.5.
Table 2.1 Selected existing condition parameters
Reach 1 2
Rosgen Stream Type F5b F4/C4/B4c
Drainage Area (square miles) 0.96 1.23
Reach Length (ft) 417 1,995
Substrate Riffle C1511 (mm) 1 7
Typ. Bankfull Area (sq ft) 42 58
Typ. Bankfull Width (ft) 22 27
Typ. Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 12 13

q Typ. Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.8
-- 2.1
-----_...------
- --
Typ. Bank Height Ratio 2.5 1.7
Typ. Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.8-3.8
Typ. Meander- Length (ft) NA 220
Typ. Radius of Curvature (ft) 96 135
y Typ. Meander Belt Width (ft) NA 52
Sinuosity 1.00 1.06
Valley Slope (ft/ft)
Channel Slope (ft/ft) 0.0273
0.0273 0.0067
0.0063
----- ----------
Peters ('reek Rests ration Plan - --- ----- 4 fhc ('onununitics GrOnh
2.2 Geology and Soils
The geologic setting of the site is the Charlotte Belt of the Plednont physiographic
province. The Charlotte Belt is comprised of metamorphic and intrusive rocks, chiefly
Lnciss, schist and -ranitc.
Soil horings performed at the site indicate the site is underlain by varying depths of firm
to very stiff silt and loose sand. Borin,s near the former building`s encountered several
feet of fill. One boring near the downst-cam end of Reach 2 encountered weathered rock
at a depth of 7 feet. The near-surface soils are likely sediments (alluvium) transported by
Peters Creek. The deeper native soils are residual, meaning they formed by in place
wcathcring of' the underlying bedrock. Bedrock is visible in the stream bed at several
locations, including immediately upstream of- the Glenn Avenue culvert and immediately
downstream of the Oak Street culvert.
2.3 land Use
Land use immediately adjacent to the project reach includes single-family residential to
the west and multi-family residential and park land to the north and cast. Demolition of'
the Kimberly Park housing complex has been completed south of Glenn Avenue and will
continue in the coming months on the north side of Glenn Avenue. New construction
will consist of multi-family housing. The floodplain west of- Oak Strect will be park and
open space. See Sheet 3 for an overview of local land use.
Utilities in the project vicinity include a sanitary sewer line on the left hank south 01'
Glenn Avenue and several storm sewers parallel to and crossing the channel. A natural
Oas line located along Derry Street will be relocated parallel to 'T'rade Strect heyond the
upstream limit of the project. A temporary stormwater retention basin has been
constructed on the left floodplain near the downstream end of Reach 2.
2.4 Reach 1
2.4.1 Channel Morphology
Reach I is classified as a straightened and unstable Rosgen F51) stream type. Results from
the existing condition survey are shown in Appendix I and include cross sections, a
longitudinal profile, and a bed surface material distribution. A plan view of the existing
conditions is shown on Sheet 3. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure
(Wolman, 1954) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is I mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 0.2 mm.
Instability within Reach I is mainly due to low sinuosity and high hank height ratios.
Apparent efforts in the past to straighten the stream have resulted in a steep channel slope
and an incised channel. In several arras, bedrock knickpoints at the channel hottom have
Pclcr?, (-reel. Rc`ior:ition Ilan 5 The Cumlilt] iIic` Group
prevented do\vllcllttlll`() and led to lateral expansion and bank erosion. Bankfull width to
depth ratios arc in the 12 to 14 range.
Bank height ratios (top of bank height divided by hankfull 11elg11t) arc ahout 2.5. A bank
height ratio of 1.0 is ideal hccause it indicates that the stre.ull has access to the energy
dissipating effects of' its floodplain at hankfull stage and above. Rosoen (?001) converted
hank height ratios to stability ratiM-S. He l'ound that streams with bank height ratios
between 1.3 and 1.5 have an "unstable" stability rating'. Bank height ratios greater than
1.6 were rated as "highly unstable." Using this system, the entire reach classifies as
highly unstable.
A box culvert beneath Trade Strect sets the invert grade at the upstream end of the reach.
A similar culvert at Glenn Avenue sets the invert grade mid-reach. Bedrock knickpoints
provide grade control between the culverts. The longitudinal profile (shown in Appendix
1) shows some diversity of' ril'lles and pools with relatively long runs in the upstream
half. The average slope for this reach is 0.0273, including the culvert beneath Glenn
Avenue.
2.4.2 Vegetation Assessment
A narrow buffer exists along the existing stream in Reach 1. The stream banks along the
existing stream in Reach 1 are dominated by black willow (Sali.v nigra), kudzu (Puerarirr
lobala) and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). The area east of Deny Street along the
proposed alignment is currently a grass field. Mature oaks line the north side of Glcnn
Avenue and the west side of Derry Street.
2.5 Reach 2
2.5.1 Channel Morphology
Reach 2 is classified as a straightened and unstable Rosgen F4 stream that is evolving
into a C4 or 134c stream over the downstream half of the reach. Results from the existing
condition survey are shown in Appendix I and include cross sections, a longitudinal
profile, and a bed surface material distribution. Pebble counts using the modified
Wolnlan procedure (Wolman, 1954) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 7
mm and the median particle size in the pools is 0.6 mill. These particle sizes are
representative of a ravel bed stream.
As is the case with Reach 1, instability within Reach 2 is mainly due to low sinuosity and
high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts in the past to straighten the stream have
resulted in a relatively steep channel slope and an incised channel. Bedrock knickpoints
at the channel bottom have prevented downcutting and led to lateral expansion and hank
erosion. Mid-channel deposition is evident. particularly near the downstream end of the
reach. Bankfull width to depth ratios arc in the 12 to 14 range.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 6 The (Communities Cn Huh
Bank height ratios (top of hank hcioht divided by bankfull hciIht) range I'rom 1.6 to 2.3.
Using Rosgen's stability rating system, the entire reach classifies as highly unstable.
A dOUNC box culvert that outlets west of Oak Street sets the invert 21'adc at the upstream
end of the reach. Another box culvert at Underwood Avenue sets the invert grade at the
dogv,fist ream end of' the reach. fhc longitudinal profile (shown in Appendix 1) shows
some diversity o1- riffles and pools with relatively long runs in the upstream half. The
average slope for this reach is 0.0063.
2.5.2 VeLetation Assessment
Both banks along Reach 2 have a relatively narrow buffer. Stream bank vegetation
includes several mature hardwood trees such as red mulberry (Mores ruhra), willow oak
(Quercus j7hello.c) and black cherry (Primus serotina), and shruhs such as Chinese privet
(Ligustrum s-incnse). Open areas along the right bank are dominated by kudzu (Puertiri(l
lohata). The left hank includes a dense stand of giant cane (Aruntlinm-ia giganlea)
extending for a length of about 150 feet. The left bank floodplain east of the huffer is an
open, grass-covered field. The floodplain on the right bank is narrow; the local
topography rises relatively steeply from the top of the right bank to a fence line along the
western property boundary.
Pelcis Cieck Re Common PLm 7 H IC Communiiics Group
3 Reference Reach Analyses
To begin our reference reach search, we observed conditions along Peters Creek
upstream and downstream of the project reach. Neither the upstream nor downstream
reaches were suitably stable. To expand our search, we attempted to locate a C or E-type
reference reach in a similarly urbanized section of Winston-Salem. We found an E-type
reference reach in the Rcynolda Gardens section of the Wake Forest University campus.
about 1.5 miles west of the project reach. The reference reach is an unnamed tributary
(UT) of Silas Creek. The drainauc area for the reference reach is considerably smaller
than the project reach, about 42 acres (0.07 square miles), but it is within the same hydro-
physiographic province and is therefore of significant value for design. The
dimensionless ratios used for the iZeach 2 design were based on the UT reference reach
data.
Because Reach 1 is designed as a Bc stream, we also acquired reference reach data for a
Be-type reference reach on Silas Creek, about 0.75 mile northwest of' the E reference
reach. The field survey for the Silas Creek reach was performed by USDA - Natural
Resources Conservation Service personnel. The drainage area for the reference reach is
3.3 square miles. Dimensionless ratios used for design of Reach 1 were based the Silas
Creek reference reach data.
Summary data and reference reach ratios are shown in Table 5.1. Reference reach data
are presented in Appendix 4.
Peters Creek Rcstoration Plan The Communities Group
4 Bankfull Stage Verification
During the existing conditions survey, the bankfull stage was identified in the field as an
upper scour line, typically present about 2 to 3 feet above the baseflow water surface
elevation. For verification that this upper scour line is a valid indicator of bankfull flow,
we compared the cross sectional areas for the surveyed cross sections to the regression
line on the North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman et al., 2000 and Doll, et
al., 2002) as shown below in Figurc 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Bankfull stage verification for Peters Creek
1000
:e
100
c
°-
u
I
10
I! -
c
I
0.0 1
North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve
Urlan Data i
?I A Rural Data
p
? ¦ Peters 2+91
X Pctcrs 1+01
X Peters 12+55
o Peters 20+60
+ Silas Rcl Rcach I
• - Silas Rel Rcach
O A
t1T to Silas RR I
O to to Silas RR 4
Po"rr (Rural Data) t
(1 1 1 - IQ 100 IUU(1 Urban Reeression
Drainage Area lmi Z )
The surveyed cross sections all plot below the urban regression line and above the rural
line in Figure 4.1. This indicates the upper end of the Peters Creek watershed may be
slightly less urbanized (somewhat lower runoff volume) than the watersheds and streams
included in the urban piedmont regional curve. The offset from the urban line is roughly
the same for the project reaches and the UT to Silas Creek reference reach, indicating that
the hydrophysiographic characteristics of the UT reference reach watershed are similar to
those in the Peters Creek watershed. The cross sections from the Silas Creek reference
reach plot closer to the rural line; the Silas Creek reach is an area that is less developed
than either the project reach or the UT reference reach.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 9 The Conlmllnllles GIM11)
5 Natural Channel Design
5.1 Design Summary
The proposed natural channel design is the 11 ghcst Icvcl of' restoration achicvahlc L1vcn the
valley and stream type and right-of-way constraints. The proposed design will restore
channel dimension, pattern, and profile, as \vell as the adjacent floodplain. Summal-Ies of
the proposed design parameters for Reaches l and 2 arc provided in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.
Descriptions of the desi(!-ns are presented below.
5.2 Reach I Morphological Restoration
A new 135c stream type with stable dimension, pattern, and profile will he re-located
along Reach I heginning immediately east of Derry Strect (station 0+00) and exten(Iin0
to the downstream side of it proposed culvert at Glenn Avenue (station 6-94). A Priority
2 restoration approach will be used to create a new channel and floodplain at the present
elevation of the creek. The new valley has a 1.2%, slope and the new channel will have a
0.91yc slope.
A rock cross vane will be constructed at the bedrock knickpoint at station 1+18 to sct the
upstream channel grade as high as possible so that excavation depths downstream can hc
minimized. The design will incorporate outfall protection (possibly it step-pool
sequence) at a storm drain outfall near station 1+90. J-hook or single rock vanes will he
installed at the start of each meander hend. A root wad complex will be installed in the
apex of each bend along with plantings at the top of hank. Cross vanes will he installed
between each glide and riffle, such that the head of riffle begins near the end of the
structure. Boulder clusters may be constructed in riffles for habitat purposes.
A plan view of the proposed restoration, including structures, is presented on Shcet 4
Design cross sections and the design profile are presented in Appendix 2.
Table 5.1 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 1
Existing Reference Design
Rosgen Stream Type
----- F5h

- ----- 134c

------- - 135c

-- -
------- -
Drainage Area (sq ml)
Reach Length (ft)
_ 0.96
417 33
348 0.96
590
--- ---- --_
Bankfull Width (ft) 22 26
-- 24
__---
---- ------
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.8
1.7
1.9
Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 12.2 15.1
12-5
---
Bankfull Arca (sq ft)

Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 42

2.3 44

2.7 46
_ _-
5
Width ol'Floodpronc Area (ft) 24 34 5f>
Peters ('rect. Restoration Ilan - -- 1?) I he ('umnnmitics ( imi
Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.3 2.1
Max Pool Dcpth (ft) 3.8 4-5 4 0
Ratio of Pool Depth to l
- 2.6 2.1
Bankfull Depth
Pool Width (ft) 20 26 26
Ratio ol'Pool Width to 0.9 I.)
1.1
Bankfull Width
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) 24 62 - - -- 100
q Ratio ol'Pool to Pool Spacing 1.1 2.4 4.2
to Bankfull NNIidth
Bank HcI ht Ratio 2.5 1.6 LO
cr Length (1t)
Meand NA 168 200
_
Meander LenLth Ratio NA 6.6 8.3
Radius of Curvature (1' t) 96 41 160
Radius of Curvature Ratio 4.4 1.6 6.7
Meander Belt Width (ft) NA 44 55
Meander Width Ratio NA 1.7__ 2.3
Sinuosity 1.00 1_07 1.05
Valley Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 0.009 0.012
WS Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 - 0.008 0.0093
o Pool Slope (ft /ft) NA 0.004 0.001
Ratio of pool slope to WS
NA
0.00
0.108
slope
5.3 Reach 2 Mori) hologicaI Restoration
A nc%v C4 stream type with stable dimension, pattern, and profile will he constructed
alone Reach 2 beginning immediately downstream of a proposed culvert at Glenn
Avenue (station 6+94) and extendino to a tie-in to the existing stream at station 17+00.
Restoration in this upstream section will use a Priority 2 approach. Downstream of the
tie-in at station 17+00, the cxistino channel will he stahilircd usinL, a comhination of
Priority 3 (bankf'ull benches) and Priority 4 (bank stabilization) approaches. The channel
slope through the new channel section will be about LOT. The existing culvert between
Glenn Avenue and (yak Street will he demolished.
A rock cross vane will he constructed downstream of the proposed Glcnn Avenue culvert
to set the upstream channel grade. The Glenn Avcnuc crossing is planned as a bottomless
arch spanning the main channel, with two smaller bottomless arch culverts at the
floodplain elevation. A second similar crossing may he constructed at Kennerley Street;
the proposed channel alignment includes a straight reach in this area. J-]-look or single
rock vanes will he installed at the start ol'each meander hend. A root wad complex will
be installed in the apex of cash hcnd along with plantings at the top of hank. Cross vanes
will he installed between each elide and riffle, such that the head of riffle heLins near the
end of the structure. Boulder clusters will he constructed in riffles for habitat purposes.
I'ctcrs ('rock Rcstoi anion Ilan I 1 I he ('immunities Group
Bankfull benches will he constructed downstream of the tie-in from the new channel to
the existing channel. Benching will be discontinuous, with bench limits established to
avoid existing utilities and desirahle vegetation. Most benching is likely to take place on
the left bank. Cross vanes, .l-hook vanes, double-wine dcllectors and root wads will he
used to stabilize hanks and enhance habitat.
A plan view of the proposed restoration, including structures, is presented on Shect 4
Design cross sections arc presented in Appendix 2.
Table 5.2 Natural channel design parameters- for Reach 2
Existing
--- - Reference Design
-- -- --
Rosgen Stream Type --
F4/C4/B4c E41) C4
Drainage Area (sq mi) 1.23 0.06 1.23
Reac h Length (ft) 1,995 - 420 2,100
Bankfull Width (i't) 27 8
-
F _
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2_1-- -- - 0-8--- ---
Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 13 10 - 12.3
Bankfull Arca (sq ft) --.--
58 - -
7 60
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.5 1.4 2.9
Width of Floodprone Ai-ea (ft) 50-103 45 60

= Entrenchment Ratio 1.8-3.8
------ 5.0
--- 2.2
---
- -----------
Max Pool Depth (ft) 6.3 1.6 5.0
Ratio of Pool Depth to
Bankfull Depth q 2.0 2.3
Pool Width (ft) 27 11 - -30 -----
Ratio of Pool Width to
Bankfull Width 1.0 1.4 1.1
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) 150 50 120
Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing
to Bankfull Width 5.6 6.3 4.4
Bank Height Ratio 1.7_ _ 1.4 1.0= 1.7
Meander Length (ft) 220 90 240-
Meander Length Ratio 8.1 11.3 8.9
---- -------
Radius of Curvature (ft)
135
13
70
zz Radius of Curvature Ratio 5.0 1.6 2.6- -
Meander Belt Width (f-t) 52
----- 40 80
Meander Width Ratio 1.9
-- 5.0 3.0
Sinuosity ------ - 1.06--
- - 1.24 - 1.08
Valley Slope (ft/ft) --- 0.0067---
- -. 0.026 0.010
WS Slope (fUft) - - - 0.0063 0.021 0.0095---
c Pool Slope (ft/ft) 0.001 -- -- 0.00 -- - 0.00
_
Ratio of pool slope to WS
-slope - - - ----
0.16
0.00
0.00
----- -- - ---- -
Peteis Crock Restmation Ilan 12 The Communities Croup
Note that the design parameters presented in 'fable 5.2 apply mainly to the new channel
in Reach 2, not to the section downstream of station 17+00. Downstream of' station
17+00, the stream transitions from a C4 to a 134c. The sinuosity and slope values apply
to the entire reach.
5.4 Riparian Duffer Restoration - Reaches I and 2
A combination of' native herbaceous and woody vegetation will be established in the
riparian buffer along the project reaches. To inhibit competition of invasive species
within the buffer au-cas (primarily kudzu and privet), most of the invasive species will he
removed during construction and, if necessary, treated with herbicide. The giant cane
will be trimmed as needed to install plantings or transplants. The buffer width will be
approximately 30 feet from the top of both banks. Species used for seeding and woody
vegetation will depend upon availability and cost at the time of' planting. Permanent
seeding may include, but not be limited to, switch grass (Panicum vir? (itwn), deer-tongue
grass (P(micunr clwidesthnun), soft rush (Juncos e ilsus), sedge (Carer spp.), ironweed
(Vet-iionia noveholwcensis), Joe pyc weed (F_til)(ltol"111117 lisliilost1111), and virginia wildrye
(EI_ynlus virg III I (.11s),
Trees and shrubs that may be used include, but are not limited to, persimmon (01O.7) - yros
virgiiilana), sycamore (Platanus occicleiit(ilis),blackgurn (Nvssa sylvatica), river birch
(Betula nigra), sweet birch (Betul(i lenta), witch-hazel (Halncnnelis virgIIIi(nui),
hornbeam (Carpinus carolini(ina), silverbell (Halesia carolinian(i), spicebush (I,inder(1
henzoin), and alder (A mis serrulata). Species to be used for live staking include silky
dogwood (Cornus (imoinum) and black willow (Salix lii??rcr). Temporary vegetation for
erosion control will consist of annual rye (cool season) or millet (warm season)
depending on the construction schedule. Planting details are provided in Appendix 3.
Peters Creek kesturahmi Plan 13 The Ccmununities Group
6 Sediment 'T'ransport Analysis
A stable stream has the ability to move its sediment load without aggrading or dc`?rading
over long periods of time. The total volume of sediment transported throu11h a cross
section consists of bedload and suspended load fractions. Suspended load is normally
composed of fine sand, silt and clay particles transported in the water column. Bedload is
generally composed of larger particles, such as course sand, gravcls and cobbles,
transported by rolling, sliding, or hopping (saltating) alone the bed.
The ability of the stream to transport its total sediment load is quantil'icd through two
measures; sediment transport competency and sediment transport capacity. Competency
is a stream's ability to move particles of a given size and is a measurement of force, often
expressed as units of lbs/ft`. Sediment transport capacity is a stream's ahility to move a
quantity of sediment and is a measurement of stream power, often expressed as units of
Ibs/ (ft-sec). Competency and capacity analyses were conducted for this project to ensure
that the design streambed neither aggrades nor degrades during bankfull flows. 'T'hese
two analyses are discussed below.
6.1 Competency Analysis
Median substrate size has an important influence on the mobility of particles in
streambeds. Critical dimensionless shear stress (v:,j) is the measure of- force required to
initiate general movement of particles in a bed of a given composition. At shear stresses
exceeding this critical value, essentially all grain sizes are transported at rates in
proportion to their presence in the bed (Wohl, 2000). T;!?C; can be calculated for gravel
bed stream reaches using surface and subsurface particle samples from a stable,
representative riffle in the reach (Andrews, 1983). Critical dimensionless shear stress is
calculated as follows (Jessup, 2002):
1. Using the following equations, determine the critical dimensionless shear
stress required to mobilize and transport the largest particle from the har
sample (or subpavement sample).
a) Calculate the ratio Dst?/D^sn
Where: D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count
in the riffle or pavement sample)
DA50 = median diameter of the bar sample (or subpavement)
If the ratio Dst?D5o is between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then calculate the
critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 1.
i 1)
T*c; = 0.0834 (DS(/D^=O)??. (:yuation
h) if the ratio D5dDA5o is not between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then
calculate the ratio of D;/D50
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 14
"I he ('Un1nlUnities G1-,up
Where: 1); = Largest particle from the bar Sample (or SuhpavemCnt)
1);0 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count in thc
riff lc or the pavement sample)
The critical dimensionless shear stress for Peters Creek was calculated using bed material
samples from it stable riffle within the project reach near cross section 12+55 (cm,"Im`,
stationing). A sample of the pavement was collected by placing it bottomless 5-gallon
bucket in the riffle at a point midway between the thalwe- and edoe o1' channel so its to
best represent average channel stress. Particles on the bed surface (pavement) were
removed in order from smallest to largest working 1'rom one side of' the bucket to the
other. The intermediate axis of' the largest pavement particle was then measured. The
subpavement was excavated to a depth of 1.5 to 2 times the measured diameter of the
largest pavement particle. The subpavement sample was placed in a separate bang and
both samples were sieved in our lab us1110 the procedure described by Brunte and Abt,
2001. A cumulative frequency curve of the samples is shown in FiL'ure 6.1.
If the ratio Ij)/ O is between the values of 1.3 and 3.0, then calculate the.
critical dimensionless shear stress using l?.quation 2.
T*,•i = 0.0384 (Ui/Uso)-0.887 (Equation 2)
PetersCreek
P:INelnent Vs SubPavement Anal VSls
100
90
80 -
70
00
_ 50

40

30
20
Ifl

i
0
0 - -
I.
?(ll'
1
I I (1
Panicle tirc Unml
Figure 6.1 Pavement / Subpavement Analysis
j
i
i
--41?- P;1\ mCnt t ')Ail, Pa cnu•nl
I'etcn (beet: kcstoralum flan 15 The (ummunilies (soup
Data presented in Figure 6.1 were used to determine particle sizes for the various
calculations. The D5(VD^5t1 ratio is 10, so Equation 1 does not apply. The D;/D50 ratio is
2.1, so Equation 2 is valid. Critical dimensionless shear stress was calculated using
Equation 2 as TI, = 0.02 and is used in the aggradation analysis presented below.
6.1.1 Appradation Analysis 'rhrouj,,h Critical Depth and Slope Calculation
An aggradation analysis was performed to predict whether the channel slope proposed in
the design will cause the stream to aggrade. We examined conditions at Reach 2. The
aggradation analysis is based on calculations of the critical depth and slope needed to
transport large sediment particles, in this case defined as the largest particle of the riffle
subpavement sample. Critical depth can be compared with the design mean riffle depth
and critical slope can be compared to the design slope to verify that the stream has
sufficient competency to move large particles and thus prevent thalweg aggradation. The
critical depth and slope are calculated by:
dr = 1.652*,iDi (Equation 3)
Sf
s, = 1.65T*,;1); (Equation 4)
de
Where: d, (ft) = Required bankfull mean depth
d,. (ft)= Design bankfull mean depth
1.65 = Sediment density (suhmerged specific weight)
= density of sediment (2.65) - density of water (1.0)
T'ci = Critical dimensionless shear stress
D; (ft) = Largest particle from bar sample (or subpavement)
s, (ft/ft) = Required bankfull water surface slope
s,. (ft/f-t) = Design bankfull water surface slope
Using a design slope of- 0.009-5 ft/ft and the largest subpavement particle diameter of 105
mm, Equation 3 indicates a critical depth of 1.2 feet for Reach 2. The largest particle of
the subpavement is used in the equation because this represents the largest grain size
typically moved during a bankfull event (Rosgen 2001). This means that at a water depth
of 1.2 feet, particles up to 105 mm would be mobile in the design channel. The mcan
desi(,,n bankfull riffle depth along Reach 2 is 2.2 ft (Table 6.2), greater than the critical
depth and thus sufficient to transport the larger materials and prevent aggradation. Usin(l
the design depth, the slope check indicates a critical slope of 0.0051. As with depth. the
design slope is greater than the critical slope and aggradation is not a concern. A
degradation analysis, discussed in Section 6.1.3, indicates that the design depth and slope
will not lead to degradation either.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan- -- 16 'I'hc C'Omnninities Gn)LiP
6.1.2 Aj,,j,,radation Analysis Through Boundary Shear Stress and Shield's Curve
Comparison
As a compliment to the critical depth and slope calculations, we calculated boundary
shear stresses for design riffle cross sections and compared with Shield's Curve to predict
sediment transport competency. The shear stress placed on the sediment particles is the
force that entrains and moves the particles, given by:
r = yRs (1?quation 5)
Where, T = shear stress (lb/ft2)
Y = specific gravity of water (62.4 Ib/ft')
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
s = average channel slope (ft/ft)
The boundary shear stress estimated for the design cross-section at Reach 2 is 1.27 lb/ft2.
From Shield's Curve (Figure 6.2), calculations of shear stress indicate that bankfull flows
in the design cross sections will move particle sizes of about 100 mm, roughly equal to
the D; of the subpavement (105 mm). The Shield's Curve analysis supports the critical
depth based conclusion that the design-cross sections can move sediment competently in
Peters Creek and prevent aggradation.
1000
100
E
E
`m
m
E 10
Om
c
C7
1
0.1 1-
0.001
0.01 0.1 1 10
Critical Shear Stress (lbs/sgtt)
Figure 6.2. Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported Particle in Relation
to Critical Shear Stress. Shaded areas represent the range of values calculated for
proposed design channels.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 17 --- The Communities group
6.1.3 Degradation Anal sis
We performed a degradation analysis in order to assess whether the design cross sections
would result in scour and bed downcutting. As presented in Section 6.1.1, the desH-111
mean bankfull depth is significantly greater than the critical depth, thus raising the
question of potential bed scour. We evaluated the potential for degradation by examining
the upper competency limits for design cross sections and by reviewing existing and
design grade control at the site.
The calculated shear stresses discussed in Section 6.1.2 can be used to describe the upper
competency limits for the design channel. Boundary shear stresses estimated for the
design cross-sections ranged from 1.07 Ibs/ft? at Reach I to 1.27 Ibs/ft' at Reach 2. Based
on Shield's Curve (Figure 6.2), shear stress values in this range will move particles up to
about 100 mm in size, which is essentially equal to the largest subpavement particle
sampled. Had our shear stress analyses indicated particles much larger than 100 mm
would be moved (say 200 rnm), there could be a potential for channel degradation.
Further confidence in vetlical stability of the streambed comes from a review of grade
control at the project site. Two existing and two proposed culverts within the project
length, as well as bedrock knickpoints throughout, control the overall slope and will
prevent reach-wide degradation. Rock cross vanes throughout the project will help
control grade locally.
6.2 Capacity Analysis
We calculated stream power for both existing and design channel conditions to determine
the effect of the proposed restoration on sediment transport capacity, as shown in ']'able
6.1. A comparison of existing versus design cross sections at (existing) station 3+61
indicates the design channel %vill have roughly 40% the power of the existing channel
during bankfull conditions. The existing conditions at Reach 1 indicate ongoing bank
erosion and bed scour, which arc signs of excessive stream power. The proposed
reduction in stream power will help maintain a stable channel through the new Reach 1.
The stream power at (existing) station 12+55 will increase by about 5017(). The increase in
stream power will help prevent the mid-channel deposition, which has been a problem for
the reach. The degradation analysis presented in the previous section indicates the design
cross section and slope will not induce downcutting, so excessive stream power- is not it
concern.
(?nxiti
Peters Creek Resuonuion flan 15 The Coninrunitie,"
Table 6.1 Boundary shear stresses I'or existing and design rillle cross sections.
XSI:C 3+61 XSEC 12+55
Shear Stress Analvsis (Rea ch 1) (Rea ch 2)
--
Existing Design Existing Design
Bankfull Area (sq I't) 34 46 58 60
Bankfull Width, W (ft) 21 24 28 27
Bankfull Mean Depth,
1.6
1.9
2.1
.2
_

Wetted Perimeter 24.2 25 32.2 28
Hydraulic Radius, R
(ft) --- 1.4 1.84 1.8 2.14
Slope (ft1ft) 0.022 0.0093 0.0063 0.0095
Bankfull Discharge, Q 250 250 300 300
(ft3/sec)
------
-
- - -- --
Flow velocity, V ----- -
7.4 ---
5.4 52 5.0
(ft/sec) *
Boundary Shear 1.9 1.07 0.83 1.27
stress, i (lbs/sq ft)
Stream Power, (1) 14.1 5.8 4.3 6.4
(lbs/(i't•sec))
Velocity estimated from v=Q/A, with Q taken from NC Piedmont Regional Curves.
6.3 Sediment 't'ransport Analysis Summary
The aggradation analyses predict that bankfull dischan-,c in the design channel will
entrain particles at least as large as the lamest subpavcment sample. Even with a
decrease in slope at Reach I from existing conditions, the design channel will have
sufficient stream power and sediment transport capacity to prevent aggradation. 't'he
de?oradation analyses indicate shear stress in the design channel will not be so p-cat as to
cause downcutting o1' the streambed; culverts, bedrock and cross vanes will control the
bed elevation throt?ghout the restoration area. Based on our analyses, we predict the
design channel will remain vertically stable over time.
PCICf> ('rock Re"Imallon flan ---- 19 The Cmmimuniticti (;rout)
7 References
Andrews, E.D., 1983. Entrainment of `,ravel from naturally sorted riverbed material,
Geological Society of America Bulletin. 94, 1225-1231.
Brunie, K. and S. R. Abt, 2001. Sampling Surface and Subsurface Particle-Size
Distributions in Wadable Gravel- and Cohble-Bed Streams for Analysis in
Sediment'T'ransport. Hydraulics, and Sircambed Monitoring. USDA Forest Service
Report RMRS-GTR-74. Rocky Mountain Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO.
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. In Press.
Harman, W.A., D.E. Wise, M.A. Walker, R. Morris, M.A. Cantrell, M. Clemmons, G.D.
Jennings, D. Clinton, and J. Patterson, 2000. Bankfull Regional Curves for North
Carolina Mountain Streams. AWRA Proceedings: Water Resources in Extreme
Environments. Edited By D. L. Kane. May 1-3, 2000. pp. 185-190.
Jessup, A.G., 2002. Personal communication. March 2002.
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosucn, D. L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings
of the Seventh Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, March 25-29, 2001,
Reno, Nevada. pp. II-18 to II-26.
Wohl, E. 2000. Mountain Rivers. Water Resources Monograph 14. American
Geographic Union. Washington. DC.
Wolman, M.G., 1954. A Method of Sampling Coarse River-Bed Material. Transactions
of American Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
-------fin --- The Ccnnmunities C;rciuh
Appendix I
Existing Condition Profiles, Cross Sections,
Photographs, and Bed Material Analysis
_m m
O O LL
~
o
C J CO
X
V
O
L
a
c?
O U
L i
O O
N
O
0
a
?C -
O ?
U
L =
? J
a

LO 0
LO LO
00 00
C)
L
i
o i
O
O
LO
C'7
O
O
Co
O
N $'
O
++
c?
O N
0
N
O
LO
T
0
0
T
O
U')
Q
L
N
co
U-) O LO O
00 00 co co
(4) UOIIBAal3
Peters Creek
Pool Cross Section 2+93
Pclcn ('rcrk sircam Kc,ior:uuon P1,11", I
Itcarl11.(,To? S(, I I on:u1"yI,I int,tilaUom-'41);
844
842
840 Ilu?nl I'n?nc :Arca
i
838
836
834 ------
832 It:u?l-.lull
830
828 --- - ---
0 U !0 hU SII I(lU 120
I)n;w III
Bankfull Elevation ft = 833.7
Bankfull Area (ft) = 43.1
Bankfull Width ft = 23.1
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 1.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) = 4.1
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft 12.4
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 2.6
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.0
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.0
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0026
d50 (mm) = 0.20
Stream Type = F5
Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 3+61
PCI"1, (lrrl. Sucvn Kcsuxation hojccI
IlCach I. (l, - Sccuun :n I{ei?ung Station 1+61
8.16
944
842
840
c
°- 838
r
816
814
832
830
100
I >i.i,n: r i li 1
Bankfull Elevation ft = 834.1
Bankfull Area ft2 = 33.6
Bankfull Width ft = 21.1
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 1.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft = 2.3
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 13.3
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 2.5
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.1
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.0
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0026
d50 mm = 1.00
Stream Type = H
0 ?II In 00 SO
C)
C?j U
a?
Q? /1
U
a

I i

--
I ? I
I ?
0
0
o I
0
0
0
0
0
a?
o N
Q?
A-,
.---1
O
i__ ?I I I o
O O O O o c o O o O O o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 6 6 0 6 6 6
O'\ 00 r- ?0 V-) lzt rr) CIA
OZ) aniar.jnwnD
? U
x
? a
U O
O
? a
?a

f

0
o
O
0
0
0
O
0
0
o N
U
ct
a

0
0
o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
° 0 ° 0 o 0 0 0 0 0
o 0
0 ?10 tr) m CIA 1-4

o anijrjnwnD
co co
O O

mo (1)
I
- J ED
I
I
;
.O
L
a N
t
O "
M
W
ca cr
L i
Oa
O
L
? a
U?
L ?
O
F.+ J
a
- -- ------- --- --- -

I
t

'
i

X

'
X

/
X

X
O
O
It
N
O
O
N
N
O
0
0
N
O
00
T
O
a
cn
0
0
T
O
O
It
T
O
O
N
T
O
O
VJ co T ^` (- LO C7 T VI 1` LO r"
C) M ('') N N N N N T T T
00 00 00 OD 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(4) UOIIUA913
Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 12-4-55
Pcl, I . ( i?rl. tiurani Kr.i?,i:uiun I'u,jrrl
k Slat loll
838
836
834
832
c
°- 830
828
E3
826
824
822
I1„ ?I I um, \rr:?
0 20 10 00 110 10()
Bankfull Elevation ft = 825.8
Bankfull Area ft2 = 58.1
Bankfull Width ft = 28.0
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 2.1
Bankfull Max Depth ft = 3.1
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 13.5
1 'U 11) 100 I SO 100 M 260
I )i.i:ui?r i Il i
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft - 2.3
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.8
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.1
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0063
d50 mm = 7.00
Stream Type = B4c
Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 20+60
1YIc . Cwvk Suranl Rcslui;niun PIoI(cI
ItrarI .'. I Io", Sccuun :d I,:\ ItiIin!ISl;uiun .'0A hU
S27
ti25
40
S23
821
till)
XI7
0
Bankfull Elevation ft = 821.7
Bankfull Area ft2 = 57.4
Bankfull Width ft = 26.6
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 2.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft = 3.5
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 12.3
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 1.6
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 3.8
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.1
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0063
d50 mm = 7.00
Stream Type = C4
J ti
•? . , fi't'. a _Y ., ,_ _. .._ .. ? ?
'I) 10 hU till
I)islancc III I
O
O
N
ct O
U
N
U a
N ?
N a/
CIO
O
O
.-.
N

O
O
O
O
O
V)
U
3-4
C?l
A-,

0
O
0
0 0 0 0 0 o O O O o O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0
O G? oo t? \?D Lr) d M N -'

oZO aniluinwnD
O
O
c o
? U
U
U a
O
N
?ar a
O
O
0
0
0
R
0
0

a?
N
O

Q?
U

c?
a

0
? I
o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0
0AilninwnD

1 i I
i
1 -
i

? c
•,=, are
X U

CO

U ..._ ....

..
U 'r .

Q .

O O O ?O
00 00 00 00
O
CYj
00
O
O
M
O
00
C, 1
O
V
N
O
N
O
N
0
0
0
0
Q?
U
O
Q
O
c?
O
O
O
00
rV O
O
rt
O
f 1
O
W)

a?
W Q
i

Y
...... ....................... ...... ........ .....,....... ............ ........ ........
0
....
N
O
N
> O
N
i g I ? N
• ^
O 1
N
a

O

O ? ....... ...............

U ........
.....:... ......0:..................... ....
......
00
cCf U Q ? e
i
cn cn O s

?
U Q
bA O
--?
? Y U
Q

U

i. cC

U
.?

Q•, x o

3_....
i........ _.._ d
...... ........d !..
!..
.--i
.....
......
0
f

s C)
i / Ct
O
f
d ^Q
l '?

O

00
M \?o d
M r, N O 00
r, M rl V
(`I -It
N N
(11
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(a?) tro[at?na[?
?? o
a o0 00
AC K, -?
w ? 00
X
?! ?n r
eM?
,? N N
w
A r`i ri
? ?c o
N M
w
? O O
a
rl ?D
?•-I rl
w O ?
6J
V V
L 6J ?,
?aa
C C
° W A
?n
W Q
k
A

O
O
rl
O
00
,
1 :.1. . .:.. r. ?..

_. 1 ..... ........... .........
-
0 0
•? ,

1 I?
1
.V

w
U ?
GU O a ,.._, O U
O

U
U
00

U U s

? IE

'k O

ik

0
0 O

A O

:
r O

GN r- kr) M,
N N c I N N --
coo 00 00 00 00 coo
00 (aj) UOIJUAal?j

O
O
I
CD
'I L
U
L
W
L
II
W
i
?I
i
i
AvI`
A
it
l O
C)
T/w,
¦
W
t O
co
co co co
(I3) UOIIBA913
O
N
00
O
C7
O
O
LO
N
O
O
O
N
oooml.%
4.4
LL
O
Lo O
T
V!
O
O
O
T
O
O
LO
O
O
00
Appendix 3
Planting Specifications
1.0 Permanent Seeding Specifications
Permanent seeding will be used in combination with woody plantings extending to
bankfull elevation along the restored reaches. Permanent seeding will occur in
conjunction with temporary seeding where applicable. This mixture will also be used in
any terrestrial (not inundated) riparian area that has been disturbed by construction. This
mixture shall be planted in combination with woody plant installations. Seeding should
be done evenly over the area using a mechanical or hand seeder. A drag should be used
to cover the seed with no more than '/z inch of soils. Where a drag cannot safely be
utilized, the seed should be covered by hand raking.
1.1 Seedbed Preparation
On sites where equipment can be operated safely, the seedbed shall be adequately
loosened. Disking may be needed in areas where soil is compacted. Steep banks may
require roughening, either by hand scarifying or by equipment, depending on site
conditions. Ii' seeding is done immediately following construction, seedbed preparation
may not be required except on compacted, polished or freshly cut areas. If permanent
seeding is performed in conjunction with temporary seeding, seedbed preparation only
needs to be executed once.
1.2 Fertilizing/Liming
Areas fertilized for temporary seeding shall be sufficiently fertilized for permanent
seeding; additional fertilizer is not required for permanent seeding.
1.3 Seeding
A riparian seed mix at the rate of 1/4 pound per 1,000 square feet or 10 pounds per acre
shall be used for seeding. The following table lists a recommended herbaceous,
permanent seed mixture. Species listed below are subject to availability and cost.
Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name --- -- Scientific Name
Soft Rush Jutncus e%fiusits -- 20
Decrtongue Panicu,n clandesiimmn 20
Switch grass Panicu,n vir ganan 10
lronweed Vernonia noveboracensis 10
Virginia Wildrye Elynws 14rginicus -1O - --
Hop Sedge ---
Fox Sedge -murex /lip dina_-- - - . --
Care_V vulPinoidea - - I O
- 1l)-- _-
_
Joe Pye Weed --- E,r ?utorium J`?suclosum ---- It)
2.0 Live staking
Live stake materials should be dormant and gathered locally or purchased from a
reputable commercial supplier. Stakes should be 1/2 to 2 inches in diameter, 2 to 3 feet in
length, and living (based on the presence of young buds and green hark). Stakes shall be
angled on the bottom and cut flush on the top with buds oriented upwards. All side
branches shall be cleanly trimmed so the cutting is one single stem. Stakes should be kept
cool and moist to improve survival and maintain dormancy.
Live staking plant material shall consist of it random assortment of materials selected
from the following:
Silky Dogwood (Corpus umo,nunr)
Black Willow (Salix nigra)
Silky Willow (Salix sericea)
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
Other species may be substituted upon approval of Engineer/Project Manager.
Planting shall take place in early spring. Stakes should be installed randomly 2 to 3 feet
apart using triangular spacing or at it density of 160 to 360 stakes per 1,000 sq ft along
the stream banks above bankfull elevation. Site variations may require slightly different
spacing. Stakes shall be driven into the ground using a rubber hammer or by creating a
hole and slipping the stake into it. The stakes should be tamped in at a right angle to the
slope with 4/5 of the stake installed below the ground surface. At least two buds (lateral
and/or terminal) shall remain above the ground surface. The soils shall be firmly packed
around the hole after installations. Split stakes shall not be installed. Stakes that split
during installations shall be replaced.
3.0 Bare root vegetation
Bare root vegetation to be planted along both sides of the new channel stream banks
above bankfull elevation and in the floodplain restoration area shall consist of a random
assortment of shrub and tree species including, but not limited to the following:
Common Name _ Scientific Name
Sycamore Platarncs oc•cidentalis
River Birch Benda nigrci
Sweet Birch Betula lento
---- --
Silverbell Halesia c•arolina
Persimmon Diospvros virginiano
-----------------------
Black um -
Musa si,lvatica
Witch-hazel Hainamelis nirgi.I .ana
S icebush Lindera benzoin
Tag alder Alnus sernd(im
Hornbeam Carpinus Carolilaim?a
Planting shall take place in late winter/early spring. Listed species are subject to
availability and cost. Immediately following delivery to the project site, all plants with
bare roots, if not promptly planted, shall be heeled-in in constantly moist soil or sawdust
in an acceptable manner corresponding to generally accepted horticultural practices.
While plants with bare roots are heing transported to and from heeling-in beds, or are
being distributed in planting beds. or are awaiting planting after distribution, the
contractor shall protect the plants from drying out by means of' wet canvas, burlap, or
straw, or by other means acceptable to Engineer/Project Manager and appropriate to
weather conditions and the length of time the roots will remain out of the (Yround.
Soil in the area of shrub and tree plantings shall be loosened to a depth of at least 5
inches. This is necessary only on compacted soil. Bare root ve-etation may be planted in
holes made by a mattock, dibble, planting bar, or other means approved by
Engineer/Project Manager. Rootstock shall be planted in a vertical position with the root
collar approximately 1/2 inch below the soil surface. The planting trench or hole shall be
deep and wide enough to permit the roots to spread out and down without J-rooting. The
plant stem shall remain upright. Soil shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation
and tamped around the shrub or- tree firmly to eliminate air pockets.
Spacing guidelines for rooted shrubs and trees are provided in the following table.
Type Spacing # Per 1,000 s ft
Shrubs (<10 ft tall) 3 to 6 ft 25 to 110
Shrubs and trees (10-25 ft) 6 to 8 ft 15 to 25
Trees (>25 ft tall) 8 to 15 ft 4 to 15
4.0 Shrub and Tree Transplants
Native shrubs and trees less than 3 inches in diameter shall be salvaged on-silt in areas
designated for construction, access areas, and other sites that will necessarily be
disturbed. Vegetation to be transplanted will be identified by the Engineer/Project
Manager. Transplanted vegetation shall carefully be excavated with rootballs and
surrounding soil remaining intact. Care shall be given not to rip limbs or bark from the
shrub and tree transplants. Vegetation should be transplanted immediately, if possible.
Otherwise, transplanted vegetation shall be carefully transported to designated stockpile
areas and heeled-in in constantly moist soil or sawdust in an acceptable manner
appropriate to weather or seasonal conditions. The solidity of the plants shall be
carefully preserved.
Installation of shrub and tree transplants shall be located in designated areas along the
stream bank above bankfull elevation or in floodplain restoration areas as directed by
Engineer/Project Manager. Compacted soil in the area of vegetation transplants shall be
loosened to a depth of at least 1 foot. Transplants shall be replanted to the same depth as
they were originally growing. The planting trench or hole shall be deep and wide enough
to permit the roots to spread out and down without J-rooting. The plant stem shall remain
upright. Soil shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation and tamped around the
shrub or tree firmly to eliminate air pockets.
E-type Reference Reach
UT to Silas Creek
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Field Survey by Buck Engineering - January 2002
4- p
1 l ,
--{ ' t •Fft2l `\?\ ? {'[?- .'?+1{ _ t`)a?i LCPRt ;,? 1 ?? ,
t n t q,?.?,.?,n, .q.. Mh, • ioo, Irl„rnv Y.-I, NU RIM ?.???.. iM..: csr:. : «, o •..?- 1 I",db U+?il n r. 7'eimn v: crat
rl,- ,?: ;1•
?., i•? t pia '?? 7 ? {? ? ;T ? ?; l <?, `.?.? ,,? .?. ?? ? ??
~f,'
L'wn
J /1 ? Y
1 ?r r'
z
j. .rte, t •?* k \ UY ?, ?t -\-, '.??,
.'l l'?i
t1? ti 7
A 1.
'.JC Ft ? ?.
l ? rt,`hstS I'ti."p?"+\L`t?lt ? ?..?I•. h ?. t 1. r i ?1 ??, rii
t I a ?t •?
t
ij,
Cross-section Data:
BKF Max BKF
Feature 7T)e
I B;KF Area BKF Width De th De th W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev TOB Elev
Riffle .9 8 .97 0.99 1.59 9.06 1.3 8.2 98.34 102.22
105
104
103
o0 102
101
100
w 99
98
97
96
0
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 0+93
20 40 60
Station

Pt # North East Elevation Note Station
118 4977.171 4940. 489 102.219 X1EPATH 0
119 4968.934 4951. 376 99.468 X1 12.94642
120 4961.956 4955. 947 99.224 XICPATH 21.28666
121 4950.012 4963. 615 99.221 X1 35.47349
122 4941.351 4969. 484 98.91 X1 LTOB 45.93604
123 4940.321 4970. 213 98.047 XILBKF 47.19735
125 4937.956 4971. 327 96.758 X 1 49.77857
126 4936.809 4971. 771 96.802 X1 50.97628
127 4935.81 4972. 204 96.79 X1 52.04442
129 4932.85 4974. 414 98.344 XIRBKFT( 55.73499
130 4930.237 4975. 271 98.735 X1 58.37582
131 4918.605 4982. 058 99.303 X1 71.80884
132 4909.174 4988. 249 99.72 X1 83.08843
133 4886.124 5002 .794 103.819 X1 110.3246
80 100 120
o • • Ban Mull o Floodprone
Banktull Line _ 777]
Station Elevation
46.76 98.34
55.73 98.34
Flood rone Line
Station Elevation
10.77 99.93
84.48 99.93
Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Type I
BKF Area
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool E4b 6 8.4 0.72 1.41 11.73 1.4 5 97.4 97.94
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
0
10 20 30

Pt # North • ^ ' - East Elevation : Note . Station
134 4967.634 4949.214 100.099 X2 0
135 4968.762 4955.375 98.904 X2CPATH 6.259722
136 4970.568 4965.75 98.278 X2LTOB 16.78048
137 4971.169 4967.374 97.786 X2LBKF 18.49595
139 4972.856 4970.552 95.985 X2TW 21.96055
140 4973.565 4971.821 96.182 X2 23.35203
141 4973.931 4972.932 96.256 X2REW 24.51597
142 4974.164 4973.448 97.028 X2 25.06946
143 4974.742 4975.952 97.397 X2RBKF 27.63978
144 4976.223 4977.814 97.941 X2RTOB 29.7754
145 4979.747 4994.92 97.986 X2 47.239
146 4981.071 5010.58 103.093 X2 62.81981
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 1+44
40 50 60 70
o Bankfull - - o - Floodprone
Bankfull Line
Station Elevation
19.24 97.4
27.64 97.4
Flood rove Line
Station Elevation
7.86 98.81
49.75 98.81
Cross-section Data:
BKF Max BKF
Feature M BKF Area BKF Width Depth Depth W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev TOB Elev
Pool E4 4.9 6.79 0.72 1.35 9.41 1.6 3.1 92.85 93.62
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 3+29
99 -----
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91 -T--
0 5 10
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
o Bankfull o - - Floodprone
Pt # North -. ',East Elevation Note ? `< Station
240 5122.839 4964.443 96.004 X3CLPATI- 0
241 5130.56 4976.721 93.847 X3 14.35931
242 5135.811 4983.38 93.622 X3LTOB 22.58025
243 5136.936 4986.767 92.647 X3LBKF 26.13139
244 5137.478 4988.485 92.231 X3 27.92115
246 5139.517 4991.856 91.499 X3TW 31.83031
248 5139.321 4992.33 92.85 X3RBKF 32.18279
249 5138.976 4994.032 94.782 X3RTOB 33.59742
250 5140.429 5003.871 98.593 X3 43.17497
Bankfull Line.
Station Elevation
25.39 92.85
32.18 92.85
Flood cone Line'
Station Elevation
12 94.2
33.17 94.2
Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Type I
BKFArea
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle E4b 8.8 11.18 0.79 1.36 14.24 3.2 2-8 92.2 95.24
98 - -
97
96
95
94
93
92
91

90
0 10
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 3+63
20 30 40
Pt # North East . Elevation Note Station
251 5130.471 4946.129 97. 361 X4 0
252 5145.699 4955.861 92. 454 X4 18.072
253 5152.177 4959.643 92. 591 X4LTOB 25.56774
254 5153.447 4960.797 92. 059 X4LBKF 27.25855
256 5156.112 4962.35 90. 835 X4 30.34017
257 5157.815 4963.154 90. 852 X4 32.20914
259 5162.852 4966.016 92. 199 X4RBKFT( 37.99473
260 5166.474 4970.094 93.15 X4 43.24093
261 5171.805 4974.622 94. 805 X4 50.16962
262 5188.101 4982.853 95. 237 X4 68.33619
50 60 70 80
o - - Bankfull . - o - - Floodprone
Bankfull Line
Station Elevation
26.81 92.2
37.99 92.2
Flood prone Line
Station Elevation
13.99 93.56
44.97 93.56
m 00 u- LL
Y
F- CO M
J C
T
Y
V
cn
c?
cn
O
H
V
or
N
L
V
cc
W
O
LO
O
O
N-
O
LO
C'7
O
O
C)
O c
Lr) o
N +•
++
cn
O
O
N
O
T
O
O
T
O
uJ
O
00
N O 00 CO tt N O
O O O O O O O 00
T T I

1
.(n
>>
N
U ?
CCS ?
7
C?
a
I - 1_
T

- - -
f I
I
0
0

N
C/)
Q)
U
.E
c3
O
O
O
a?
cd
ja
T
i
G?
N
E
N
c3
a
f
00 p C) O O O O O O O O
00
`%? anilr.?nwn;?
Bc-type Reference Reach
Silas Creek
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Field Survey by USDA - NRCS - October 2001
XS 91 HIM(, Silas Cowl,
101
1171)
a•
W r}'?
X14
q,•
..- i 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Width from Hived Leff to Right (fl)
sectio
- n:
- Riffle
Silas Creek
U er Yadkin River
_
descriptio n: r
height of instrument (ft ): r : r
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning'
notes pt. (ft) (tt) elevation bankfull top of bank (h) slope (%) 'n'
I 999 r r "'

Omn i= L?A
997

-
9`"i 97 8
- -
OAAWF 99 1
j -g !f
PRO, Eft
dimensions
38 6 x-section area 1 5 d mean
25 7 width 29.5 wet P
24 d max 1 3 h yd radi
5 , bank ht 172 w/d ratio
35 0 W flood prone area 1 4 ent ratio
4 7M 94 7
93 04
¦ (I :• 764
10.1 27
¦ f, 188 9.9 929
¦'.< 21.1 '9.8
¦ . 22.3 9.9
.¦?,... 24 .? . ?. 10_.
¦ 25.8 _ 10,
hydraulics
3 6 velocity (fVsec)
137 5 discharge rate, Q cfs
067 shear stress ((Ibs/h sq)
0.59 shear velocit fUsec
2 730 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)
0 27 Froude number
6 1 friction factor u/u'
423 threshold rain size mm
929
r 92.6
93

..
s 93h

.

3 7
channel material
check from
157 measured D84 mm
2 9 relative roughness 5.5 Eric. factor
0 050 Mannin 's n frorn channel material

. . 934
. . 935
• . 935
939
94
94.9
94 7
942
946
95
942
r 96
• ' 97 8
97 4
9H
9H 4
-. qq
99 ti
XS #2 Pool Silas Creek
100
99
98
97
96
0 95
m 94
m
w 93
92
91
90
89
0
notes
section:
Pool
Silas Creek
U per Yadkin River
description: ' light of instrument (ft)?03r7
distance FS
elevation
98.64
98.34
97.84
96.34
95.44
95.04
94.04
93.94
93.14
92.64
91.04
90.04
90.74
91.84
92.34
92.64
93.54
94.04
94.44
94.64
95.04
95.74
96.84
97.44
97.84
98.14
98.64
bankfull top of be
95.04 97.44
W
infng's
.n.
dimensions
71.3 ection area 2.5 d mean
0
28 dth 30.6 wet P
.
0
5 !dmax 2.3 h d radi
.
4
7 nk ht 11-.0 w/d ratio
.
0-0 W flood tone area 0.0 eratio
hydraulics
0 0 velocity ft/sec
ao discharge rate, Q cfs
1.19 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.78 shear velocity ft/sec
0-.Wo unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)
0:00 Froude number
0 0 friction factor u/u'
101.8 threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
4-57 measured D84 mm
4.9 relative roughness t -8 fric. factor
0:045 Mannin 's n from channel material
10 20 30 40 50 60
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
U
Z
E
m
m
U)
C
O
N
>C_
N
Q
C_
Y
D
t0
}
Q
Q
Y
O
U
N
m

X I I

I
I i
i
i
'

T

-

X ? -}
T
T
I* a
X ?+ d

X • f Q
Q
I

O CO c0 V N O
O (3) m m m m
(1!) UOI)enal3
o
0
d
O
LO
co
OI
O
m
OI
In
N
O
O
N
O
0
0
0
Lr)
0
00
co
U
ld
N
x
N
m

L
E- ---- ---- - ------

O
7
...................................................
............ O
-
. - -
Y
E
co U T

-
C ?
cz m
a
O
: -- -
?
C U T

Q ?
?
?
? U
m
L
U

m i :? .
E C O
O - T
1- C) -
m CL

L

o

N L

i

?
N
N
}?
cc ? O (n
`Y cd _ ---- T

? N? ?' c0

Y
o cc J.H

'
/?
\V ?
a ?i

i
* T-
O

i

(n ' T
O
O O O O O O O O O
O O
C) C) CD O 0
0
' O O O
O O
Y

Q) 0
)
Lo cy
0) 00 r-
O
T
0 (Ueyl aaUij) ani}einwno
cn
--
cn
O
U
a?
I
N
O
O
N
N
N
a?
JG
Q
i?
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County,
North Carolina
Prepared for:
The Communities Group
NELI A. CE ?
r•
Prepared by:
Buck Engineering, PC
BUCK
I (; I I I I Z I N< f
.91 1
March 2002
o?o? w a rFRp?

April 9, 2002
DW Q# 02-0434
Forsyth County
Janet DeCreny
TCG Development Services
2101 N. Trade St.
Winston-Salem, NC, 27105
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Dear Ms. DeCreny:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to restore and/or stabilize 2,412 linear feet of
streams in order to construct the Peters Creek Stream Restoration Project in Forsyth County, as you described in your
application received by the Division of Water Quality on March 25, 2002. After reviewing your application, we have decided
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3375 and 3353, which can be viewed on our web site
at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 14 and 27 when
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers- In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you
go ahead with your project including (but M limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge
and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us in writing and you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the
property is sold, the new owner must be giyan a copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory
mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certificatk>n-
If you do not accept any of the conditioins of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act
within 60 days of the date that you receive riis letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to
Chapter 1506 of the North Carolina GeneracJ Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh,
N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have
any questions, please telephone Cyndi Ka;* in our Central Office at 919-733-9721.
ince lely,
?f{Lb)
r ory J. Thorpe, Ph.Attachments
.j
cc: Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatcct Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
Andrew Bick, 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27511
020434
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Water CLefity, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit.
1650 Mail Service C= e. , Ralev7L NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd__ Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1736 (phcre). 919-733=i*1 (fax), httpJ/h2o.enr_state.nc.us/rcweUands/
„F \N A TF^
k
?I
",u P
14',lu_;Qii-LITY SECTIT'
C
co
0
r
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form
For Section 404 and/or Section 10 Nationwide, Regional and General Permits, Section 401
General Water Quality Certifications, and Riparian Buffer and Watershed Buffer Rules
This form is to be used for projects qualifying for any of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USAGE)
Nationwide, Regional or General Permits as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and for the North Carolina Division of Water Quality's
(DWQ) associated General 401 Water Quality Certifications. This form is also to be used for any
project requiring approval under any Riparian Buffer Rules implemented by the N.C. Division of Water
Quality. This form should not be used if you are requesting an Individual 404 Permit or Individual 401
Water Quality Certification. The USACE Individual Permit application form is available online at
http://www.saw.usace.army.i-niI/wetlands/Perm-app.htm.
The USACE is the lead regulatory agency. To review the requirements for the use of Nationwide,
Regional or General permits, and to determine which permit applies to your project, please go to the
USACE website at http://www.s tw.us ice.army.miI/wetlands/rep tour.htm, or contact one of' the field
offices listed at the end of this application. The website also lists the responsible project manager for
each county in North Carolina and provides additional information regarding the identification and
regulation of wetlands and waters of the U.S.
The DWQ issues a corresponding Certification (General or Individual), and cannot tell the applicant
which 401 Certification will apply until the 404 Permit type has been determined by the USAGE.
Applicants are encouraged to visit DWQ's 401/Wetlands Unit website at
http://h 2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetIands to read about current requirements for the 401 Water Quality
Certification Program and to determine whether or not Riparian Buffer Rules are applicable. The
applicant is also advised to read the full text of the General Certification (GC) matching the specific 404
Permit requested. In some cases, written approval for some General Certifications is not required,
provided that the applicant adheres to all conditions of the GC. Applicants lacking access to the Internet
should contact DWQ's Central Office in Raleigh at [phone].
Trout Waters Coordination - Special coordination with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) is also required for projects occurr1110 in any of North Carolina's twenty-five
counties that contain trout waters. In such cases, the applicant should contact the appropriate NCWRC
regional coordinator (listed by county on the last page of this application).
faze 1 ul, I?
LAMA Coordination - If the project occurs in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on
the last page of this application) the applicant should also contact the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (D(-'M) at [phone]. DCM will determine whether or not the project involves a
designated Area of lnvironmental Concern, in which case DCM will act as the lead permitting agency.
In such cases, DCM will require a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Permit and will coordinate
the 404/401 Permits.
USACE: Permits - Submit one copy of this form, along with supporting narratives, maps, data forms,
photos, etc. to the applicable USACE Regulatory Field Office (addresses are listed at the end of this
application). Upon receipt of an application, the USAGE will determine if the application is complete as
soon as possible, not to exceed 30 days. This PCN form is designed for the convenience of the applicant
to address information needs for all USACE Nationwide, Regional or Gcneral permits, as well as
information required for State authorizations, certifications, and coordination. Fully providing the
information requested on this form will result in a complete application for any of the USACE
Nationwide, Regional or General permits. To review the minimum amount of information that must be
provided for a complete PCN for each USACE Nationwide permit, see Condition 13, 65 Fed.Reg. 12893
(March 9, 2000), available at http://www.saw.usace.army.miI/wetlands/nwpi'inalFedReg_pdf.
Processing times vary by permit and begin once the application has been determined to be complete.
Please contact the appropriate regulatory field office for specific answers to permit processing periods.
401 Water Quality Certification or Buffer Rules - All information is required unless otherwise stated
as optional. Incomplete applications will be returned. Submit seven collated copies of all USACE
Permit materials to the Division of Water Quality, 401/Wetlands Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. If written approval is required or specifically requested for a 401
Certification, then a non-refundable application fee is required. In brief, if project impacts include less
than one acre of- cumulative wetland/water impacts and less than 150 feet cumulative impacts to
streams, then a fee of $200 is required. If either of these thresholds is exceeded, then a fee of $475 is
required. A check made out to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, with the specific name of
the project or applicant identified, should be stapled to the front of the application package. For more
information, see the DWQ website at httR://h2o.ehni-.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/fees.html. The fee must be
attached with the application unless the applicant is a federal agency in which case the check may be
issued from a separate office. In such cases, the project must be identifiable on the U.S. Treasury check
so that it can be credited to the appropriate project. ifs written approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules,
the application fee does not apply, and the applicant should clearly state (in a cover letter) that only
Buffer Rule approval is sought in writing. Wetlands or waters of the U.S. may not be impacted prior to
issuance or waiver of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Upon receipt of a complete application
for a 401 Certification, the Division of Water Quality has 60 days to prepare a written response to the
applicant. This may include a 401 Certification, an on-hold letter pending receipt of additional
requested information, or denial.
Page 2 of 1
Office Use Only: Poirm Version April 2001
USAC1; Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Numhcr(s) Requested: NW 27, NW 14
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Ms. Janet DeCrenv
Mailing Address: TCG Development Services
2101 N. Trade St.
Winston-Salem. NC 27105
Telephone Number: 336-748-3592 Fax Number: 336-748-3598
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Andrew Bick, PE
Company Affiliation: Buck Engineering
Mailing Address: 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, NC 2751 (
Telephone Number: 919-459-9006 Fax NumhC1-: 919-463-5490
E-mail Address: [e-mail] _ _ ,
PaL,c 3 cif 12
M. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of' the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of' all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USAGE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than l I by 17-inch format,
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. 11' full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Peters Creek Stream Restoration
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Forsyth Nearest Town: Winston-Salem
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Kimberley Park
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From Bus 40, take the N. Main St.
exit. Travel north for approximately I mile. Turn left on W. 8°i St. and right on Trade St.
Travel north on Trade St. for 1 miles to Glenn Ave. Project limit is at Trade and Glenn.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or LaULong):
(Note - 11' project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
Multi-family residential
7. Property size (acres):
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake):- Peters Creek
9. River Basin: Yadkin-Pec Dee
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen desi-nated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http //h2o.cnr.statc.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
PaL,e 4 of I-'
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: To improve water duality and acfuatic habitat
by rcducin?' sedimentation; improve stream stability-, and improve riparian and floodplain
functionality. This is not a mitigation project.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Track excavator; bulldozer;
loader: damn truck; hand labor.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: urban residential
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application: N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section Vill helow. if additional space is needed for
listin?? or description. please attach a separate sheet.
Pa?e 5 of 12
I. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
'type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Iloodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Strcam
(linear lect)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identil'y temporary impacts. Imparts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill.
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year Iloodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FF.MA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps arc available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at httn:/ wvkw fcma.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/sal(water marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, hog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: N/A
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear lect)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent'?
(please secit )
Reach I Restoration 417 Peters Creek 23 ft Perennial
Reach 2 Restore/Stabilize 1,995 Peters Creek 28 It Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but arc not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
darns (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding). relocation (include linear feet be[ore and alter, and net loss/gain).
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gahions. etc.). excavation. ditching/straightening. etc. 1f stream relocation is
proposed, plans and proliles showing the linear Ibolprint tin both (he original and relocated streams must he included.
** Stiram names can be lixmd on USGS topographic maps. If a scram has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream nanmd stream into which it lbws. USGS maps are availahle through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
wvvw.to?oztme.c?n_n.
wwvv; ti ,eoo,. Several Internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (c L,-
www.maLducsl_com. ctc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 2,412
Pa,c 6 of 12
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact '
Site Number
(indicate on nom)
'T'ype of impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name ofWaterbody
(ifapplicable) "Type of" Watetbody
(lake. pond, estuary, sound,
bav, ocean, etc.)

* List cacti impact separately and identity temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: tin, excavation, ureaging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads. etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The moiect constitutes a positive impact since it will enhance stream stability by protecting
streambanks providing grade control improving, bed features, and reducing sediment
concentrations in the stream. Construction practices will follow guidelines from the NC Erosion
and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. The new culvert proposed is necessary to
maintain vehicular access to the adiacent development.
Pa,c 7 of 12
V111. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for pro.'ccts involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands orgreater than or equal to 150 linear feet of' total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - in accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
htti)://h2o.cni,.state.nc.us/ncwctlands/strmgide.htm1.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of' mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
P•1L,C 8 of 12
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the N('WRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at hth_//h1o.enr.statc_nc.us/xurpl nclex.lum. 1f
use of the NCWRP is proposed. please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
IX.
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ® No ?
X.
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on it
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Yes ? No ® if you answered "yes". provide the following information:
Will the project impact protected riparian huffers identified
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 213 .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 213
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify
within 15A NCAC 213 .0233
.0250 (Randleman Rules and
V
PaLe 9 of1 '-
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If huff-el,
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the huffer
multipliers. `
7.one* Impart Multiplier Required
- - (square feet) Mitigation
--------- ------------- -
3
2 1.5
'T'otal
* "Lone I extends out 10 lest perpendicular from near bank of channel:/.eme 2 extends an
additional 20 feel liom the edge of "Lone I.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Redevelopment of the Kimberlev Park complex will involve construction of multi-family units
east of Oak Street and South of Glenn Avenue. None of the new construction will take place
immediately adjacent to the stream project. Stormwater from the development will be
discharged to the west side of Oak Street. Planned stormwater controls include grass swales and
level spreaders.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of'
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules'?
Yes ? No
Page 10 of 12
FROM : THE COMMUNITIES GROUP FAX NO. : 2026673035 Mar. 22 2002 11:13AM P2
is this atr after-the-fact permit application?
Yes [] No Z
XYV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
_\ & - 67
L2 16
ZZL 31117al 6 A
Ap licant/Agent's Signature 'j Date
(Agent's signature is valid only Z authorisation letter from the applicant is provided.)
US Army Corps Of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Cherokee Iredell Mitchell Union
US Army Corps of Engineers Avery Clay Jackson Polk Watauga
151 Patton Avenue Buncombe Cleveland Lincoln Rowan Yancey
Room 208 Burke Gaston Macon Rutherford
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
Telephone: [phone] Caldwell Haywood McDowell Swain
Fax. [phone] Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alanrance Durham Johnston Rockingham Wilson
US Army Corps Of Engineers Allegheny Edgecombe Lee Stokcs Yadkin
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Ashe Franklin Nash Surry
Suite 120 Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
Raleigh, NC 27615 Chatham Granville Orange Wake
Telephone: [phone] Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Fax: [phone] Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones Pitt
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bertic Dare Lenoir Tvrrell
Post Office Box 1004 Camden Gxles Martin Washington
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico Wayne
Telephone: [phone] Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
Fax: [phone] Craven Hyde Perquimans *Croatan Nati onal Forest Only
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Anson Duplin Onslow
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bladen Harnett Pender
Post Office Box 1890 Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Page 11 of 12
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Carteret Montgomery Robeson
'telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
lax: [phone] Cumberland New Ilanovcr Scotland
US Fis
US Dish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
'telephone: [phone]
h and Wildlife Service / National N
t!S Dish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 7,illicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone: [phone]
larine Fisheries Service
National Marine Fisheries Service
I labitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
'telephone: [phone]
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Restoration Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
CAMA and NC Coastal Counties
State Historic Preservation Office
Department Of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
"Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan I lertford Pasquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertic Craven Hyde Pender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Currituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gates Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ashe Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Surry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe I lenderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] Maywood McDowell Yancey
I'aL,c 12 of I-'
WQC #3375
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBER 14 (ROAD CROSSINGS) AND REGIONAL GENERAL
PERMIT 198200031 (WORK ASSOCIATED WITH BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION. MAINTENAN
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401,
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500 and 15A NCAC 2B .0200 for
the discharge of fill material to waters and adjacent wetland areas or to wetland areas that are not
a part of the surface tributary system to interstate waters or navigable waters of the United States
(i.e., isolated wetlands) as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (14) of the Corps of
Engineers regulations (Nationwide Permit No. 14 and Regional General Permit 198200031) and
for the Riparian Area Protection Rules (Buffer Rules) in 15A NCAC 2B .0200. The category of
activities shall include any fill activity for road crossings and is limited to fill less than one-third
acre in tidal waters and less than one-half acre in non-tidal waters. This Certification replaces
Water Quality Certification Number 2177 issued on November 5, 1987, Water Quality Certification
Number 2666 issued on January 21, 1992, Water Quality Certification Number 2732 issued on
May 1, 1992, Water Quality Certification Number 3103 issued on February 11, 1997, and Water
Quality Certification Number 3289 issued on June 1, 2000. This WQC is rescinded when the
Corps of Engineers re-authorizes Nationwide Permit 14 or Regional General Permit 198200031 or
when deemed appropriate by the Director of DWQ.
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with the conditions hereinafter set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Enumerating and Reporting of Impacts:
Streams - Impacts to streams as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall be
measured as length of the centerline of the normal flow channel. Permanent and/or
temporary stream impacts shall be enumerated on the entire project for all impacts
regardless of which 404 Nationwide Permits are used. Stream relocations and stream
bed and/or bank hardening are considered to be permanent stream impacts. Any
activity that results in a loss of use of stream functions including but not limited to
filling, relocating, flooding, dredging and complete shading shall be considered
stream impacts. Enumeration of impacts to streams shall include streams enclosed
by bottomless culverts, bottomless arches or other spanning structures when a 404
Permit is used anywhere in a project unless the entire structure (including
construction impacts) spans the entire bed and both banks of the stream, is only
used for a road, driveway or path crossing, and is not mitered to follow the stream
pattern. Impacts for dam footprints and flooding will count toward the threshold for
stream impacts, but flooding upstream of the dam will not (as long as no filling,
excavation, relocation or other modification of the existing stream dimension, pattern
or profile occurs) count towards mitigation.
Wetlands - Impacts to wetlands as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall
be measured as area. Permanent and/or temporary wetland impacts shall be
enumerated on the entire project for all impacts regardless of which 404 Nationwide
Permits are used. Any activity that results in a loss of use of wetland functions
including but not limited to filling, draining, and flooding shall be considered wetland
impacts. Enumeration of impacts to wetlands shall include activities that change the
hydrology of a wetland when a 404 Permit is used anywhere in a project.
WQC #3375
Lakes and Ponds - Lake and Pond Impacts Enumeration- Impacts to waters other
than streams and wetlands as determined by the Division of Water Quality shall be
measured as area. Permanent and/or temporary water impacts shall be enumerated
on the entire project for all impacts proposed regardless of which 404 Nationwide
Permits are used. Any activity that results in a loss of use of aquatic functions
including but not limited to filling and dredging shall be considered waters impacts;
2. Proposed fill or substantial modification of wetlands or waters (including streams) under
this General Certification requires application to and prior written concurrence from the
Division of Water Quality;
3. Application to and payment of a fee to DWQ is not required for construction of a driveway
to a single family lot as long as the driveway impacts less than 25 feet of stream channel
including any in-stream stabilization needed for the crossing;
4. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins (or
any other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at
the time of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification from DWQ in
accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0200. Activities listed as "exempt" from these rules do not
need to apply for written concurrence under this Certification. New development activities
located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not)
within the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within
and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be
located, designed, constructed, and maintained to have minimal disturbance to protect
water quality to the maximum extent practicable through the use of best management
practices;
5. Irrespective of other application thresholds in this General Certification, all impacts to
perennial waters and their associated buffers require written approval from DWQ since
such impacts are allowable as provided in 15A NCAC 2B. 0212 (WS-1), 213.0213 (WS-II),
213 .0214 (WS-III) and 2B .0215 (WS-IV). Only water dependent activities, public projects
and structures with diminimus increases in impervious surfaces will be allowed as outlined
in those rules. All other activities require a variance from the delegated local government
and/or the NC Environmental Management Commission before the 401 Water Quality
Certification can be processed. In addition, a 30 foot wide vegetative buffer for low
density development or a 100 foot wide vegetative buffer for high density development
must be maintained adjacent to all perennial waters except as allowed in the Water
Supply Rules. For the purposes of this condition, perennial waters are defined as those
shown as perennial waters on the most recent USGS 1:24,000 topographic map or as
otherwise determined by local government studies;
6. Additional site-specific stormwater management requirements may be added to this
Certification at DWQ's discretion on a case by case basis for projects that have or are
anticipated to have impervious cover of greater than 30 percent. Site-specific stormwater
management shall be designed to remove 85% TSS according to the latest version of
DWQ's Stormwater Best Management Practices manual at a minimum.
Additionally, in watersheds within one mile and draining to 303(d) listed waters, as well as
watersheds that are classified as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW), water supply waters
(WS), trout waters Jr), high quality waters (HQW), and outstanding resource waters
(ORW), the Division shall require that extended detention wetlands, bio-retention areas,
and ponds followed by forested filter strips (designed according to latest version of the NC
DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual) be constructed as part of the
stormwater management plan when a site-specific stormwater management plan is
required.
WQC #3375
Alternative designs may be requested by the applicant and will be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis by the Division of Water Quality.
Approval of stormwater management plans by the Division of Water Quality's other
existing state stormwater programs including appropriate local programs are sufficient to
satisfy this Condition as long as the stormwater management plans meet or exceed the
design requirements specified in this condition. This condition applies unless more
stringent requirements are in effect from other state water quality programs.
• Unless specified otherwise in the approval letter, the final, written stormwater
management plan shall be approved in writing by the Division of Water Quality's
Wetlands Unit before the impacts specified in this Certification occur.
• The facilities must be designed to treat the runoff from the entire project, unless
otherwise explicitly approved by the Division of Water Quality.
• Also, before any permanent building or other structure is occupied at the subject site,
the facilities (as approved by the Wetlands Unit) shall be constructed and operational,
and the stormwater management plan (as approved by the Wetlands Unit) shall be
implemented.
• The structural stormwater practices as approved by the Wetlands Unit as well as
drainage patterns must be maintained in perpetuity.
• No changes to the structural stormwater practices shall be made without written
authorization from the Division of Water Quality.
7. Compensatory stream mitigation shall be required at a 1:1 ratio for all perennial and
intermittent stream impacts equal to or exceeding 150 feet and that require application to
DWQ in watersheds classified as ORW, HQW, Tr, WS-1 and WS-II unless the project is a
linear, publicly-funded transportation project, which has a 150-foot per-stream impact
allowance;
8. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute Section 143-215.3D(e), any
application for a 401 Water Quality Certification must include the appropriate fee.
If a project also requires a CAMA Permit, one payment to both agencies shall be
submitted and will be the higher of the two fees;
9. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) compensatory mitigation may be required for
impacts to 150 linear feet or more of streams and/or one acre or more of wetlands. For
linear public transportation projects, impacts equal to or exceeding 150 feet per stream
may require mitigation. In addition, buffer mitigation may be required for any project with
Buffer Rules in effect at the time of application for buffer impacts resulting from activities
classified as "allowable with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer
Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A determination of buffer, wetland
and stream mitigation requirements shall be made for any Certification for this Nationwide
Permit. The most current design and monitoring protocols from DWQ shall be followed
and written plans submitted for DWQ approval as required in those protocols. When
compensatory mitigation is required for a project, the mitigation plans must be approved
by DWQ in writing before the impacts approved by the Certification occur, unless
otherwise specified in the approval letter. The mitigation plan must be implemented and/or
constructed before any permanent building or structure on site is occupied. In the case
of public road projects, the mitigation plan must be implemented before the road is
opened to the travelling public. Projects may also be implemented once payment is made
to a private mitigation bank or other in-lieu fee program, as specified in the written
concurrence of 401 Certification for a project. Please note that if a stream relocation is
conducted as a stream restoration as defined in The Internal Technical Guide for Stream
Work in North Carolina , April 2001, the restored length can be used as compensatory
mitigation for the impacts resulting from the relocation;
WQC #3375
10. For any project involving re-alignment of streams, a stream relocation plan must be
included with the 401 application for written DWQ approval. Relocated stream designs
should include the same dimensions, patterns and profiles as the existing channel, to the
maximum extent practical. The new channel should be constructed in the dry and water
shall not be turned into the new channel until the banks are stabilized. Vegetation used for
bank stabilization shall be limited to native woody species, and should include
establishment of a 30 foot wide wooded and an adjacent 20 foot wide vegetated buffer on
both sides of the relocated channel to the maximum extent practical. A transitional phase
incorporating coir fiber and seedling establishment is allowable. Also, rip-rap may be
allowed if it is necessary to maintain the physical integrity of the stream, but the applicant
must provide written justification and any calculations used to determine the extent of rip-
rap coverage requested. If suitable stream mitigation is not practical on-site, then stream
impact will need to be mitigated elsewhere;
11. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be
placed below the elevation of the streambed to allow low flow passage of water and
aquatic life unless it can be shown to DWQ that providing passage would be impractical.
Design and placement of culverts including open bottom or bottomless arch culverts and
other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a
manner that may result in aggradation, degradation or significant changes in hydrology of
wetlands or stream beds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above
structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium shall be
maintained if requested to do so in writing by DWQ. Additionally, when roadways,
causeways or other fill projects are constructed across FEMA-designated floodways or
wetlands, openings such as culverts or bridges must be provided to maintain the natural
hydrology of the system as well as prevent constriction of the floodway that may result in
aggradation, degradation or significant changes in hydrology of streams or wetlands;
12. That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" whichever is
more appropriate (available from the Division of Land Resources (DLR) in the DENR
Regional or Central Offices) shall be in full compliance with all specifications governing
the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management
Practices in order to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality
standard;
13. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands and waters shall be
removed and the original grade restored within two months after the Division of Land
Resources has released the project;
14. That additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects proposed under this
Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent
standards;
15. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
16. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) or Record of Decision (ROD) is issued by the State
Clearinghouse;
17. If this Certification is used to access building sites, all lots owned by the applicant must be
buildable without additional fill beyond that explicitly allowed under other General
WQC #3375
Certifications. For road construction purposes, this Certification shall only be utilized from
natural high ground to natural high ground;
18. When written concurrence is required, the applicant is required to use the most recent
version of the Certification of Completion form to notify DWQ when all work included in the
401 Certification has been completed;
19. Concurrence from DWQ that this Certification applies to an individual project shall expire
three years from the date of the cover letter from DWO or on the same day as the
expiration date of the corresponding Nationwide Permit 14 or Regional General Permit
198200031, whichever is sooner.
Non-compliance with or violation of the conditions herein set forth by a specific fill project
may result in revocation of this Certification for the project and may also result in criminal and/or
civil penalties.
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a
formal application for Individual Certification for any project in this category of activity that
requires written concurrence under this certification, if it is determined that the project is likely to
have a significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing uses of
the wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a
Certification decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.
Effective date: December 2002
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
By
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
WQC 4 3375

WQC #3353
STREAM RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT AND STABILIZATION AND WETLAND AND
RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND CREATION ACTIVITIES CERTIFICATION
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR STREAM RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT AND
STABILIZATION PROJECTS AND WETLAND AND RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND
CREATION ACTIVITIES INCLUDING THOSE ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 13 (BANK STABILIZATION) AND 27 (WETLAND AND
RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND CREATION) AND REGIONAL PERMIT 197800080
(CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF BULKHEADS)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401, Public
Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality Regulations in 15A NCAC 2H .0500 and 15A NCAC 26 .0200 for the discharge of fill
material to waters as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (13) and (27) of the Corps of
Engineers regulations (i.e. Nationwide Permit Numbers 13 and 27) and Regional Permit
197800080. The category of activities shall include stream bank stabilization or stream
restoration activity as long as impacts to waters or significant wetlands are minimized. This
Certification replaces Water Quality Certification (WQC) Number 1663 issued on September 8,
1983; WQC No. 1272 issued November 10, 1978; WQC No. 2665 issued on 21 January 1992;
WQC No. 2102 issued on February 11, 1997, and WQC Nos. 3256, 3257 and 3258 issued on
November 22, 1999. This WQC is rescinded when the Corps of Engineers reauthorize
Nationwide Permits 13 or 27 or Regional Permit 197800080 or when deemed appropriate by the
Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with the conditions set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Wetland and/or riparian area restoration and creation projects (not including projects
that only involve stream restoration or enhancement work described in condition
nos. 2 and 3) that are proposed under this General Certification require written
application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality except as specified
below;
Wetland and riparian area restoration and creation projects (not including projects
that involve work in or impacts to streams) which are not for compensatory
mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit proposed under this General
Certification do not require written application to and approval from the Division of
Water Quality. In these cases, the applicant is required to notify the Division in
writing with three copies of project specifications before the impact occurs. If the
Division determines that the project would not result in an ecologically viable wetland
and riparian area, then the Division shall notify the applicant in writing within 30 days
of receipt of the notification. In such cases, the applicant will be required to submit a
formal application and pay of the appropriate fee, and DWQ will be required to
process the application through normal procedures;
2. Proposed stream restoration projects (as defined and limited below), that do not
disturb wetlands and that are not being conducted for compensatory mitigation or
compensatory mitigation credit do not require written application to and approval
from the Division of Water Quality, and, therefore, do not require payment of an
application fee to the Division of Water Quality.
Stream restoration is defined as the process of converting an unstable, altered or
degraded stream corridor, including adjacent riparian zone and floodprone areas to
WQC #3353
its natural or referenced, stable conditions considering recent and future watershed
conditions. This biological and chemical integrity, including transport of water and
sediment is produced by the stream's watershed in order to achieve dynamic
equilibrium. The applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three
copies of detailed restoration plans and specifications before the impact occurs. If
the Division determines that the project does not meet the above definition of stream
restoration, then the Division shall notify the applicant in writing within 30 days of
receipt of the application. In such cases, the applicant will be required to submit a
formal application and pay of the appropriate fee, and DWQ will be required to
process the application through normal procedures;
-.
3. Stream enhancement projects (as defined and limited below), that do not disturb
wetlands and that are not being conducted for compensatory mitigation or
compensatory mitigation credit and do not include any stream channel relocation, do
not require written application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality,
and, therefore, do not require payment of an application fee to the Division of Water
Quality.
Stream enhancement is the process of implementing stream rehabilitation practices
in order to improve water quality and/or ecological function. These practices must
only be conducted on streams that are not experiencing severe aggradation or
erosion. Stream enhancement does not include the relocation of the stream channel.
Stream enhancement bank stabilization techniques include the use of woody
vegetation as the primary means of long term stability, and "soft" techniques such
as root wads that encourage the establishment of dense woody vegetation. Stream
enhancement techniques do not typically include the use of stream bank or bed
hardening techniques such as rip-rap or other rock, gabion, block or concrete
structures. However, enhancement activities may also include the placement of in
stream habitat or grade control structures such as cross vanes, j-hook vanes, and
wing deflectors that do not affect the overall dimension, pattern, or profile of a stable
stream.
The applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three copies of detailed
enhancement plans and specifications before the impact occurs if the stream
enhancement project disturbs greater than 500 feet of stream bank or if the project
proposes the use of in stream structures. If the Division determines that the project
does not meet the above definition of stream enhancement, then the Division shall
notify the applicant in writing with an explanation within 30 days of receipt of the
notification to require application and payment of the appropriate fee;
4. Stream stabilization projects that include the use of any structure or fill in the existing
stream bed or disturb greater that 500 feet of stream bank that are proposed under
this General Certification require written application to and approval from the
Division of Water Quality.
Stream stabilization is defined as the in-place stabilization of an eroding stream
bank using measures that consist primarily of "hard" engineering, such as but not
limited to concrete lining, rip rap or other rock, and gabions. The use of "hard"
engineering will not be considered as stream restoration or enhancement;
5. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins
(or any other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in
effect at the time of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification
from DWQ in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0200. Activities listed as "exempt"
from these rules do not need to apply for written concurrence under this
Certification. New development activities located in the protected 50-foot wide
WQC #3353
riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not) within the Neuse and Tar-
Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within and constructed in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be located,
designed, constructed, and maintained to have minimal disturbance to protect water
quality to the maximum extent practicable through the use of best management
practices;
6. In order for the above conditions to be valid, any plans not requiring written
concurrence to use this Certification must be built according to the plans provided to
the Division of Water Quality. If written concurrence is required, then the project
must be built and maintained according to the plans approved by the written
concurrence and Certification from the Division of Water Quality;
Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment
Control Planning and Design Manual" or "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual"
whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of Land Resources at the
DENR Regional and Central Offices) shall be designed, installed and maintained
properly to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by DWQ; 25 NTUs in
all saltwater classes and all lakes and reservoirs; 10 NTUs in DWQ-classified trout
waters);
8. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be
removed and the original grade restored after the Division of Land Resources or
delegated program has released the project;
9. Any rip-rap shall be of such a size and density so as not to be able to be carried off
by wave or current action and consist of clean rock or masonry material free of
debris or toxic pollutants. Rip-rap shall not be installed in the streambed except in
specific areas required for velocity control and approved by the Division of Land
Resources and Water Quality. However rock vanes, wing deflectors, and similar
structures for grade control and bank protection are acceptable;
10. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact
with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
11. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a Finding
of No Significant Impact or Record of Decision is issued by the State
Clearinghouse;
12. Additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects which require written
concurrence under this Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable
water quality and effluent standards;
13. Concurrence from DWQ that this Certification applies to an individual project shall
expire three years from the date of the cover letter from DWQ or the notification sent
to DWQ.
Non-compliance with or violation of the conditions herein set forth by a specific project shall
result in revocation of this Certification for the project and may also result in criminal and/or civil
penalties.
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a
formal application for individual Certification for any project in this category of activity that requires
WQC #3353
written concurrence under this certification, if it is determined that the project is likely to have a
significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing uses of the
wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a
Certification decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.
Effective date: December 2002
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
By
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
M
WQC # 3353
r'1
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
March 2002
Prepared For:
The Communities Group
Attention: Mr. Peter Behringer
1012 N Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
[phone]
Prepared By:
Buck Engineering, PC
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, North Carolina 27511
[phone]
C?
William A. arman
Principal In-Charge
Andrew Bick, P.E.
Project Manager

Executive Summary
The Peters Creek Basin covers approximately 5.7 square miles in the central portion of
Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The basin is entirely within Forsyth County and the
Winston-Salem municipal city limits. The basin is largely urbanii,ed with a mixture of
high density residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The project site is located
in the eight-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101.
This project will focus on the upper portions of the Peters Creek Basin. The drainage area
of the study reach is 1.23 square miles. The stream restoration work is a part of a larger
project to rebuild a low income urban residential area. Much of the existing stream flows
in underground culverts. The goals of the stream restoration project are to restore a stable
stream that will act as a focal point for the new neighborhood and to reduce flooding
problems in the project area. Restoration will also reduce bank erosion and sediment
pollution from the project area, improve the aquatic habitat, and protect water quality.
Sections of culverted stream will be daylighted and existing degraded sections will be
restored to a stable dimension. The project is not intended for mitigation.
' For design purposes, the project reach was divided into two sub-reaches. Reach I
contains approximately 345 feet of open channel and 72 feet of culverted stream for a
total reach length of 417 feet. Reach 2 contains approximately 1,297 feet of open channel
' and 698 feet of culverted stream, for a total reach length of 1,995 feet. Reaches 1 and 2
are both classified as Rosgen "F" stream types, with the downstream end of Reach 2
evolving toward a "C" stream in terms of cross section (e.g. the entrenchment ratio is
' increasing). Both reaches are characterized by moderate to deep channel incision and
active streambank erosion.
' The stream bed is dominated by shallow riffles and runs. Pools in most areas are
relatively shallow and are generally the results of scour obstructions, such as downed
trees and bedrock outcrops. The substrate consists mainly of sand and gravel sized
particles. Bedrock outcrops are present in several locations and act as grade control for
the stream bed.

This report describes the recommended restoration approach, including detailed
descriptions of channel geometry modifications, structure installations, and riparian
vegetation. The table below lists the existing and proposed stream lengths, restored
buffer area and restoration approach.
Reach Existing
Length (ft) Restored
_Length- t) Restored
Buffer (acre) Restoration Approach
1 417 694 0.8+/- Priority 2
2 1,995 2.1115 2.9+/- Priority 2, 3 and 4
Peters Creek Restoration Plan i The ConlnlunlLics Grou

1

Table of Contents
In I I-OCILIC 11011 ............................................................................................ ..................... I
1.1 Project Description ......................................................................... ..................... 1
1.2 Goals and Objectives ...................................................................... ..................... I
Existing Condition Survey ..................................................................... .....................4
2.1 Summary Information for Existing Reaches .................................. .....................4
2.2 Geology and Soils .......................................................................... .....................5
2.3 Land Use ........................................................................................ ..................... 5
2.4 Reach 1 ........................................................................................... .....................5
2.4.1 Channel Morphology .............................................................. ..................... 5
2.4.2 Vegetation Assessment .......................................................... .....................6
2.5 Reach 2 ........................................................................................... .....................6
2.5.1 Channel Morphology .............................................................. .....................6
2.5.2 Vegetation Assessment .......................................................... .....................7
Reference Reach Analyses ..................................................................... ..................... 8
Bankfull Stage Verification .................................................................... .....................9
Natural Channel Design ......................................................................... ................... 10
5.1 Design Summary ............................................................................ ................... 10
5.2 Reach 1 Morphological Restoration ............................................... ................... 10
5.3 Reach 2 Morphological Restoration ............................................... ................... 11
5.4 Riparian Buffer Restoration - Reaches 1 and 2 ............................. ................... 13
Sediment Transport Analysis ................................................................. ................... 14
6.1 Competency Analysis ..................................................................... ................... 14
6.1.1 Aggradation Analysis Through Critical Depth and Slope Ca lculation ..... 16
6.1.2 Aggradation Analysis Through Boundary Shear Stress and Shield's Curve
Comparison ............................................................................................ ................... 17
6.1.3 Degradation Analysis ............................................................. ................... 18
6.2 Capacity Analysis ........................................................................... ................... 18
6.3 Sediment Transport Analysis Summary ......................................... ................... 19
References .............................................................................................. ................... 20
2
3
4
5
6
7
' Peters ('reek Rcsto ation Plan ii The Communnics Gnnih
Appendices
Appendix I Existing Condition Profiles, Cross Sections, Photographs and Bed Material
Analysis
Appendix 2 Design Cross Sections and Profiles
Appendix 3 Planting Specifications
Appendix 4 Reference Reach Data
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Peters Creek Project Location
Figure 1.2 Peters Creek Drainage Area
Figure 4.1 Bankfull Stage Verification for Peters Creek
Figure 6.1 PavemenUSubpavcment Analyses
Figure 6.2 Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of Transported Particle in Relation to
Critical Shear Stress
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Selected existing condition parameters
Table 5.1 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 1
Table 5.2 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 2
Table 6.1 Boundary shear stresses for existing and design riffle cross sections
Sheets
Sheet 1 Title Sheet
Sheet 2-A Typical Pool and Riffle Cross Sections, Details
Sheet 2-B Structure Details
Sheet 3 Existing Conditions
Sheet 4 Proposed Stream Design
Peters ('reel. Restoration Plan iii I'he ComnlnnltlCS (soup

1 Introduction
1 1.1 Project Description
' The Communities Group and the City of Winston-Salem propose to restore a section of
Peters Creek as part of the Hope VI revitalization project. ']'he goals of the stream
restoration project are to construct a stable stream that will serve as a focal point for a
' new community housing development and to reduce flooding problems in the project
area. The project is not intended to be used for stream mitigation credit.
Peters Creek is located in the City of' Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, North Carolina
and is part of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. The Peters Creek watershed upstream of'
the project site has a total drainage area of 1.23 square miles and is located in the eight-
digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101. The proposed restoration area is near the
headwaters of Peters Creek. The project location is shown on Figure 1.1 and the
watershed delineation is shown on Figure 1.2.
For design purposes, the project reach was divided into two sub-reaches. Reach 1 consists
of approximately 345 ft of open channel and 72 ft of culverted stream, for a total reach
length of 417 ft. Reach 2 consists of approximately 1,297 ft of open channel and 698 ft of
culverted stream, for a total reach length of 1,995 ft. Both Reaches 1 and 2 are classified
as Rosgen "F" stream-types over most of their lengths with moderate to deep channel
incision. Bank height ratios range from 1.6 to 2.6. The downstream end of Reach 2 is
evolving toward a "C" stream. Bankfull cross-sectional area ranges from about 45 square
feet in Reach 1 to about 60 square feet at the end of the Reach 2. Areas of active
streambank erosion are common throughout both reaches. Stream sinuosity is about 1.0
for Reach 1 and about 1.1 for Reach 2.
1.2 Goals and Objectives
The goals of this project are to:
1. Restore Peters Creek to a natural, stable form,
2. Develop the restored stream as a community focal point,
3. Improve floodplain functionality,
4. Reduce flooding in the project area,
5. Restore native floodplain vegetation throu01h a forested riparian buffer, and
6. Improve aquatic habitat and the natural aesthetics of the stream corridor.
Petcrs ('reek Restoration Plan I fhe CoMMUllities Group
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 2 The Communities Group
Figure 1.1 Peters Creek Project Location

Peters Creek Restoration Plan
3
Communities Group
Figure 1.2 Peters Creek Drainage Areas
2 Existing Condition Survey
2.1 Summary Information for Existing Reaches
Summary information for the existing Reaches I and 2 is presented below in Table 2.1.
Narrative descriptions describing- the existing conditions are presented in sections 2.4 and
2.5.
Table 2.1 Selected existing condition parameters
Reach 1 2
Rosgen Stream Type F5b F4/C4/B4c
Drainage Area (square miles) 0.96 1.23
Reach Length (ft) 417 1,995
Substrate Riffle d50 (mm) 1 7
Typ. Bankfull Area (sq ft) 42 58
Typ. Bankfull Width (ft) 22 27
Typ. Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 12 13

Q Typ. Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.8 2.1
Typ. Bank Height Ratio 2.5 1.7
Typ. Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.8-3.8
Typ. Meander Length (ft) NA 220

y
Typ. Radius of Curvature (ft) ---
96 ------------
135
cap, Typ. Meander Belt Width (ft) NA 52
Sinuosity 1.00 1.06

c Valley Slope (ft/ft)

Channel Slope (ft/ft) 0.0273

0.0273 0.0067

0.0063
Peters Cieck Restmvation flan 4 'fhc Communitics Group
2.2 Geology and Soils

The geologic setting of the site is the Charlotte Belt of' the Piedmont physiographic
province. The Charlotte Belt is comprised of metamorphic and intrusive rocks, chiel'ly
onciss, schist and granite.
Soil borings perl'ormed at the site indicate the site is underlain by varying depths of' firm
to very stiff silt and loose sand. Borin0s near the former buildings encountered several
feet of fill. One boring near the downstream end of Reach 2 encountered weathered rock
at a depth of 7 feet. The near-surface soils are likely sediments (alluvium) transported by
Peters Creek. The deeper native soils are residual, meaning they formed by in place
weathering of the underlying bedrock. Bedrock is visible in the stream bed at several
locations, including immediately upstream of the Glenn Avenue culvert and immediately
downstream of the Oak Street culvert.
2.3 Land Use
Land use immediately adjacent to the project reach includes single-family residential to
the west and multi-family residential and park land to the north and east. Demolition of'
the Kimberly Park housing complex has been completed south of Glenn Avenue and will
continue in the coming months on the north side of Glenn Avenue. New construction
will consist of multi-family housing. The floodplain west of Oak Street will be park and
open space. See Sheet 3 for an overview of local land use.
Utilities in the project vicinity include a sanitary sewer line on the left bank south of
Glenn Avenue and several storm sewers parallel to and crossing the channel. A natural
gas line located along Derry Street will be relocated parallel to Trade Street beyond the
upstream limit of the project. A temporary stormwater retention basin has been
constructed on the left floodplain near the downstream end of Reach 2.
2.4 Reach 1
2.4.1 Channel Morphology
Reach 1 is classified as a straightened and unstable Rosgen F5b stream type. Results from
the existing condition survey are shown in Appendix 1 and include cross sections, a
longitudinal profile, and a bed surface material distribution. A plan view of the existing
conditions is shown on Sheet 3. Pebble counts using the modified Wolman procedure
(Wolman, 1954) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is I mm and the median
particle size in the pools is 0.2 mm.
Instability within Reach 1 is mainly due to low sinuosity and high hank height ratios.
' Apparent efforts in the past to straighten the stream have resulted in a steep channel slope
and an incised channel. In several areas, bedrock knickpoints at the channel hottom have
Peters Cicck Restoration Plan 5 file ('uinmunitics Group

prevented downcutting and led to lateral expansion and hank erosion. Bankfull width to
depth ratios are in the 12 to 14 range.
Bank height ratios (top of hank height divided by bankfull height) are about 2.5. A hank
height ratio of 1.0 is ideal because it indicates that the stream has access to the energy
dissipating effects of its floodplain at bankfull stage and above. Rosgen (2001) converted
bank height ratios to stability ratings. He found that streams with bank height ratios
between 1.3 and 1.5 have an "unstable" stability rating. Bank height ratios greater than
1.6 were rated as "highly unstable." Using this system, the entire reach classifies as
highly unstable.
A box culvert beneath Trade Street sets the invert grade at the upstream end of the reach.
A similar culvert at Glenn Avenue sets the invert grade mid-reach. Bedrock knickpoints
provide grade control between the culverts. The longitudinal profile (shown in Appendix
1) shows some diversity of riffles and pools with relatively long runs in the upstream
half. The average slope for this reach is 0.0273, including the culvert beneath Glenn
Avenue.
2.4.2 Vegetation Assessment
A narrow buffer exists along the existing stream in Reach 1. The stream banks along the
existing stream in Reach 1 are dominated by black willow (Salix nigra), kudzu (Pueraria
lobata) and Chinese privet (Ligustrurn sinense). The area east of Derry Street along the
proposed alignment is currently a grass field. Mature oaks line the north side of Glenn
Avenue and the west side of Derry Street.
2.5 Reach 2
2.5.1 Channel Morphology
Reach 2 is classified as a straightened and unstable Rosgen F4 stream that is evolving
into a C4 or 134c stream over the downstream half of the reach. Results from the existing
condition survey are shown in Appendix I and include cross sections, a longitudinal
profile, and a bed surface material distribution. Pebble counts using the modified
Wolman procedure (Wolman, 1954) indicate the median particle size in the riffles is 7
mm and the median particle size in the pools is 0.6 mm. These particle sizes are
representative of a gravel bed stream.
As is the case with Reach 1, instability within Reach 2 is mainly due to low sinuosity and
high bank height ratios. Apparent efforts in the past to straighten the stream have
resulted in a relatively steep channel slope and an incised channel. Bedrock knickpoints
' at the channel bottom have prevented downcutting and led to lateral expansion and hank
erosion. Mid-channel deposition is evident, particularly near the downstream end of the
reach. Bankfull width to depth ratios are in the 12 to 14 range.
'clers Ureek Restoration Plan 6 The ComillnnllICS GI-u11)

Bank height ratios (top of bank height divided by bankfull height) range from 1.6 to 2.3.
Using Rosgen's stability ratim, system, the entire reach classifies as highly unstable.
A double box culvert that outlets west of Oak Street sets the invert grade at the upstream
end of the reach. Another box culvert at Underwood Avenue sets the invertgrade at the
downstream end of the reach. The longitudinal profile (shown in Appendix 1) shows
some diversity of riffles and pools with relatively long runs in the upstream half. The
average slope for this reach is 0.0063.
2.5.2 Vegetation Assessment
Both banks along Reach 2 have a relatively narrow buffcr. Stream bank vegetation
includes several mature hardwood trees such as red mulberry (Mores rubra), willow oak
(Quercus plrellos) and black cherry (Primus serotina), and shrubs such as Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense). Open areas along the right bank are dominated by kudzu (Pueraria
lobata). The left bank includes a dense stand of giant cane (Arundinari(l gigantea)
extending for a length of about 150 feet. The left bank floodplain east of the buffer is an
open, grass-covered field. The floodplain on the right bank is narrow; the local
topography rises relatively steeply from the top of the right bank to a fence line along the
western property boundary.
Peters (.rock Restoration Ilan 7 The Communities GlIoup

3 Reference Reach Analyses
To begin our reference reach search, we observed conditions along Peters Creek
upstream and downstream of the project reach. Neither the upstream nor downstream
reaches were suitably stahle. To expand our search, we attempted to locate a C or E-type
reference reach in a similarly urhanized section oi- Winston-Salem. We found an E-type
reference reach in the Reynolda Gardens section of the Wake Forest University carnpuS,
about 1.5 miles west of' the project reach. The reference reach is an unnamed tributary
(UT) of Silas Creek. The draina-c area for the reference reach is considerably smaller
than the project reach, about 42 acres (0.07 square miles), but it is within the same hydro-
physiographic province and is therefore of significant value for design. The
dimensionless ratios used for the Reach 2 design were based on the UT reference reach
data.
Because Reach 1 is designed as a Be stream, we also acquired reference reach data for it
Bc-type reference reach on Silas Creek, about 0.75 mile northwest of the E reference
reach. The field survey for the Silas Creek reach was performed by USDA - Natural
Resources Conservation Service personnel. The drainage area for the reference reach is
3.3 square miles. Dimensionless ratios used for design of Reach I were based the Silas
Creek reference reach data.
Summary data and reference reach ratios are shown in Table 5.1. Reference reach data
are presented in Appendix 4.
Pctets Greek Restoration Plan TIIC ('<immunitiCS Gnxih
4 Bankfull Stage Verification
During the existing conditions survey, the bankfull stage was identified in the field as an
upper scour line, typically present about 2 to 3 feet above the baseflow water surface
elevation. For verification that this upper scour line is a valid indicator of bankfull flow,
we compared the cross sectional areas for the surveyed cross sections to the regression
line on the North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman et al., 2000 and Doll, et
al., 2002) as shown below in Fi°urc 4. I.
Figure 4.1 Bankfull stage verification for Peters Creek
North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve
1000
R
100

R
o ?
V
K
l2
i?
0 10 0
V

Y
C
m
I
0. 01 0 I
1 10 100
Drainage Area (mi 1)
• Urlran Data
? Rural Data
• Peters 2+91
X Peters 3+01
Peters 12+55
0 Peters 20+60
+ Silas Ref Reach I
Silas Ref Reach 2
UT to Silas RR I
0 UT to Silas RR 4
- PoNver (Rural Data)
1000 -Urban Regression
The surveyed cross sections all plot below the urban regression line and above the rural
line in Figure 4.1. This indicates the upper end of the Peters Creek watershed may be
slightly less urbanized (somewhat lower runoff volume) than the watersheds and streams
included in the Urban piedmont regional curve. The offset from the urban line is roughly
the same for the project reaches and the UT to Silas Creek reference reach, indicating that
the hydrophysiographic characteristics of the UT reference reach watershed are similar to
those in the Peters Crock watershed. The cross sections from the Silas Creek reference
reach plot closer to the rural line; the Silas Creek reach is an area that is less developed
than either the project reach or the UT reference reach.
Petus Creep Restoration Plan 9 The ('0mrnunitics GI 01.11)

5 Natural Channel Design
5.1 Design Summary
The proposed natural channel design is the highest level of restoration achievable `,ivcn the
valley and stream type and right-of-way constraints. The proposed design will restore
channel dimension, pattern, and profile, as well as the adjacent floodplain. SLImn1arlCS of
the proposed design parameters for Reaches i and 2 arc provided in Tables 5.1 and 5.2.
Descriptions of the designs are presented below.
5.2 Reach 1 Morphological Restoration
A new B5c stream type with stable dimension, pattern, and profile will be re-located
along Reach 1 beginning immediately east of Derry Street (station 0+00) and extending
to the downstream side of a proposed culvert at Glenn Avenue (station 6-94). A Priority
2 restoration approach will be used to create a new channel and floodplain at the present
elevation of the creek. The new valley has a 1.2% slope and the new channel will have a
0.9% slope.
A rock cross vane will be constructed at the bedrock knickpoint at station 1+18 to set the
upstream channel grade as high as possible so that excavation depths downstream can be
minimized. The design will incorporate outfall protection (possibly a step-pool
sequence) at a storm drain outfall near station 1+90. J-hook or single rock vanes will be
installed at the start of each meander bend. A root wad complex will be installed in the
apex of each bend along with plantings at the top of bank. Cross vanes will be installed
between each glide and riffle, such that the head of riffle begins near the end of the
structure. Boulder clusters may be constructed in riffles for habitat purposes.
A plan view of the proposed restoration, including structures, is presented on Sheet 4.
Design cross sections and the design profile are presented in Appendix 2.
Table 5.1 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 1
Existing Reference Design
Rosgen Stream Type F5b B4c B5c
Drainage Area (sq mi) 0.96 3.3? - 0.96
Reach Length (ft) 417 348 590
Bankfull Width (ft) 22 26 24
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.8 1.7 1.
Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 12.2 15.1 12.5
z
Q Bankfull Area (sq ft) _
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 42
2.3 44
2.7 46
2.5
Width of Floodprone Area (ft) 24 34 50
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
10 The ('"nlnlunitics Group

Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.3 2.1
Max Pool Depth (ft) 3.8 4.5 4.0
Ratio of Pool Depth to

Bankfull Dc?th
- 2.1

-
--- 2.6

---
-- 2.1

-
° Pool Width (ft) 20 26 26
o Ratio of Pool Width to 0.9 _
_
----? LO 1.1
Bankfull Width
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) 24 62 100
q Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing

to Bankfull Width 1.1 2.4 4.2

Bank Height Ratio
2.5 _
1.6
1.0
_
Meander Length (ft) NA 168 200
Meander Length Ratio NA 6.6 8.3
Radius of'Curvature (ft) 96 41 160
Radius of Curvature Ratio 4.4 1.6 6.7
4 Meander Belt Width (ft) NA 44 55
Meander Width Ratio NA 1.7 2.3
Sinuosity 1.00 1.07 1.05
Valley Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 _ 0.009 0.012
WS Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 0.008 0.0093
Pool Slope (ft/ft) NA 0.004 0.001
Ratio of pool slope to WS

l NA 0.00 0.108
s
oe
5.3 Reach 2 Morphological Restoration
' A new C4 stream type with stable dimension, pattern, and profile will be constructed
along Reach 2 beginning immediately downstream of a proposed culvert at Glenn
Avenue (station 6+94) and extending to a tie-in to the existing stream at station 17+00.
' Restoration in this upstream section will use a Priority 2 approach. Downstream of the
tie-in at station 17+00, the existing channel will be stabilized using a combination of
Priority 3 (bankfull benches) and Priority 4 (bank stabilization) approaches. The channel
' slope through the new channel section will be about 1.0'Yc. The existing culvert between
Glenn Avenue and Oak Street will be demolished.
t A rock cross vane will be constructed downstream of the proposed Glenn Avenue culvert
to set the upstream channel grade. The Glenn Avenue crossing is planned as a bottomless
arch spanning the main channel, with two smaller bottomless arch culverts at the
' floodplain elevation. A second similar crossing may be constructed at Kennerley Street,
the proposed channel alignment includes a straight reach in this area. J-Hook or single
rock vanes will be installed at the start of each meander hend. A root wad complex will
be installed in the apex of each bend along with plantings at the top of bank. Cross vanes
will be installed between each glide and riffle, such that the head of riffle begins near the
end of the structure. Boulder clusters will be constructed to riffles for habitat purposes.
Peters Creck Restoration Plan 1 1 'I he G0111MUniUCS Goup
Bankfull benches will be constructed downstream of' the tie-in I'rom the new channel to
the existing channel. Benching will be discontinuous, with bench limits established to
avoid existing utilities and desirable vegetation. Most benching is likely to take place on
the left bank. Cross vanes, .l-hook vanes, double-wing deflectors and root wads will be
used to stabilize banks and enhance habitat.
A plan view of the proposed restoration, including structures, is presented on Sheet 4.
Design cross sections are presented in Appendix 2.
Table 5.2 Natural channel design parameters for Reach 2
Existing Reference Design
Rosgen Stream "Type F4/C4/B4c E4b C4
Drainage Area (sq mi) 1.23 0.06 1.23
Reach Length (ft) 1,995 420 2,100
Bankfull Width (ft) 27 _
8 27
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.1 0.8 2.2
Width/Depth Ratio (ft) 13 10 12.3
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 58 7 60
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.5 1.4 29
Width of Floodprone Area (ft) 50-103 45 60

Entrenchment Ratio
1.8-3.8
5.0 _
2.2

Max Pool Depth (ft)
6.3
1.6 _
5.0
Ratio of Pool Depth to
Bankfull Depth
2.9
2.0
2.3
Pool Width (ft) 27 11 30
Ratio of Pool Width to
Bankfull Width 1.0 1.4 1.1
Pool to Pool Spacing (ft) 150 50
-- 120
Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing
to Bankfull Width 5.6 -6.3 4.4
Bank Height Ratio 1.7 1.4 1.0- 1.7
Meander Length (ft) 220 90 240
Meander Length Ratio 8.1 11.3 8.9
Radius of Curvature (ft) 135 _ 13 70
Radius of Curvature Ratio 5.0 1.6 2.6
a Meander Belt Width (ft) 52 40 80
Meander Width Ratio L9
- 5.0 3.0
- -Sln-uosity 1.06 1.06
--- - ---1.24 1.08
Valley Slope (ft/f•t) -
- 0.0067-- -- 0.026 0.010
_
WS Slope (I'Uft) 0.0063 0.021 0.0095
Pool Slope (ft/f
t) --0.001
- 0.00 0.00
-
-__-
Ratio of pool slope to WS ,_
0.16 _ - -
0.00
0.00
Peters Creck Restoration Plan 12 The ColnnlunlUCS Group

Note that the design parameters presented in Table 5.2 apply mainly to the new channel
in Reach 2, not to the section downstream of' station 17+00. Downstream of station
17+00, the stream t ansitions from a C4 to a B4c. The sinuosity and slope values apply
to the entire reach.
5.4 Riparian Buffer Restoration - Reaches 1 and 2
A combination of native herbaceous and woody vegetation will be established in the
riparian buffer along the project reaches. To inhibit competition of invasive species
within the buffer areas (primarily kudzu and privet), most of the invasive species will he
removed during construction and, if necessary, treated with herbicide. The giant cane
will be trimmed as needed to install plantings or transplants. The buffer width will be
approximately 30 meet from the top of both banks. Species used for seeding and woody
vegetation will depend upon availability and cost at the time of planting. Permanent
seeding may include, but not be limited to, switch grass (Panicum virgatum), deer-tongue
grass (Panicum clandestinum), soft rush (Juncus elfiisus), sedge (Carex spp.), ironweed
(Vernonia noveboracensis), joe pye weed (Eupatorium fistulosunt), and virginia wildrye
(Elymus virginicus).
Trees and shrubs that may be used include, but are not limited to, persimmon (M)s•Pyros
virginiana), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis),blaekgum (Nyssa sylvatica), river birch
(Betula nigra), sweet birch (Betula lenta), witch-hazel (Hcanamelis virginiana),
hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), silverbell (Halesia caroliniana), spicebush (Lin(lera
henzoi.n), and alder (Alnus serrulata). Species to be used for live staking include silky
dogwood (Corpus cunonturn) and black willow (Salix nigra). Temporary vegetation for
erosion control will consist of annual rye (cool season) or millet (warm season)
depending on the construction schedule. Planting details are provided in Appendix 3.
Peters Creek RCSIOraliun Nlan 13 1 he Communities (;nwl,

6 Sediment Transport Analysis
A stable stream has the ability to move its sediment load without aggrading or dcgrading
over long periods of tirne. The total volume of sediment transported through a cross
section consists of bedload and suspended load fractions. Suspended load is normally
composed of' fine sand, silt and clay particles transported in the water column. Bedload is
generally composed of larger particles, such as course sand, gravels and cobbles,
transported by rolling, sliding, or hopping (saltating) along the bed.
The ability of the stream to transport its total sediment load is quantified through two
measures; sediment transport competency and sediment transport capacity. Competency
is a stream's ability to move particles of a given size and is a measurement of force, often
expressed as units of lbs/ft'. Sediment transport capacity is a stream's ability to move a
quantity of sediment and is a measurement of stream power, often expressed as units of
lbs/ (ft-sec). Competency and capacity analyses were conducted for this project to ensure
that the design streambed neither aggrades nor degrades during bankfull flows. These
two analyses are discussed below.
6.1 Competency Analysis
Median substrate size has an important influence on the mobility of particles in
streambeds. Critical dimensionless shear stress (i*ci) is the measure of force required to
initiate general movement of particles in a bed of a given composition. At shear stresses
exceeding this critical value, essentially all grain sizes are transported at rates in
proportion to their presence in the bed (Wohl, 2000). iyc; can be calculated for gravel-'
bed stream reaches using surface and subsurface particle samples from a stable,
representative riffle in the reach (Andrews, 1983). Critical dimensionless shear stress is
calculated as follows (Jessup, 2002):
1. Using the following equations, determine the critical dimensionless shear
stress required to mobilize and transport the largest particle from the bar
sample (or subpavement sample).

a) Calculate the ratio D51r/D^50
Where: D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 count
in the riffle or pavement sample)
DA50 =median diameter of the bar sample (or subpavement)
If the ratio D51?D50 is between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then calculate the
critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 1.
T%j = 0.0834 (D5o/D"su)A.872 (Equation 1)
b) If the ratio D5tr/D^51? is not between the values of 3.0 and 7.0, then
calculate the ratio of D;/D;0
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 14 The Communities Group
Where: D; = 1_argest particle from the bar sample (or subpavement)
D50 = median diameter of the riffle bed (from 100 Count in the
riffle or the pavement sample)
If the ratio D;/D5() is between the values of' 1.3 and 3.0, then calculate the
critical dimensionless shear stress using Equation 2.
t %i = 0.0384 (D;/DS))) (Equation 2)
The critical dimensionless shear stress for Peters Creek was calculated using bed material
samples from a stable riffle within the project reach near cross section 12+55 (cxistiIW,
stationing). A sample of the pavement was collected by placing a bottomless 5-gallon
bucket in the riffle at a point midway between the thalweg and edge of channel so as to
best represent average channel stress. Particles on the bed surface (pavement) were
removed in order from smallest to largest working from one side of' the bucket to the
other. The intermediate axis of' the largest pavement particle was then measured. The
subpavement was excavated to a depth of 1.5 to 2 times the measured diameter of the
largest pavement particle. The subpavement sample was placed in a separate bag and
both samples were sieved in our lab using the procedure described by Brunte and Abt,
2001. A cumulative frequency curve of the samples is shown in Figure 6.1.
Peters Creek
Pavement Vs Subl'awment Analysis
100 - -- - -
90 - - l- ! 1 - - j
I l I, III I,
80
70 '
I I ?I
- coo i
00
40
50
40
to
{!
20 1 1 i -
40
l
0
I
0 I 10 100 looo
Particle S 41c (111111)
I '
-41?-Ila\emenl - PavrmenI
Figure 6.1 Pavement / Subpavement Analysis
Peters (Ieck Restoration Plan 15 The Communities Glouh
1
Data presented in FiOurc 6.1 were used to determine particle sizes for the various
calculations. The Dst?D^s() ratio is 10, so Equation 1 does not apply. The D;/DSO ratio is
2.1, so Equation 2 is valid. Critical dimensionless shear stress was calculated using
Equation 2 as T*,; = 0.02 and is used in the aggradation analysis presented below.
1
6.1.1 Aggradation Analysis Through Critical Depth and Slope Calculation
An aggradation analysis was performed to predict whether the channel slope proposed in
the design will cause the stream to aggrade. We examined conditions at Reach 2. The
aggradation analysis is based on calculations of the critical depth and slope needed to
transport large sediment particles, in this case defined as the largest particle of the riffle
subpavement sample. Critical depth can be compared with the design mean riffle depth
and critical slope can be compared to the design slope to verify that the stream has
sufficient competency to move large particles and thus prevent thalweg aggradation. The
critical depth and slope are calculated by:
d, = 1.65T',;D;
Se
s, = 1.652*,rD;
de
(Equation 3)
(Equation 4)
Where: dr (ft) = Required bankfull mean depth
d, (ft)= Design bankfull mean depth
1.65 = Sediment density (submerged specific weight)
= density of sediment (2.65) - density of water (1.0)
T*c; = Critical dimensionless shear stress
D; (ft) = Largest particle from bar sample (or subpavement)
s, (ft/ft) = Required bankfull water surface slope
s, (ft/ft) = Design bankfull water surface slope
Using a design slope of 0.0095 ft/ft and the largest subpavement particle diameter of 105
mm, Equation 3 indicates a critical depth of 1.2 feet for Reach 2. The largest particle of
the subpavement is used in the equation because this represents the largest grain size
typically moved during a bankfull event (Rosgen 2001). This means that at a water depth
of 1.2 feet, particles up to 105 mm would be mobile in the design channel. The mean
design bankfull riffle depth along Reach 2 is 2.2 ft (Table 6.2), greater than the critical
depth and thus sufficient to transport the larger materials and prevent aggradation. Using
the design depth, the slope check indicates a critical slope of 0.0051. As with depth. the
design slope is greater than the critical slope and aggradation is not a concern. A
degradation analysis, discussed in Section 6.1.3, indicates that the design depth and slope
will not lead to degradation either.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 16 The Communities Group
6.1.2 Aggradation Analysis Through Boundary Shear Stress and Shield's Curve
Comparison
As it compliment to the critical depth and slope calculations, we calculated boundary
shear stresses for design riffle cross sections and compared with Shield's Curve to predict
sediment transport competency. The shear stress placed on the sediment particles is the
force that entrains and moves the particles, given by:
z = yRs (Equation 5
Where, T = shear stress (ib/ft`')
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft 3)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
s = average channel slope (ft/ft)
The boundary shear stress estimated for the design cross-section at Reach 2 is 1.27 lb/ft2.
From Shield's Curve (Figure 6.2), calculations of shear stress indicate that bankfull flows
in the design cross sections will move particle sizes of about 100 mm, roughly equal to
the D; of the subpavement (105 mm). The Shield's Curve analysis supports the critical
depth based conclusion that the design-cross sections can move sediment competently in
Peters Creek and prevent aggradation.
100(
100
E
E
v
M
d
E 10
?o
0
M
E
0
1
0.1 1-
0.001
0.01 0.1 1
Critical Shear Stress (lbs/sgft)
10
Figure 6.2. Shield's Curve for Grain Diameter of 'T'ransported Particle in Relation
to Critical Shear Stress. Shaded areas represent the range of values calculated for
proposed design channels.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan
17
The Communitie` ( in,uh

6.1.3 Degrada tion Analysis
We performed a degradation analysis in order to assess whether the design cross sections
' would result in scour and bed downcuttina. As presented in Section 6.1.1, the design
mean bankfull depth is significantly greater than the critical depth, thus raising the
question of potential bed scour. We evaluated the potential for degradation by examining
' the upper competency limits for design cross sections and by reviewing existing and
design grade control at the site.
The calculated shear stresses discussed in Section 6.1.2 can be used to describe the upper
competency limits for the design channel. Boundary shear stresses estimated for the
design cross-sections ranged from 1.07 lbs/ft2 at Reach I to 1.27 Ibs/ftz at Reach 2. Based
' on Shield's Curve (Figure 6.2), shear stress values in this range will move particles up to
about 100 mm in size, which is essentially equal to the largest subpavement particle
sampled. Had our shear stress analyses indicated particles much larger than 100 mm
' would be moved (say 200 mm), there could be a potential for channel degradation.
' Further confidence in vertical stability of the streambed comes from a review of grade
control at the project site. Two existing and two proposed culverts within the project
length, as well as bedrock knickpoints throughout, control the overall slope and will
prevent reach-wide degradation. Rock cross vanes throughout the project will help
control grade locally.

n.

6.2 Capacity Analysis
We calculated stream power for both existing and design channel conditions to determine
the effect of the proposed restoration on sediment transport capacity, as shown in Table
6.1. A comparison of existing versus design cross sections at (existing) station 3+61
indicates the design channel will have roughly 40% the power of the existing channel
during bankfull conditions. The existing conditions at Reach 1 indicate ongoing bank
erosion and bed scour, which are signs of excessive stream power. The proposed
reduction in stream power will help maintain a stable channel through the new Reach 1.
The stream power at (existing) station 12+55 will increase by about 50%. The increase in
stream power will help prevent the mid-channel deposition, which has been a problem for
the reach. The degradation analysis presented in the previous section indicates the design
cross section and slope will not induce downcutting, so excessive stream power is not a
concern.
Peters Creek Restoration Plan 18 The Communities Gnnip
1
t
i
Table 6.1 Boundary shear stresses for existing; and design riffle cross sections.
XSEC 3+61 XSCC 12+55
Shear Stress Analysis (Reach 1) - (Reach 2)

Existing Design Existing Design
Bankfull Area (sq ft) 34 46 58 60
Bankfull Width, W (ft) 21 24 28 27
Bankfull Mean Depth,
1.6
1.9
2.1
2.2
D (ft)
Wetted Perimeter 24.2 25 32.2 28
Hydraulic Radius, R 1.4 1.84 1.8 2.14
(ft)
Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 0.0093 0.0063 0.0095
Bankfull
Discharge, Q 250 250 300 300
?
(ft3 /sec)
Flow velocity, V 7.4 5.4 5.2 5.0
(ft/sec) *
Boundary Shear

Stress, i (lbs/sq ft) 1.9 1.07 0.83 1.27
Stream Power, co 14.1 5.8 4.3 6.4
(lbs/(ft•sec))
* Velocity estimated from v=Q/A, with Q taken from NC Piedmont Regional Curves.
6.3 Sediment Transport Analysis Summary
The aggradation analyses predict that bankfull discharge in the design channel will
entrain particles at least as large as the largest subpavement sample. Even with a
decrease in slope at Reach I from existing conditions, the design channel will have
sufficient stream power and sediment transport capacity to prevent aggradation. The
degradation analyses indicate shear stress in the design channel will not be so great as to
cause downcutting of the streambed; culverts, bedrock and cross vanes will control the
bed elevation throughout the restoration area. Based on our analyses, we predict the
design channel will remain vertically stable over time.
Peters Crcek Restoration Plan 19 The COM111nnitIC, (110111)

n

1

7 References
Andrews, E.D., 1983. Entrainment of gravel from naturally sorted riverbed material,
Geological Society of America Bulletin, 94, 1225-1231.
BruntC, K. and S. R. Abt, 2001. Sampling Surface and Subsurface Particle-Size
Distributions in Wadable Gravel- and Cobble-Bed Streams for Analysis in
Sediment Transport, Hydraulics, and Streambed Monitoring. USDA Forest Service
Report RMRS-GTR-74. Rocky Mountain Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO.
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. In Press.
Harman, W.A., D.E. Wise, M.A. Walker, R. Morris, M.A. Cantrell, M. Clemmons, G.D.
Jennings, D. Clinton, and J. Patterson, 2000. Bankfull Regional Curves for North
Carolina Mountain Streams. AWRA Proceedings: Water Resources in Extreme
Environments. Edited By D. L. Kane. May 1-3, 2000. pp. 185-190.
Jessup, A.G., 2002. Personal communication. March 2002.
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D. L. 2001. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings
of the Seventh Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, March 25-29, 2001,
Reno, Nevada. pp. 11-18 to 1I-26.
Wohl, E. 2000. Mountain Rivers. Water Resources Monograph 14. American
Geographic Union. Washington, DC.
Wolman, M.G., 1954. A Method of Sampling Coarse River-Bed Material. Transactions
of American Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
Peters C leek Rcstcnation Plan 20 The Communilics Group

E

F-j

I

Appendix 1
Existing Condition Profiles, Cross Sections,
Photographs, and Bed Material Analysis
I

?
?- m
0
Ir
0O
J
U)
>
Y
co
I I
I
; ?
X
X
?.

/ X

V
O
L
a?
c?
o?
a?
00
? V=
cc: O
Y a
U?
as
d
a
X
X
X
LO ? Nt co °
00 O 00 00 00 00
(11) UOIIUAO13
>
Q
U CO
C?
O
LO
Nt
O
O
ct
O
LO
C'7
O
O
C)
o _
N_
O
o •-'
o un
N
0
LO
O
O
O
LO
-4 0
Lr)
N
00

Peters Creek
Pool Cross Section 2+93
Pekes ('reek Sucam Rcsluraliun hojco
Reach I. ('cuss Section at Fi.xislim-, SlaIion 1+93
844
842 --
840 1luud hone Arca
838
836 ------ ------
v 834
m
832 Itanklull
830
828
-- - ---- -- - - -- - ----
0 40 00 80 100
Uislancc (11)
Bankfull Elevation ft = 833.7
Bankfull Area ft2 = 43.1
Bankfull Width ft = 23.1
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 1.9
113ankfull Max Depth (ft) 4.1
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 12.4
120
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 2.6
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.0
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.0
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0026
d50 mm = 0.20
Stream Type = F5
Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 3+61

846 PCWI1 ('Icel. Slrcam Restoration Project
Kcach I. 0011 Sccllon :11 laising Station 3+61
844
842
840 Il i u1 Fume Awj
c
° 838
836
--- ----------

834 - ----------
832 lianklull
830 -- ----- ----- - - - -
0 11) 60 S0 10 0
I >i i;uirc i li 1
Bankfull Elevation ft = 834.1
Bankfull Area ft2 = 33.6
Bankfull Width ft = 21.1
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 1.6
Bankfull Max Depth ft = 2.3
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 13.3
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 2.5
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.1
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.0
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0026
d50 mm = 1.00
Stream Type = F5
1
1
1
1
1
(U
U ?
U a
? N
(1) t
p a/
P1

jlll??l!I
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
r--1
0
0
a?
N
U
a
r--q
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O
O G1 00 [? ?O d M N .-,
0L 2AIIPlnwnD
i
i
i
i
U ?
cd ?
U O
p? U
a?
O
N O
Q-1
a

i

1 I

1

_
?
11I
i
j ---- -- - -- -- ---- --

I
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
a?
N
cn
U
c?
a
-.4
0
O O O O O O O O O O o°
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
°o ? 00 ° ?c ° ° o 0 0 0
m CIA 1-4
o/0 anijrjnwnD
i
i
L
?• N
? t
2 V
cts cc
L L,
O ,0
O
L
CL
V '
N ?
L ?
O
++ J
a
m co
(1) LL
O co
I
I ;
---------- ---------
/-
\ ---------------
_
i
t
f -
I
i I
i x
/ x
_ X
x
/ x
\ n
O
O
,It
N
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
N
o ^
00
T i
O
a
N
O
O
(D
T
O
O
T
O
O
N
T
O
O
C) C) C') N
00 00 00 00
N N co
00 00 00
(4) UOIIUA013
O
r-- LO
N MT TT
Co co M co
W
Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 12+55
xis
836
834
832
c
830
v 828
826
824
822 .
0
IYIVI1(lrrk SIICan I KrslnratitM I'rojcct
It(arh 10 o " )",Iion at FAI"IInr tit a lion 12-+5>
Hood frolic A wa
20 40 00 ,u
IUfI I'0 I 0 100 ISO ?00 ??1) W 260
i )i.t:nn ? ? n
Bankfull Elevation ft = 825.8
Bankfull Area ft2 = 58.1
Bankfull Width ft = 28.0
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 2.1
Bankfull Max Depth ft = 3.1
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 13.5
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 2.3
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 1.8
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.1
Slope (ft/ft) = 0.0063
d50 mm = 7.00
Stream Type = B4c

Peters Creek
Riffle Cross Section 20+60
Peters ('reek Stream Restoration hojccI
Reach 2. ('Hiss Section at Existing Station 20460
829
Flood Prone Area
827
' 825 ----------- - -
n 823
----------
821 - - - -
liankfull
819
i
817 --- ------ ------ -
0 20 30 60 S0
I)istancc (It)
Bankfull Elevation ft = 821.7
Bankfull Area ft2 = 57.4
Bankfull Width ft = 26.6
Bankfull Depth (ft) = 2.2
Bankfull Max Depth ft - 3.5
Width/De th Ratio ft/ft = 12.3
Bankhei ht Ratio ft/ft = 1.6
Entrenchment Ratio ft/ft = 3.8
Sinuosity ft/ft = 1.1
Slope (ft/ft) - 0.0063
050 mm = 7.00
Stream Type == C4

ctU
U a
? N
{

0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
r--1
a?
N
U
cCi
a
r--1
0
0
°
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 C 0 C 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0
0
C
o
0
0
0
0
0
° Cl\ 00 r- C
?I
% OAIIPInwnD

0
0
N _
U ?
? U
U a
O
?a
a

I
i

0
O
0
°o
0
0
a?
N
O
U

0
? I i ? ! I I I I .? I- o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
°O o°N o 00 r- o ?c o "Zt 0 m CIA _--q
`Y. antlujnwnD

u

Appendix 2
Design Cross Sections and Profile

ap
W Q
0
M
O
00
O

G]Q
.
...
.. O

U :._
....... ... _.
... ...........:....;.....;.... ... .... .
.._.;.._...._....;_...;_...;...
...._:........
. N
O
.. ... O

A
O U
a>
_ _..
_._
.. ?
:... O
cd ? ?
,? . ?.
U 00

N

. _...
* z
U
C]. .. .
x - Q

U •
__

_. ..
N
Q?

f?
_...

;
?_ ,.....

.
?
....:.
.....
..... .
. _..
..
.. .

.
O
. _ t
...... . - o

_ O
a?
Q 7o

a?
0

o
o O o o? o
00 00 00 00 00
(?J) trogYnalg

U k r)
U v-)
}O. N
tom" Q
O O
? U
O cUi?
N cn
(? O
U
U ?
Co ' a)
N
4.4
U
u" N
U .c
U
U N
U
a
aA
•? oA
W Q
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
O
O
N
O
00
O
U
O ?
Q
0
0
00 \D -It N O 00 I-r It N
M m M C-1 M N C I N N
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(aj) U011Pna['l
O
00
O
0
0
N
O

bA

W Q

C)
...... .... . ......... ...... ..... ............:. . .......... O

00
,
C)
•
^
' +
O
}. O
. ,
---
W N .._._ , O

O O _... -
4 •4= ,
CIZ U ?._...... _._... .... .. . ...

?n ........ ; _... ON

bA U
• ^' a O

'd

U :..__ .;.. .... ;.. ._ :......... ............ ..
U

:............... i. _.

...;.. _.. _'.. _..... ....

. -................. . 8..

...i....... J..

.... .. ..
00

?^1

d ' O

;...... C)
o

• m
r
O
G1 t? t/•) M ? G\ ?
N C`?1 C`d N N r--?
00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(aj) u011PAOIA

0
0
U
AL
W
A?
W
CIO
L
O
L?
r
NOMON
O
`i
C)
¦y
T/w)
W
o 0 0
00 OD co
i
(1=1) u01jen013
0
N
co
0
co
0
0
N
0
O
O
N
10-%%
f+
U.
O r
Un O
T •y?
Ty
Ow
c n
O
O
O
T
O
'0
L
0
_O
W

Appendix 3
Planting Specifications
1.0 Permanent Seeding Specifications
Permanent seeding will be used in combination with woody plantings extending to
bankfull elevation along the restored reaches. Permanent seeding will occur in
conjunction with temporary seeding where applicable. This mixture will also be used in
any terrestrial (not inundated) riparian area that has been disturbed by construction. This
mixture shall be planted in combination with woody plant installations. Seeding should
be done evenly over the area using a mechanical or hand seeder. A drag should be used
to cover the seed with no more than ?/2 inch of soils. Where a drag cannot safely be
utilized, the seed should be covered by hand raking.
1.1 Seedbed Preparation
On sites where equipment can be operated safely, the seedbed shall be adequately
loosened. Disking may be needed in areas where soil is compacted. Steep banks may
require roughening, either by hand scarifying or by equipment, depending on site
conditions. If seeding is done immediately following construction, seedbed preparation
may not be required except on compacted, polished or freshly cut areas. If permanent
seeding is performed in conjunction with temporary seeding, seedbed preparation only
needs to be executed once.
1.2 Fertilizing/Liming
Areas fertilized for temporary seeding shall be sufficiently fertilized for permanent
seeding; additional fertilizer is not required for permanent seeding.
1.3 Seeding
A riparian seed mix at the rate of '/a pound per 1,000 square feet or 10 pounds per acre
shall be used for seeding. The following table lists a recommended herbaceous,
permanent seed mixture. Species listed below are subject to availability and cost.

fl

Riparian Seed Mix
Common Name Scientific Name
-- %
----
Soft Rush - Juncus c'fficsus ?0
- - --
Deertongue - Panicum clandestinum
--- 20
Switchgrass Panicum rirgatum l0
lronweed Vernonuc noveboracensis
- lU
-
Virginia Wildr e _
ENnnis 14r inicus
-
10
Ho Sedge Carex lupilina _
10 - -
----
Fox Sedge - Carex uulpinoidea
--- 10
Joe Pye Weed
___ Eurium frstulosurn 10
Live staking
Live stake materials should be dormant and gathered locally or purchased from a
reputable commercial supplier. Stakes should be 1/2 to 2 inches in diameter, 2 to 3 feet in
length, and living (based on the presence of young buds and green bark). Stakes shall be
angled on the bottom and cut flush on the top with buds oriented upwards. All side
branches shall be cleanly trimmed so the cutting is one single stem. Stakes should be kept
cool and moist to improve survival and maintain dormancy.
Live staking plant material shall consist of a random assortment of materials selected
from the following:
Silky Dogwood (Corpus anunncan)
Black Willow (Salix nigra)
Silky Willow (Salix sericea)
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensi.s)
Other species may be substituted upon approval of Engineer/Project Manager.
Planting shall take place in early spring. Stakes should be installed randomly 2 to 3 feet
apart using triangular spacing or at a density of 160 to 360 stakes per 1,000 sq ft along
the stream banks above bankfull elevation. Site variations may require slightly different
spacing. Stakes shall be driven into the ground using a rubber hammer or by creating a
hole and slipping the stake into it. The stakes should be tamped in at a right angle to the
slope with 4/5 of the stake installed below the ground surface. At least two buds (lateral
and/or terminal) shall remain above the ground surface. The soils shall be firmly packed
around the hole after installations. Split stakes shall not be installed. Stakes that split
during installations shall be replaced.

3.0 Bare root vegetation
Bare root vegetation to be planted along both sides ol' the new channel stream banks
above bankfull elevation and in the floodplain restoration area shall consist of' a random
assortment of shrub and tree species including, but not limited to the following:
Common Name Scientific Name
Sycamore Platanus occidenmlis
_
River Birch Betula nigra
Sweet Birch Benda lento
Silverbell Halesia caroling
Persimmon Dios gyros W.rginiana
Black urn Nyssa sylvatica
Witch-hazel Hamamelis virginiana
S icebush Lindera henzoin
Tag alder Alnus serrulata
Hornbeam Carpinus caroliniana
Planting shall take place in late winter/early spring. Listed species are subject to
availability and cost. Immediately following delivery to the project site, all plants with
bare roots, if not promptly planted, shall be heeled-in in constantly moist soil or sawdust
in an acceptable manner corresponding to generally accepted horticultural practices.
While plants with bare roots are being transported to and from heeling-in beds, or are
being distributed in planting beds, or are awaiting planting after distribution, the
contractor shall protect the plants from drying out by means of' wet canvas, burlap, or
straw, or by other means acceptable to Engineer/Project Manager and appropriate to
weather conditions and the length of time the roots will remain out of the ground.
Soil in the area of shrub and tree plantings shall be loosened to a depth of at least 5
inches. This is necessary only on compacted soil. Bare root vegetation may be planted in
holes made by a mattock, dibble, planting bar, or other means approved by
Engineer/Project Manager. Rootstock shall be planted in a vertical position with the root
collar approximately 1/2 inch below the soil surface. The planting trench or hole shall be
deep and wide enough to permit the roots to spread out and down without J-rooting. The
plant stem shall remain upright. Sol] shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation
and tamped around the shrub or tree firmly to eliminate air pockets.
Spacing guidelines for rooted shrubs and trees are provided in the following table.
Type Spacing # Per 1,000 s ft
Shrubs (<10 ft tall) 3 to 6 ft 25 to 110
Shrubs and trees (10-25 ft) 6 to 8 ft 15 to 25
Trees (>25 ft tall) _
_ 8 to 15-ft 4 to 15

' 4.0 Shrub and Tree Transplants
' Native shrubs and trees less than 3 inches in diameter shall be salvaged on-site in areas
designated for construction, access areas, and other sites that will necessarily be
disturbed. Vegetation to be transplanted will be identified by the Engineer/Project
' Manager. Transplanted vegetation shall carefully be excavated with rootballs and
surrounding soil remaining intact. Care shall be given not to rip limbs or bark from the
shrub and tree transplants. Vegetation should be transplanted immediately, if possible.
t Otherwise, transplanted vegetation shall be carefully transported to designated stockpile
areas and heeled-in in constantly moist soil or sawdust in an acceptable manner
appropriate to weather or seasonal conditions. The solidity of the plants shall be
carefully preserved.
Installation of shrub and tree transplants shall be located in designated areas along the
stream bank above bankfull elevation or in floodplain restoration areas as directed by
Engineer/Project Manager. Compacted soil in the area of vegetation transplants shall be
' loosened to a depth of at least I foot. Transplants shall be replanted to the same depth as
they were originally growing. The planting trench or hole shall be deep and wide enough
to permit the roots to spread out and down without J-rooting. The plant stem shall remain
' upright. Soil shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation and tamped around the
shrub or tree firmly to eliminate air pockets.

I

' Appendix 4
Reference Reach Data

' E-type Reference Reach
UT to Silas Creek
' Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Field Survey by Buck Engineering - January 2002

11

I D Tp.<?..A. (.q.ri`hi , Iv9V D11- Y-k ME 00% %- D.": US US I _ __ { W , 4?k: I : Iv_W IN-i, l: 110 IM?vm: WGA1
Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle E4b 8.9 8.97 0.99 1.59 9.06 1.3 8.2 98.34 102.22
105
104
103
oo 102
101
> 100
w 99
98
97
96
0
20 40 60
Station

Pt North East - Elevation Note Station !'
118 4977.171 4940.489 102.219 X1 EPATH 0
119 4968.934 4951.376 99.468 X1 12.94642
120 4961.956 4955.947 99.224 XICPATH 21.28666
121 4950.012 4963.615 99.221 X1 35.47349
122 4941.351 4969.484 98.91 X1LTOB 45.93604
123 4940.321 4970.213 98.047 XILBKF 47.19735
125 4937.956 4971.327 96.758 X1 49.77857
126 4936.809 4971.771 96.802 X1 50.97628
127 4935.81 4972.204 96.79 X1 52.04442
129 4932.85 4974.414 98.344 X1 RBKFT( 55.73499
130 4930.237 4975.271 98.735 X 1 58.37582
131 4918.605 4982.058 99.303 X1 71.80884
132 4909.174 4988.249 99.72 X1 83.08843
133 4886.124 5002.794 103.819 X1 110.3246
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 0+93
80 100 120
Lo - Bankfull o . - Floodprone
Bankfull Line
Station Elevation
46.76 98.34
55.73 98.34
Flood 'rone Line'
Station Elevation
10.77 99.93
84.48 99.93

Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Type-
BArea
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool E4b 6 8.4 0.72 1.41 11.73 1.4 5 97.4 97.94
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 1+44
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
o _ - Bankfull _ - v . _Floodprone

Pt # North " - F,&At Elevation ;Note . ' aStation Bankfull Une
134 4967.634 4949.214 100.099 X2 0 Station Elevation,
135 4968.762 4955.375 98.904 X2CPATH 6.259722 19.24 97.4
136 4970.568 4965.75 98.278 X2LTOB 16.78048 27.64 97.4
137 4971.169 4967.374 97.786 X2LBKF 18.49595
139 4972.856 4970.552 95.985 X2TW 21.96055
140 4973.565 4971.821 96.182 X2 23.35203 Flood rove Line
141 4973.931 4972.932 96.256 X2REW 24.51597 Station Elevation
142 4974.164 4973.448 97.028 X2 25.06946 7.86 98.81
143 4974.742 4975.952 97.397 X2RBKF 27.63978 49.75 98.81
144 4976.223 4977.814 97.941 X2RTOB 29.7754
145 4979.747 4994.92 97.986 X2 47.239
146 4981.071 5010.58 103.093 X2 62.81981

Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width BKF
Depth Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool E4b 4.9 6.79 0.72 1.35 9.41 1.6 3.1 92.85 93.62
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 3+29
-------------------------------------
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
- o - • Bankfull - - o . - Floodprone

Pt -# North, _. East Elevation ? Note, Station Bankfull Line
240 5122.839 4964.443 96.004 X3CLPATt 0 Station Elevation
241 5130.56 4976.721 93.847 X3 14.35931 25.39 92.85
242 5135.811 4983.38 93.622 X3LTOB 22.58025 32.18 92.85
243 5136.936 4986.767 92.647 X3LBKF 26.13139
244 5137.478 4988.485 92.231 X3 27.92115
246 5139.517 4991.856 91.499 X3TW 31.83031 Flood `rone Line
248 5139.321 4992.33 92.85 X3RBKF 32.18279 Station Elevation
249 5138.976 4994.032 94.782 X3RTOB 33.59742 12 94.2
250 5140.429 5003.871 98.593 X3 43.17497 33.17 94.2
Cross-section Data:

Feature Stream
Z am

Area

BKF Width BKF

Depth Max BKF

Depth

W/D

BH Ratio

ER

BKF Elev :

TOB Elev
Riffle E4b 8.8 11.18 0.79 1.36 14.24 3.2 2.8 92.2 95.24
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90--
0
10 20 30 40

Pt #' NoCth „Ea"st Elevation Note -Station
251 5130.471 4946.129 97.361 X4 0
252 5145.699 4955.861 92.454 X4 18.072
253 5152.177 4959.643 92.591 X4LTOB 25.56774
254 5153.447 4960.797 92.059 X4LBKF 27.25855
256 5156.112 4962.35 90.835 X4 30.34017
257 5157.815 4963.154 90.852 X4 32.20914
259 5162.852 4966.016 92.199 X4RBKFT( 37.99473
260 5166.474 4970.094 93.15 X4 43.24093
261 5171.805 4974.622 94.805 X4 50.16962
262 5188.101 4982.853 95.237 X4 68.33619
UT to Silas Creek - Cross-section 3+63
50 60 70 80
0 • Bankfull • . o - . Floodprone
8ankfull Line
Station Elevation
26.81 92.2
37.99 92.2
Flood prone Line
Station Elevation
13.99 93.56
44.97 93.56
LL LL
? 0 0 V v
?:
U) CO CO

F-
cl: >
Cc
I
O

L
V
ca
O
V
(D
cc
U)
M
L
0
m
V
w`
W

L4 i
I
i
O
O
d'
O
LO
' J
CIO
O
O
o
co
O =
N
cC
-W
cn
O
O
N
O
LO
T
O
O
T
O
u /
O O O O O O O
T T
UOIIUA913
J O
O
O

d
a?
N
i?r V
U ?
c?
b
C
a?
c?
a

i
t
i
0
0
i
a?
N
U
cd
a
a?
cd
a
c
U
a
cn

0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°
° Q, oo v r; ri
??, anilr.?mun;J

1

7

Bc-type Reference Reach
Silas Creek
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Field Survey by USDA - NRCS - October 2001
11

dimensions
38,5 x-section area 1.5 d mean
25.7 width 29.5 wet P
2.4 d max 1.3 h d radi
5.2 bank ht 17.2 w/d ratio
35.0 W flood rove area 1.4 ent ratio
hydraulics
3.6 velocity ft/sec
137.5 discharge rate, Q cfs)
0.67 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.59 shear velocity ft/sec) _
2.730 unit stream power (lbs/fttsec)
0.27 Froude number
6 1 friction factor Wu*
42.3 threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
157 measured D84 mm
2.9 relative roughness 5.5 fric. factor
0.050 Mannin 's n from channel material

100
99
98
97
96
o 95
94
w 93
92
91
90
89
0
XS k2 Pool Silas Creek
Pool
Silas Creek
U er Yadk in River
description: • ..• '
height of instrument (ft : r
orriit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
notes t ft) (ft) elevation bankfull to of bank (ft) slope "n"
4
7
64
98
0
. .
• : 2.5 5 98.34 95.04 97.44
97.84
6.2 7 96.34 dimensions
9 7.9 95.44 71.3 x-section area 2.5 d mean
r 8.3 95.04 28.0 width 30.6 wet P
0 11.5 9.3 94.04 5.0 d max 2.3 h yd radi
M 13.5 9.4 93.94 7.4 bank ht 44,0 w/d ratio
0 14.5 r 93.14 0 0 W flood prone area 0 0 ent ratio
91.04
90.04
90.74
91.84
92.34
92.64
93.54
94.04
94.44
94.64
95.04
95.74
96.84
97.44
97.84
98.14
98.64
check from channel material
4,57 measured D84 mm
4-,9 relative roughness 6,8 fric. factor
046 Mannin 's n from channel material
?f
ti
?i
t
10 20 30 40 50 60
Width from River Left to Right (ft)

U
Z
E
m
c
0
c
Q
C
cz
(R
Y
C
CL
a
D
Y
U1
N
U
y
ca

i
I
I
!I

+
+
x •
t
X • + d

+
X • +
+
+

a

x 1 0
+
Q
+
+

X • + d
• 4

o m m It m°
(11) uOIJVAOl3
0
0
V
O
Lo
O
0
O
in
N
of
X
Q
w
w
m
a
LL
Y
m
•
W
J
N
V
tU
H
x
't
m
3
C)
o
N
(CJ
L
U
O
0
0
O
to
O
00
co

L
E- - -- - - --- ... --

O N
O
N
:............_. ..._.......... ,............. .............. .............. .............. .. O

E -Y
co r
o

c
m (D
pp
a y
` O

t o,
o O
c r
Q
amp.
o
m E

L

7
m
E m $ < O
es

F
-
U po.
r

' m Q N
?.

o L

N ...
O CIO
Cc > N
\Y
r
T
O
' 1. ri.? L))

U V cu

n.

0
t

? C
¦t?^ co

..
V /
r
O

t ?
2 C
T
O
co :
v U

:b P.
O ?

O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O C
O N
D O
O
Y O O O r l- C D L O d C `') N • -
N (ue yl JG UIJ) anilei nwn o %
t
?
Cn Q

1
BUCK 8000 Regency Parkway LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Suite 200
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Phone: [phone]
C N G I N 1 L RING Fax: [phone]
www. bu ckengineering. com
7 ,
T '. ; NC DENR - Div. of Water Quality RE: Peters Creek Stream Restoration
?n Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
r: Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
ATT0 TIO c Mr. Todd St. John
DATE: March 22, 2002 JOB NO. 030
We are sending via:
0 Overnight 0 Regular Mail F-] Pick-up EK] Hand Delivered
The following items:
0 Correspondence 0 Plans F-1 Specifications F_X_] Other as listed below:
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
7 3/02 401/404 Permit Package - Peters Creek Restoration Plan
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
8 For Approval e As Requested B Approved As Submitted EForward Returned For Corrections
For Your Use For Review And Comment Approved As Noted To Subcontractor
REMARKS:
Todd - please call me at 459-9006 if you have any questions about the enclosed documents.
COPY TO: Todd Tuewell SIGNED: Andrew Bick, PE
BUCK ENGINEERING
2392
Invoice Number Date Voucher Amount Discounts Previous Pay Net Amount
1 3/22/02 0000382 , 475.00 475.00
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION O Totals 475.00 475.00
CAPITAL C 1
D/I
V v??rNT
0 2 0 4 3 4 RFC[ VF p
arers srsrs paat~cr s~eRSrras Na ~'gT T0T'w Na ss~rs
i
e o
~ 3TAT8 PAOJ.Na RA.PAOJ.Na DBBCAmTtON
•
•
ZZ DC)
• • ~ ~ . O
m~
(gyp
~ '
UNDERWDDD DRIVE i UNDERWOD~DRIVE ~
nan I T____r"_~____,____r___T__T__T__~.__T-__T__T__T__T_~__ T ~
--------r----r-----r------,-------- ---~1 STA-28+ 8.64 I I ( I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
END CON TRUCTION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
\ I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I
I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I ~
I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i N
I 'k I I I I I I I FJ---1---L--~---~--1--1--J---1---I---L--L- ' I I I , w I I ~g I I I I I ~ w ~ , ~
) ~,I I I I I ~ s I I I I I I I z~
~ I I I I I I I I ~ w` e I I I I I ; Y ~ I
20 ~ ~ `t`L I I I P~ ~ ~ I ~c~. I I I I I I ~ /
s~ i r I I I I I I PROPOSED TRIPLE CULVERT / I I I I I CONSTRUCTED BY OTHERS r
( I I I I STA 6+94.11 ~ ~
~m~ ~ I I \ o \ I I I I I END REACH 1 ~ I I I I BEGIN REACH 2 z
~I \ ~ I I I I------------- E
~.l ' ~ VARIABLE-W/DTN I I / . ~ ~
BANKFULL BENCH . I
I /e' \ ~o ~ I
/ ~
~ I /i~
~ ~ PROPOSEOOAKST/~ErR~gC` ~ _ s ~
I I G~MFNT
1 `I 1 ~ ~ / ~ - % I ~ ~ 1 8c
~ II I' ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o
I it OAK STREET GNMENI i~ ~
~ i I ~ ~ PROPOSED OAK S7REE7 RE~A~~ 1 i ~ ~
11 I r 1 i
I II , I I I ° ~ I I I ~ i
I I II ~ I , I I i
I~ I I I ! I 1°9 ~ I I I
I! . ~ I I I I
l~ I I $ ~ I I ----------J 3
i I ~
~ DERRY ST I ~ Ha npe un I I ~
M I I I , .n I I ~
1 I I T + i I I ,Ij ~ 1 '
I O J 8A I I '
m , I~ > 9 I I x; I I ! ~
I I I ~ I s
EET : a H F X IND I I 1 ' I I
2 I I STA =1+18.43 I I
I BEGIN CONSTRU ION I I I I :~1~
1
I I ~ I----------------------J I )r.
EE H T ITLE T 1 q'M ~ 1!
m T~A~E~ T TRADE 5T TRADE S1
L PO LAND PI A A 2B 2 _ I - I ( I - - wrnas ve ~ I i ~ ~ i I
I I I I I H ~ I I I I I ' i
RO SET NS ~ ~ I I I I I FLE C C 10 RIF I I I I I I I ~ , I i I I I ~ t ~ I I i I I I I 3~ I
I I I I I 1~
RE DETAIL R T TU
N NDITI TI N EXI 3 •
•
ED STREA E I PO M D N PR 4
DESIGN DATA PHIC SCALES GRA Prepored In t1~ Ot'flc'~e of: pR OJECT ENGINEER PRU ECT LENGTH
8000 Regency Parkway, Suiie 200
1 Cary, North Carolina 27511
50 25 0 50 100 ~ ~ l'~ l N t t tt I V ~i Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
~ "j'
a,
PLANS
50 25 0 50 100 PRELIMINARY PLANS DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
,s
I nr-
PROFILE HORIZONTAL ANDREW D. BICK PE
LETTING DATE: PROJECT ENGINEER
5 0 5 10
° t_:
ERTI AL PROFILE C P.E.
SIGNATURE;
8U wa ace I a ro eo s e er s ree es an _ es ee . s

PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
030 2-A
PROJECT ENGINEER
IFFLE LAND BANKFULL BEN H F AL R P TYPI HE 1 AND 2 R REA
F RD THE M R IN
NOTES:
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
ON-SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS. PRELIMINARY PLANS 3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF STREAMBANKS. DO NOT usE FOR CONSTRUCTION
TYPICAL RIFFLE DO NOT EXCAVATE CHANNEL BOTTOM. COMPLETE ONE
SIDE BEFORE STARTING ON THE OTHER SIDE. 4. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING AT RIGHT ANGLE TO THE FLOW.
5. GRADE SLOPES TO A 2:1 SLOPE. TRANSPLANT SOD
FROM ORIGINAL STREAMBANK ONTO SIDE SLOPES. 6. MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN THE
CONSTRUCTION ROAD DOES NOT ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL.
Wbkf EXISTING GROUND 7. A STABILIZED PAD OF CLASS "A" STONE, 6 INCHES THICK, LINED WITH TYPE 2 FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE,
USED OVER THE BERM AND ACCESS SLOPES.
8. WIDTH OF THE CROSSING SHALL BE SUFFICIENT TO
ACCOMMODATE THE LARGEST VEHICLE CROSSING THE CHANNEL. 666orzegencyPen~eY,suit~z69 9. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE Cary,NodhCarolina21511
~y WATER SURFACE RAMP ANGLE ACCORDING TO EQUIPMENT UTILIZED. Pnon~ 9t9-06asae9 Fax: [phone]
2 D-Max EXCAVATED BENCH i
- REACH 1 REACH 2
~ RIFFLE POOL RIFFLE POOL
24.0' 26.0' 27.0' 30.0' BANKFULL V NKFULL WIDTH OF Wbkfl
1.9' 2.4' 2.2' 2.8' AVERAGE DI ERAGE DEPTH
TYPICAL POOL
2.5' 4.0' 2.9' S.0' MAXIMUM DI JCIMUM DEPTH D-max} CLASS A STONE
- wbkf 12.5 10.8 12.3 10.7 WIDTH TO D
DTH TO DEPTH RATIO ° o
EXISTING GROUND 2 2 2 2 BERM " ~ BERM ~1 r
46ft 63ft 60ft 84ft BANKFULL ~ ,NKFULL AREA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .1__
0 r1 ~2~
2• WATER SURFACE ti ~ 0 2.
15.0 5.0 16.0 4.0 BOTTOM WII ~TTOM WIDTH (Wb) o 0
0
~ D-Max EXCAVATED BENCH ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~TY~'E2FILTER-~'ABRI~
~.1 ' ' ~ ~ ~ UNDERNEATH.STONE
~ TYP~~2 FIL'jER~FgBRlC' ~ . ~ . ~ , ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ . ~ , . ~ UNDERNEATH STONE ~ .
Wb
Z ILANTINGS
0
NOTES:
~ 1. PLANT BARE R00T SHRUBS AND TREES TO A WIDTH OF AT LEAST 25 FEET FROM THE TOP OF THE STREAMBANK. ae NOTES:
2. ALLOW FOR 6-10 FEET BETWEEN PLANTINGS, DEPENDING ON SIZE. ~ 1. STAKES SHOULD BE CUT AND INSTALLED ON THE SAME DAY. NOTES: F 2. DO NOT INSTALL STAKES THAT HAVE BEEN SPLIT.
3. LOOSEN COMPACTED SOIL. TOP OF STREAMBANK 4. PLANT IN HOLES MADE BY A MATTOCK, DIBBLE, PLANTING BAR, OR 1. BANKS SHOULD BE SEEDED PRIOR TO ~sT 3. STAKES MUST BE INSTALLED WITH BUDS POINTING UPWARDS.
OTHER APPROVED MEANS. PLACE MATTING IN 6 INCH DEEP TRENCH, P TRENCH, PLACEMENT OF MATTING. 9,~ 4. STAKES SHOULD BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO BANK. 4CT 2. PLACE MATTING ACCORDING TO Fs 5. STAKES SHOULD BE 112 TO 2 INCHES IN DIAMETER AND 2 TO 3 FT LONG.
5. PLANT IN HOLES DEEP AND WIDE ENOUGH TO PERMIT THE ROOTS STAPLE, BACKFILL, AND COMPACT TO SPREAD OUT AND DOWN WITHOUT J-ROOTING, TOP OF STREAMBANK ~ MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS. 6. STAKES SHOULD BE INSTALLED LEAVING 115 OF STAKE ABOVE GROUND.
~ 6. KEEP ROOTS MOIST WHILE DISTRIBUTING OR WAITING TO PLANT 3. MATTING STAPLES SHOULD BE PLACED TOP OF STREAMBANK IN A DIAMOND SHAPE PATTERN.
BY MEANS OF WET CANVAS, BURLAP, OR STRAW. • 7. HEEL IN PLANTS IN MOIST SOIL OR SAWDUST IF NOT PROMPTLY
~ . ' ~ PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL TO PROJECT SITE. ~ .
. .
Q WATER SURFACE Q WATER SURFACE
' • ' ' WATEA WATER SURFACE
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ • ~ . MATTING TO BE fXTE 1NG TO 9E EXTENDED ~ ~ ,
CROSS-SECTION VIEW OF BARE ROOT PLANTING ~ ~ ~ • ~ : ~ ~ ~ " • )EOF~SLQP~:; CROSS-SECTION VIEW OF LIVE STAKING SPECIFICATION
CROSS-SECTION VIEW OF EROSIOP EROSION CONTROL MATTING
TOP OF TOP OF STREAMBANK
NOTES: STREAMBANK
1. WHEN PREPARING THE HOLE FOR A POTTED PLANT OR
SHRUB DIG THE HOLE 8 -12 INCHES LARGER / / 1 / / / 1
PLANTINGS THAN THE DIAMETER OF THE POT AND THE SAME DEPTH AS THE POT. N PLANT STAKES WITHIN e ~ , / 1 1 1 / UPPER 112 OF BANK
2. REMOVE THE PLANT FROM THE POT. LAY THE PLANT ON ITS SIDE IF NECESSARY TO REMOVE THE POT. 1 1 1 / 1 1 i
3. IF THE PLANT IS ROOTBOUND (ROOTS GROWING IN A
SPIRAL AROUND THE ROOT BALL), MAKE VERTICAL - CUTS WITH A KNIFE OR SPADE JUST DEEP ENOUGH TO
CUT THE NET OF ROOTS. ALSO MAKE A
CRISS-CROSS CUT ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF THE BALL. 4. PLACE THE PLANT IN THE HOLE.
TOP OF STREAMBANK 5. FILL HALF OF THE HOLE WITH SOIL (SAME SOIL
REMOVED FOR BACKFILL . 6. WATER THE SOIL TO RE OVE AIR POCKETS AND FILL TRENCH
• THE REST OF THE HOLE WITH THE REMAINING SOIL. TRENCH
i I i ' 1 1 I ~ i I TOP OF STREAMBANK PLAN VIEW OF LIVE STAKING SPECIFICATION
------------------I TOP OF ~ - i ~ ~ ~ STREAMBANK i I 1 ! 1 '
STAPLES I ( I ~ j SQUARE CUT TOP
~ I I ~ ~ I ~
~ 0 WATER SURFACE i I i BUDS FACING UPWARD
{ i I i I I { I ! 1 i ~ LIVE CUTTING
MATTING TO BE MIN. 112" DIA I ~ I R EXTENDED TO TOE 2' - 3' LENGTH
OF SLOPE
i i I I i ! . ~ ~ i i { I ~ i
j I i i
CROSS-SECTION VIEW OF CONTAINER PLANTING PLAN VIEW OF EROSION CC ?SION CONTROL MATTING ANGLE CUT 30-45 DEGREES
LIVE STAKE DETAIL
we ace ~ ~ ~ ro ec s e er s ree es an _

PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0,
ENT 030 2-B LA E T RE P TR TYPI AL
VANE R K 0 R PROJECT ENGINEER
113 113 113
BOTTOM BOTTOM BOTTOM PLANTSlTRANSPLANTS
WIDTH OF WIDTH OF WIDTH OF TOP OF STREAM BANK
CHANNEL CHANNEL CHANNEL HEADER ROCK PRELIMINARY PLANS
~ DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
20•TO 30' WATER FLOW TO f0/. SLOPE
W W 4/ - - I
c7 A ~ STREAM BED _ - - - Q ~ ELEVATION °
~ ~ ~ ~ N SCOUR POOL
J ~ ~ (EXCAVATED) ~ ~ ~ BACKFILL WITH FOOTER ROCK
LL ~ A ~ Y ON-SITE ALLUVIUM r
Y i~ ~ Z / ~ ROOT WADS
Q R ' FLOW f Q m m CLASS A STONE i''"~~`'~ NUMBER AND / ~ / ~ ~ SIZE TO BE 8000 Regency Parkway, Suile200
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~Z ~ ~ DETERMINED Cary,N°rthCarolina27511
to \ PFRZ 098-4635490 / ~ IN THE FIELD} ; ~ . r: ; , . < / ~
,r~, r PROFILE VIEW ~ % ~ ~ , / Q~~
• ~ MA / ~w \ MAT BANK WITH C125 BN ~ p`.I~
~ ` ~ r ' ` SCOUR POOL I ~ NG OR COMPARABLE MATTI 0 ~j0 O
'0 lo. ° o~ i°
~ ~ - ° 1' ~ o
~ ~ SCOUR POOL EXCAVATED PER BACKFILL _ MAT BANK WITH C125 BN
~ N (ON-SITE ALLUVIUM) ° r ENGINEER S DIRECTIO ° OR COMPARABLE MATTING
PLAN VIEW ` _ ' NOTE:
~ h MATTING TO BE INSTALLED ON RIFFLElRUN SECTIONS BETWEEN BENDS ONLY. SECS~ON
CLASS A STONE o o ~ L R1FF~E ~pICA
- AN E KV H J ,
113 113 1' o
BOTTOM BOTTOM FILTER FABRIC 1-2' WIDTH WIDTH
OF OF TYPE 2 MAT BANK WITH C125 BN
CHANNEL CHANNEL 10' MINIMUM OR COMPARABLE MATTING
I
SECTION A-A' W 'z I o ra
c~ J~~ o
cn 2O'TO 30' U'W ~ 0 °0 ~ ai~n
~ NOTES FOR ALL VANE STRUCTURES: TOP OF BANK ~ \ Rio /
Y ~r ~ ~ ~ 1. BOULDERS MUST BE AT LEAST 4' x 3' x 2'. ~ ~o ~ a ~
Q ~ r 2. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC BEGINNING AT THE MIDDLE OF THE HEADER ROCKS AND ~ I
m ~ ~ ~ EXTEND DOWNWARD TO THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM FOOTER ROCK, AND THEN UPSTREAM ~ ~ /
TO A MINIMUM OF TEN FEET.
3. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON A ` LEAVE 1' - 2' UPSTREAM SIDE OI -VANE ARM BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAM BANK. ROOT WADS ~ ~ ~ _ ~ i STRUCTURE NOTES: (NUMBER AND

~ , ' ~ GAPS 4. START AT BANKFUI I_ AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN HEADER (TOP) ROCK. GENERALLY J-HOOK VANES ROOT WADS SIZE TO BE
i j \ 5. CONTINUE WITH S I I~UCTURE, FOLLOWING ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS. A CROSS VANES AND MATTING WILL BE DETERMINED INSTALLED IN THE LOCATION AND IN THE FIELD] ' I
I SCOUR POOL ~ 6. BOULDERS (TOP) MUST TOUCH WITHOUT GAPS. ~ ~ ~ 7. AN EXTRA BOULDER CAN BE PLACED IN SCOUR POOL FOR HABITAT IMPROVEMENT. SEQUENCE AS SHOWN. BOULDER '
~ 1 FLOW , 8. USE CLASS A STONE TO FILL GAPS ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF BOULDERS. CLUSTERS SHOULD BE ADDED DOWNSTREAM i
~ ` ~ NO GAPS'.-_ " 9. AFTER ALL STONE HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE OF J-HOOK VANES. ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES I OR CHANGES TO STRUCURE LOCATIONS MAY
BETWEEN SCOUR POOL EXCAVATED PER STRUCTURE WITH SOIL TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK. BE MADE BY THE DESIGN DURING
BOULDERS ENGINEER'S DIRECTION CONSTRUCTION.
Z PLANTSITRANSPLANTS
o_ PLAN VIEW
TRUCTION E L NS AVE CO ARY R POR CK TEM HE C ILT S DOUBLE WING DEFLECTOR RANCE TI N ENT 0
1130E PROPOSED VI OF PROPOSED Iq OF PROPOSED BOTFON N7D7H BOTTOMWID7H BOiTON N10TH
FLOW PUBLIC ROAD
HEADER ROCK SECTION A-A' CROSS SECTION
NOTE: BOULDERS MUST BE AT LEAST 4' X
3' X 2'. 6' X 4'X 3' BOULDERS
ARE PREFERRED. i WATER
a FLOW
NEW CHANNEL Y
Z _ ~1 ~ _ , Q R-40 Q R-40 ~ A ' A - 3 A' A
m m 113 T0112 BANKFULL 20° T 30° - -
~ ~ \ CLASS A STONE
~ STILLING BASIN ~ ~ 0 PUBLIC ROA[ ~ (2 FT. MAX DEPTH) _ ~ i ~ PUBLIC ROAD 6 MINIMUM THICKNESS OF ~
~ ~ Z WASHED AGGREGATE STONE ~ ~
~i 0 ~ ~ , NO GAPS
. ~ TYPE 2 FILTER FABRIC o ~ ~ BETWEEN
ROCKS
0 0 0 0 t` i FIRST ROCK
12 MIN PLAN VIEW TIED INTO
- o BOULDER FOOTER STREAM BANK
CLUSTER ROCK
EXISTING CHANNEL BOULDERS TYPE 2 FILTER FABRIC
T WAD R 0 P PLANTINGS
PLANTINGS -
PLAN VIEW
NOTES:
INVERT ELEVATION 112 TOP OF BANK DRIVE POINT METHOD:
BANKFULL MAX DEPTH FLOODPLAIN BANKFULL STAGE
BANKFULL STAGE SHARPEN THE END OF THE LOG WITH A CHAINSAW BEFORE "DRIVING"
0 BANKFULL STAGE IT INTO THE BANK. ORIENT ROOT WADS UPSTREAM SO THAT THE
~p STREAM FLOW MEETS THE ROOT WAD AT A 90-DEGREE ANGLE, DEFLECTING
~ THE WATER AWAY FROM THE BANK. A TRANSPLANT OR BOULDER SHOULD
BASEFLOW 10-15 FEET LONG BE PLACED ON THE DOWNSTREAM SIDE OF THE ROOT WAD IF A BACK EDDY
>10"DIAMETER IS FORMED BY THE ROOT WAD. THE BOULDER SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 4'X3'X2'.
TRENCHING METHOD:
IF THE ROOT WAD CANNOT BE DRIVEN INTO THE BANK OR THE BANK NEEDS
_ ~ - - TO BE RECONSTRUCTED, THE TRENCHING METHOD SHOULD BE USED. THIS
FOOTER LOG > 12" DIAMETER METHOD REQUIRES THAT A TRENCH BE EXCAVATED FOR THE LOG BOULDER PORTION OF THE ROOT WAD. IN THIS CASE, A FOOTER LOG SHOULD BE
INSTALLED BELOW STREAM BED INSTALLED UNDERNEATH THE ROOT WAD IN A TRENCH EXCAVATED PARALLEL
ROOTWADOROSS-SECTION PLAN TO THE BANK AND WELL BELOW THE STREAMBED.ONE-THIRD OF THE ROOT WAD SHOULD REMAIN BELOW NORMAL BASE FLOW CONDITIONS.
CROSS SECTION
wa ace ~ ~ ~ ro ec s e er s ree es an _

PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
030 3
PROJECT ENGINEER
1
11 I I
PRELIMINARY PLANS
Zz DO NOT U8E FOA CONSTRUCTION
Dn
O

~O I I a I
I
I 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Ca North Carolina 27511 I ? I ry, Phone: [phone]
i ------------~---Vie'---E L' 1 G1 ~lLLill ~I ti
895, Fax: 919.4fi3-5490 _ 9 T w
- UNDERWOOD DRIVE ~rualici W / 95 0" e,. (
--,----------~----r---~---- --~-----r---T----(- ---r----r-----~--- I I h r ~
_ r-----r-----T----- T---- - I --1- I I I I I . _ I I I v ~ o-~-__ I' ae
- I I 'i 9 w P ~
I I I I I I - ~ ~ i I I , i _ /.o -W /
I I I I I I I I ?I ~ I o i I I ~I / o
L I I -Section 20+ 0 I I ~ ~ I i ~ ea°
B I - ~~~T 2s s I I I I I
r I I I I I I _ I I I I _ ~ so ~
/ 1` I . ~ I I ~ I I I I-~--- -1---L--1 -1'_-~--J---I---L-- _ W ~
I I I I ~I ~I ~
I I I ~ h I ~ ~ a
~ ~ I I ' `I L I I I N - g15 o
L I ~ I I
I I ~~.I ' O~ ii ry yh ~ ~
\ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I I ' I _ ~ 6~Q_
I y - \ ` \ ~ ~ ~ 835 I _ ~ ~ I I - ( ~
I , ~ I _
I I 8as ( I iW , I/. _ _
I : d3 I I S ~ I m
. I__ _ i I _ ~ L III 0
~'I' ,E-~, ~ ~ ~ I._ ;I ~ I - m j ~
i~~ I ~ .
. , - ~ 'J X-Secfio :~~I.. ~ W ~ I X-Secfron 12 55 0 i
\ ~ _ e , ; a I I ~ 1. I ~ I
E~ ~ ~ w I 85 tP ~ I
~w i
~ . _ - ~ d I _ L ME -
~ ~ 82 ~ . _ S _ ^
I ~
OE9 _ _ . ~ m ~ ~ r.~ II
5£8 1~ ~ 1 _ .E--'-- E- --.E---p' . IXISTING SANITARY 11 i X850 t SEWER TO REMAIN
1 049 i i i ,W
1 1 / I ~ ~ 840 --.ti.~~ I ~,E.~ I I . ° i i ~
I 1 840---f . ~ ~ E I 'mss .._..,Vi / ai
~ ~ 1 1 ,
II ~W ~ _ _ _ _ ,9 , ~ - ~ ~ I ~cn
"g~E ~ ".w-.- _w_.-. ~ w ---w-----w-- ----w----«---- ~ ~ i I _ - I - _ - I ~ F~- 1
E ~ sea ~ - \ ~ ~ ~ "
- --r- . - 4 , , ; , r... c - - - ~ `z., W w ~ , fi `'I. T~....; ~ ~ - ~ i ~ A ( I I /
e; ~ I E _ r,~;, d - a. , ti ~ / ,
~ ~ I / 949 ~ ~ i
I ~ 1 ~ i ° i, _ _ I II ~ ~ \ 1
~ ~ 1 ~ _ m ~ I I I -
~ - ~ y~ I ~ ~ F ke R1 ~ ~
1 / ~ . J i
~F\~ / , i g ~ ~ 8S0 ~ / >y / \ 1 ~ ~ ~ EXISTING S LfNE f l ~ ~ II 1, ` W
,I 1,l 1 70 BE RELO CA TEO ~ _ ..,e~. EAST OFTRA EST ,l
'l ' ~ ~ ~k 880
1 II - I~- c _
_ . ; . ; _ _ s- . 1, ~----w------w w ----w-----w o - e ' ` ti Asti, __..._.u.__.~ -55^-~. E..

l - - - - _ . l ...E ? - ~ ,r afl/w ; ;1 < E'" -.E- -'E- E._ - 9....- E ~ - _
~ 1 r ~ , i / ( I
l I ~ ~ ~ o I ~ I_ I ~ W ps, _ ~ ~
~ g I I _ -1
~ ~ I r l~' ~ ~ W ~ iI I ? r ~ ~
,'l~,yW~ ~ I ~ 0 09 I i I ~ s N ~ I I N
~ 1 ~ 9g 9 ~ - I \ ~ 0_ o I I ~.e_ ~ _ Ss I I ~ ~ I
~ :1 I ~ I ~ ~ I ` ~ W " 1 \ ~ I \ / W -
~ p g I ~ ~ i .I _ ~ ~ _ _ I ~ I - - - I ~ I
b I rn _ - ,11 a o ro - m ~ r _ X: Secfton +61 II I I g9 ( 6~ ~ o I
~l 0 ~ -Se on 2+93 II i ~ - ~I ~ ;
y W ~ ~ F ~ ~ I I F _ F I ? ~ j~ ~u ---I _ ~I
l _ I o ' I I, I I i ola II •
- W l _____...-.i I ~ I , II I
~ ~ 1 ~ I ~ ~ ~ I , I << ~ w ii
~ W' I I . . I - -1- -~-o- - - - - -o I , ; ~ ; I~ ~ _ bl _
9 - - - E ~ _ E
_ ~ ~ - - _ _u-- T ~E-5~ '@ 55~ -SS- ~ sr47 - SS - . o w--. ~ T ASE ST . _ : f T e)~S~ s ss _ _ I - , w _ _ _ _ r ~wet.is-fvwr -i°, w,- - - w - M
~ 5s_ T~&AD S..SS -u _-ss.=~ - ~ 55-~. 55 - I - ae~ r- w ---~i -w ' w- - - ® - - - _ s ~ _ 1
W , ~ - ~ ~ -x-. _ , .-.o e - - I.. I I ~
~ A ~ I I I ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ; ~ - ~ P t 7 ~I - I ~ I ~ I
I~ ~ I mj m 9La I ,n
I ~ I I I I h~ , ~ ~ m 875 ~ I ~ I ? 1 II ~
I I I . I I I I I I I I ~ I _ e I ~ I \I ~ __I eo I I I ~ , . , I , o, o o
o a.
r Tr e Line Minor Contou s e Tree ass i I I 1 I I o
it i W
s5o Ma~or Contours _ ~ = Storm Drain Lines ~ Storm Drain 1 8) i , ` o r o I © - I ,
~ ~ ` b I
- - - - - - - - - r e Lines - - w Water Line s Sewer Manhole Po 0 p ~Y TQPQGRAPNI ND EXlSTIN UR TA ~Q ~ e N
87p VIDED Y STANTEC ~ ® ~ YOND _ LIMIT RO I ~
- - Lines - - - - c - - - - Gas Line ` - Water Valve Lot EAND CIATES. ,I BQ ,WAD h . ,
I~ 4 ~
- - - - - ss - - - - Sanita Sewer - E - Electric Line ry 1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . Under round Electric Line Cross Section Line 9
we ace : ro acs a er s ree as an _ .os

i
PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
030 4
PROJECT ENGINEER
~ ~ ~ ~ 1
zz
Dn PRELIMINARY PLANS 7 DO NOT USB FOR CONSTRUCTION
O G~ =~-r._

~O -
u<
~0 ~ 8000 R en Parkwa Suite 200 e9 ~Y Y.
895-----"""-` Cary, North Carolina 27511
Phone: [phone]> .
" 895 Fax: [phone]
UNDERWOOD DRIVE mueE~i © W / ~ 95 _ ,
---T--------------~-,--- - ~ ,
28 09 I i i ~ I 1 i ~ I ~ E Og ,
EN ON TRUCTION 9p _ ~ ~ ~ r W - ~ i
~ ~ / ' I, ~ - / , m
i 1 ~ / ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 1} Q o
~ , - ~ i : I; ~ ~ 50
~i 835 H I 1 /
, - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , y 90 1
, , _ _ _ _ i W i I
~ ~ I v~ , ~
_ I Vii' ~ ; ..I u
~ ~ I \ _ I _ , i ~ 1 - BSS aa~ - " 825. I I~!
` _ i ~ N n~ - _ 8S0 { I ~ ~ 0~~ / ~ ~ m l' ,I !o
I - AtfV ~ a.. , w 66 6
~ J` ~ I ~ ~y ss~ ~ ~ -..835 _ ~ _ PR D TRI CULV ' L u ~i
~ T ~ U. ~ r' as ONSTRUCTEU ERS ' ; _ , t " ~
_ _ , STA.6+94
~.a; ~ V 9q ~ ~ ~ r~ _ : - - e45 lBLE SE S. M ~ QS G END RE 1 a; _ CULVER AT10N
~ _ ~ r,:: 4, q . D - , ~ ,,.r ,r ~ - \ ' a,~ E E s l ~ REAC I~
, _ _ _ ~ I { ~ ; h I rl ~ 0h' .........SILT CHECK I",' ` I
, -
~ , , . , SEE S! EE SHEET 2-B ~ ~
E VARIABLE WIDTH , ~ , _ ~
BANKFULL BENCH: - ~ ~ / : , ~ ~ f ~ ,,i ~ ~ r
/ ~ ~ • 0 r: ~ l 55
i N.. 0 ~
' ~ ~ r ~ ~ - ~
_ - \ ~ ~
`1 ~ _ o a., ~ sT cxxr~a~~ r. / + ~ ~ I
PROPbSED OAK STR wi • - -
. . " ~ IXISTING SANITARY ~x_ www c A ~ II - ~ ' ' ' ~ m - ~ A - .c _ ` ~ s~R io ~MAiN k~x . G pR ~ , e
ova - BACKFILL EXI STING C NEL ' - ~ CONSTRUCTIONS SS ~ ~
1 - ~ E _ i rww I~ , ~ _ ~s ENTRANCE ~ -i~.• ~ I o . - I `
`i 840-~ ~ ~ 1; 1 I , ,
w _ ~ i-~ - = F ~ .e !
s r ~ - - - ti - - a ~0 . L iM N
I E , y , - ~ -__m ~ OA'tt°. STREET ' ~ - _ . _ _ - y , - s4o ~ - I ~ - - P ~ P POSED OA TREET.f~ N° , ~ I ~ ; ' ~ - . , .
V I - ~ ~ -
~ 1 _ / - , x, ; I _ - - i ~ s ~ ~ -vim W \ I, ~ \F I ~i ~ + , \ ~Y F~ r ~
, - I ~ ~ - r I - SV8 W m ~ 'I, I ~ ~ EXISTf~VG 0.~ TREES , , , V I v
~ ~ # ~ I~+
I ~ , I \ I ~ ' Flo I
~ _ I _
' ~ ~----E - ~ t ~F ~ ~ - i 1 E -
m ~.i E ~ ~ - _ _ i ~ / ~ ~ - / A' i E~fISTING GA 1 a I ~ ` L NE
f sf - r TO BE RELOC T I ~ A, ti W ED ~ ; I r ~ , ~
- I t:,,~ Y EAST OFTRAD ST. I ; I ~ _ o ~ ~ I
_ , - I b , -058 - i a5 E STING CULVERT TO BE R . ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ BACKFlLLEXISTING HANNEL ~ ~ - 1 1~ ,
_ o - ,
_ - 7-_ _ _ ~p, / ~ F &l5- . ~ x - . _ ~ _ * 1 1 ~ s t- - -,ASS ~c~-~` y -t
- ~ '"~Y~ m S - - r., - ~ ~ i / ~ ~ E- --r m - - Y i ~ i ~
~
_ ~ - - r _l~A'~ , _ 1 ~ . ~ ~ ss ~ a4o - f ki ~ 8 . , m , ; ) r ' EX T1NG SANITARY EWER
~ ° ~ ~ I W , I of _ r ~.iTdBE RELOCAT OR.
I i ~ _ I _ ~ I 1 I I ; ;PR~4TECT D IN P
~ ~ ~I m ~ ~ I1~~' .,,~1~ 1 I ~ `i I I ~ I,
~~q s 098 098 1,~i~ j I _ ~ \Jf. ~ I , { I, ~ ~ , . s ~e
`1~ ~ a I - - _ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ o~,g _ ~ ! ~e ,iii ~ ~ I_E_
~ ~ _ W L ~ ~ I 1 ~ ~ , _ / _ _ " 1
a / ~ ~ m - ~ o - ? I ~ ~ ~ I _ ~ II. ~ STA -1+ I I
~ O ~ N , ~ ~ o~ ~ I k \ - , N 1
~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ BEGIN CONSTRU ~ I ,I m
I f ~ ~ _ _ I _ I r ass s \ I 07 r ~ t / i
r o ! ~ _ 1 _ I "I , OL H
~ ~ N~ ~ ~ I I ~ I ~ , " ' '
I ~ ~ e r.,,, ~ i I ,
E ~ ~ ti~ f , , AO' R/N, " r o I I s I
5~ - -.E E..---'-;B-E^--- E-`'-'#--'E- -~''E- - ~t+'_..-...~E--_,='E .GJw=~"'"'--.'E-- ~ ~ ' SS-s ~s--~--' TOAD S~T55 ~ _S5 --ss---_ SS___ -=SS=- 55 - 5s- -Tfl-A~E-. . - - ._-'E-~.±~, E - -'-E - - ;0= E _ E.rr - - E`:f--,@'- -r'zh"„ti.-~ 0' R - - - - - - - ~ - ~
- - _ ,'SS - - -T-R-A~E- m e ~ T ASE ST ~ - ss s -ss - - - ~ + s - _ _ - ;a Pl,~.x ei~l - u,<~ F _
j w y m i u i_q 0 `F J /".^i".C.. - a i _ ~
- ~ 7'. ~ " A I ~ ~ i - { I , o~u , ~I 1
a`, r ~ ~ 7 ~Ji-' ! + i \ '
I _ wm ` mob, I ~ i ~ ~ 9" i m 1 I f c, m< L: 9L9 0 s
- : 875
Minor Contours ~.~.n ' ~ " °r Tree Line Proposed Top of Bank
a5o Ma~or Contours _ Storm Drain Lines Pro osed Centerline of Channel nnel
J p
- - - - - - - - - ~ Pro e Lines w Water Line Pro osed A rox Cut Limits
p rty p pp Rootwad Tree
Lot Lines - - - c - Gas Line ~.....~.-.~...~...a.~......-_____.__ Pro osed Edge of Floodplain
p n ~ Storm Drain J-Hook 1 oa
- - - - - ss - - - - Sanita Sewer Cross Section Line Safety Fence s s wer Manhole Crass Vane NOTE: TOPOGRAPHIC AND EXISTING FEATURE DATA
ry ~ 0 Se BEYOND STREAM LIMITS PROVIDED BY STANTEC AND
- - - - - - - - - - - Under round Electric Line Bankfull Benches Silt Fence Water Valve Win Deflector
g _x-x-x-x-x_x- 9 BORUM, WADE AND ASSOCIATES.
m aon r : ro ec s e er s ree es an _oropose .os