20131200 Ver 6_Harmon Dairy As-Built Report_20200630

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project
2020 As-Built Documentation Report
Polk County, North Carolina

USACE # SAW-2013-02262
DWR# 20131200 v6

Data collected:
July 2019 – August 2019
Submitted on:
June 30, 2020

Prepared for:

Tryon Equestrian Partners, LLC
2659 Sandy Plains Road
Tryon, NC 28782

Prepared by:

ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
32 Clayton Street,
Asheville, NC 28801

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page i
As-Built Report
June 2020
Introduction
Tryon Equestrian Partners (TEP) applied for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 404
Permit (Action Id. No. 2013-02262) and a N.C. Division of Water Resources (DWR) 401 Water
Quality Certification (Project No. 13-1200) to impact streams for the construction of the Tryon
International Equestrian Facility (TIEC). Compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams is
described in the mitigation plan for the Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigaton Project (Phases 1 and 2)
(Wildlands Engineering Inc. and Clearwater Environmental Consultants Inc. 2017).

This As-built Report documents the construction of Phases 1 and 2 of the Harmon Dairy Stream
Mitigation Project (Site). The Site is comprised of two phases totalling 7,256 linear feet of stream
and will provide 5,005 credits of stream mitigation. The site is located in Polk County. A map of
the project vicinity (Figures 1 and 2) as well as the phases and types of mitigation (i.e. restoration,
enhancement, preservation) is included in this report (Figure 3).

The success of stream stability and woody vegetation plantings will be evaluated for 7 years per
the guidance set forth by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team’s (NCIRT) “Wilmington
District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update” – October 24, 2016 (USACE
2016). The applicant will monitor the required areas for the next 7 years and report the results
annually to USACE and DWR. The streams and buffer will be protected in perpetuity by a
Conservation Easement that will be held and monitored by Polk County Soil and Water Board.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page ii
As-Built Report
June 2020
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... i 
1.0 Project Background ................................................................................................................................................. 1 
1.1 Project Location, Setting, and Directions ............................................................................................................ 1 
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 1 
1.2.1 Project Objectives- Phase 1 .......................................................................................................................... 1 
1.2.2 Project Objectives- Phase 2 .......................................................................................................................... 1 
2.0 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach ................................................................................................. 2 
2.1 Site Protection Instrument ................................................................................................................................... 2 
2.2 Project Structure .................................................................................................................................................. 2 
2.3 Restoration type and approach ............................................................................................................................ 3 
2.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data ...................................................................................................... 5 
3.0 Performance Standards ............................................................................................................................................ 6 
3.1 Channel Stability and Morphology ..................................................................................................................... 6 
3.1.1 Dimension .................................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.2 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.2.1 Bankfull Events ................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.2.2 Continuous Flow .......................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.3 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.3.1 Woody Stem Plantings ................................................................................................................................. 6 
3.4 Visual Assessment ............................................................................................................................................... 6 
3.4.1 Encroachment .............................................................................................................................................. 6 
3.5 Schedule and Reporting ...................................................................................................................................... 7 
4.0 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................... 8 
4.1 Channel Stability and Morphology ..................................................................................................................... 8 
4.1.1 Dimension .................................................................................................................................................... 8 
4.1.2 Pattern and Profile........................................................................................................................................ 8 
4.1.3 Substrate....................................................................................................................................................... 8 
4.1.4 Photo Documentation ................................................................................................................................... 8 
4.2 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 
4.2.1 Bankfull Events ............................................................................................................................................ 9 
4.2.2 Continuous Flow Monitoring ....................................................................................................................... 9 
4.3 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 
4.4 Visual Assessment ............................................................................................................................................... 9 
5.0 Adaptive Management Plan ................................................................................................................................... 10 
6.0 Record Drawings- As-Built Condition .................................................................................................................. 11 
7.0 Baseline Data Assessment ..................................................................................................................................... 12 
7.1 Channel Stability and Morphology ................................................................................................................... 12 
7.1.1 Profile ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 
7.1.2 Dimension .................................................................................................................................................. 12 
7.1.3 Pattern ........................................................................................................................................................ 14 
7.2 Hydrology ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 
7.3 Vegetation ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 
9.0 References ............................................................................................................................................................. 16 

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page iii
As-Built Report
June 2020
Attachment A: Recorded Conservation Easement
Attachment B: As-Built Record Drawings
Attachment C: Geomorphic Data
Attachment D: Visual Assessment Photographs
Attachment E: Vegetation Data

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 1 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
1.0 Project Background
1.1 Project Location, Setting, and Directions
The site is located in the Piedmont physiographic province (NCGS 2004) in Polk County, North Carolina.
The site is accessed from NC Highway 9 in the town of Green Creek (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The site is
bordered by Mary's Branch to the west, and streams on the site are unnamed tributaries (UT) to Mary's
Branch, which drains to the Broad River (HUC 03050105).

To access the site from Asheville, take Interstate 26 East for 36 miles to Exit 67. Follow US-74 East toward
Columbus. Take Exit 167 and turn south onto NC Highway 9. After approximately 7 miles, turn right onto
Harmon Dairy Lane. Harmon Dairy Lane ends at the dairy. The project reaches are located to the west of
the dairy barns.

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
1.2.1 Project Objectives- Phase 1
The resource functions of the stream restoration project address needed improvements to the watershed in
several ways. The existing stream at the site was degraded due to prior channelization, habitat alteration,
excess sediment from bank erosion, limited riparian buffers, and livestock trampling. The project addresses
these impairments and improves watershed functions by restoring approximately 1,126 linear feet of an
unnamed tributary (UT) to Mary's Branch. The primary goal of the stream restoration project is to return
the project reach to a stable, well vegetated, and naturally functioning condition. Specific stream restoration
objectives include:
 improving bank stability,
 enhancing aquatic and terrestrial habitats,
 removing invasive exotic plant species, and
 establishing more robust and wider vegetative buffers, and installing livestock fencing around these
riparian buffers.

1.2.2 Project Objectives- Phase 2
The stream restoration project addresses needed improvements to the watershed in several ways. The
existing streams at the site were degraded due to prior habitat alteration, excess sediment from bank erosion,
limited riparian buffers, and livestock trampling. The proposed project addresses these impairments and
improve watershed functions by restoring, enhancing and preserving 6,039 LF of four unnamed tributaries
(UTs) to Mary's Branch. The primary goal of the stream restoration project is to return the project reaches
to stable, well vegetated, and naturally functioning conditions. Specific stream restoration objectives
include:
 improving bank stability,
 enhancing aquatic and terrestrial habitats,
 removing invasive exotic plant species,
 stabilizing upland gullies
 establishing more robust and wider vegetative buffers, and installing livestock fencing around these
riparian buffers.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 2 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
2.0 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
2.1 Site Protection Instrument
A Conservation Easement (CE) on the property is held by the Polk County Soil and Water Conservation
District (SWCD) to permanently protect the improved aquatic habitats and riparian buffers and restrict
future activities that might otherwise compromise the functions and services of the aquatic resources
(Attachment A). The permanent conservation easement recorded January 23, 2017 extends at least 50 feet
beyond the top of both banks on all UTs. Within the conservation easement, the riparian buffers are planted
with native trees and shrubs in order to provide post-construction bank stability, erosion control and riparian
habitat enhancement. All site protection instruments require 60-day advance notification to the US Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) prior to any action to void,
amend, or modify the document. No such action would take place unless approved by the Corps and DWR.

2.2 Project Structure
The project is implemented according to the 2017 Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project Mitigation Plan
(Mitigation Plan). The Mitigation Plan consists of two phases proposing a combined 7,256 linear feet of
stream to provide 5,005 credits of stream mitigation. An overview map of the phases and types of mitigation
(i.e. restoration, enhancement, preservation) is included in Figure 3. Below is a Summary Table for
Projected Mitigation Credits for Phases 1 and 2 (Table 1). Phase one consists of Restoration and
Enhancement II on the UT1 to Mary's Branch. Phase II consists of Restoration, Enhancement I,
Enhancement II and Preservation of UT2, UT3, UT4 and UT5 to Mary's Branch. Both phases were
constructed simultaneously and with final earthwork and planting completed in 2019.

Table 1: Credit Summary Phase I and II
Stream Reach Approach STA
Begin
STA End Proposed
Reach
Length
As-
Built
Length
Mitigation
Credit
Ratio
Total
Potential
Credits
Phase I
UT1 1 Enhancement II 1+66 3+18 152 1,247 2.5:1 61
UT1 2 Restoration 3+18 13+83 1,065 1:1 1,065
Phase II
UT2 1 Preservation 0+01 4+06 405 -- 10:1 41
UT2 2 Enhancement II 4+06 7+90 384 -- 2.5:1 154
UT2 3 Enhancement I 7+90 22+65 1,475 2,325 1.5:1 983
UT2 4 Restoration 22+90 31+28 838 1:1 838
UT3 1 Enhancement II 100+00 100+48 48 -- 2.5:1 19
UT3 2 Enhancement I 100+48 112+33 1,185 -- 1.5:1 773
UT3 3 Preservation 112+33 115+62 329 -- 10:1 33
UT3 4 Restoration 115+62 124+82 920 1,037 1:1 920
UT4 -- Preservation 1+14 3+61 247 -- 10:1 25
UT5 -- Enhancement II 1+00 3+33 233 -- 2.5:1 93
Total Stream Mitigation Credits (Phase I) 1,126
Total Stream Mitigation Credits (Phase II) 3,879
Overall Stream Mitigation Credits 5,005

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 3 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
2.3 Restoration type and approach
The design approach was based on the surrounding topography, and bioloigcal community considering
existing watershed conditions and processes. The stream restoration approaches utilized in this project
include: stream Restoration (R), Enhancement I (EI), Enhancement II (EII), and Preservation (P). The
planting plan is depicted on Sheet 17 of the record drawings located in Attachment B .An overview map of
the phases and types of mitigation is included in Figure 3.

The Restoration (R) approach provides for restoring bank and bed stability, promoting sediment transport
equilibrium over a range of discharges, and improving aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Establishing and
maintaining a native forested riparian buffer along the stream banks will help improve bank stability and
reduce water temperatures as the canopy matures. Land uses in the conservation easement areas are
restricted to protect planted vegetation and ensure long-term recovery of riparian functions. Changes in
hydraulic geometry features, such as the creation of riffles and pools, enhance habitat function and
contribute to an overall improvement in habitat diversity. The design approach also includes removing
invasive plant species and planting native riparian buffer vegetation.

Stream Restoration (R), Enhancement I (EI) and Enhancement II (EII) is implemented using a "natural
channel design" (NCD) approach to restore appropriate channel dimension, pattern, and profile. Restoring
a more stable hyraulic geometry promotes water and sediment transport equilibrium between the stream
and its watershed. This also accomplished reconnecting the stream to its floodplain, and creating diverse
in-stream and riparian habitats.

The design approach for Restoration (R) is mainly a Priority I, with Priority II elements at the upstream and
downstream ends of the project reach. The Priority I approach raises the stream to its original floodplain
elevation, abandoning the old channel. The Priority II approach involves creating a new stream channel and
floodplain at the current channel elevation.

In reaches designated for Enhancement (EI or EII), the design approach includes stabilizing eroding banks,
providing in-stream grade control, installing livestock fencing, removing invasive exotic plants and planting
native riparian trees and shrubs. Additional enhancements include stabilizing areas of concentrated flow
(primarily where cattle trails cross the streams) by filling these areas with compacted soil and/or installing
vegetated diversion berms to promote sheet flow into the riparian buffers. In reaches planned for EI level
treatment, channel dimension and profile will be addressed where appropriate. Stream restoration and
enhancement measures have been designed using a combination of analytical data and reference reaches
from stable reaches found with a similar valley type.

The project design also incorporates natural materials, such as gravel, cobble and logs in order to improve
in-stream habitat and provide lateral stability. Bioengineering measures are installed on restored stream
banks, particularly at the outside meander bends where stresses are high, in order to promote bank stability
and quickly establish a near bank vegetative cover.

UT1 Drainage (Phase I)
UT1 (Phase I) Consists of Enhancement II (EII) spanning 152 feet from STA 1+66 – 3+28, Restoration (R)
spanning 1,065 LF from (STA 3+28) to the confluence with Mary's Branch (STA 13+83). The upper

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 4 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
Earthwork activities on UT1 consisted of on-line restoration of channel dimensions and in-stream structures
in the upstream reach, and excavation of a new, offline channel over the downstream reach.
UT2 Drainage (Phase II)
UT2 consists of Preservation (P) for the upper 405 LF (STA 0+01 - 4+06) (UT2 Reach 1) Enhancement II
(EII) spanning 384 LF from STA 4+06 -7+90 (UT2 Reach 2), Enhancement I (EI) spanning 1,475 LF from
STA 7+90 - 22+65 (UT2 Reach 3), and Restoration (R) spanning 838 LF from STA 22+90 - 31+28 (UT2
Reach 4).

UT3 Drainage (Phase II)
UT3 Consists of Enhancement II (EII) for the upper 48 ft (STA 100+00 – 100+48) (UT3 Reach 1),
Enhancement I (EI) spanning 1185 LF from STA 100+48 - 112+33 (UT3 Reach 2), Preservation spanning
329 LF from STA 112+33 - 115+62 (UT3 Reach 3), and Restoration (R) spanning 920 LF from STA
115+92 -124+82 (UT3 Reach 4). Earthwork on UT3 Reach 2 is divided into three sections known as UT3
Reach 2a (101+36 - 105+84), UT3 Reach 2b (107+49 - 108+02) and UT3 Reach 2c (108+71 - 109+47).
Tributaries to the UT3 Drainage include UT4 (247 LF P), and UT5 (233 LF EII).

Bankfull dimensions and estimated bankfull discharge were evaluated based on site surveys, regional
hydraulic geometry relationships, and hydraulic modeling. The design bankfull dimensions, slope, and
discharge match regional relationships well, and are summarized below in Table 2.

Table 2: Geomorphic Design Parameters- From Mitigaton Plan (2017), and Construction Planset (2018)

Dimensional
Parameter UT1 UT2 UT3
Riffle Pool Riffle Pool Riffle Pool
x-section area
(ft.sq.) 8.4 -- 6 -- 7 --
width (ft) 10 11 9 10.5 10 12
mean depth
(ft) 8.4 -- 0.67 -- 0.70 --
max depth (ft) 1.2 2 1 1.7 1.0 1.8
wetted
parimeter (ft) 10.46 -- 9.32 -- 10.32 --
hydraulic
radius (ft) 0.8 -- 0.64 -- 0.68 --
width-depth
ratio 11.9 -- 13.5 -- 14.29 --
Reach Slope 0.01 0.030 0.022
Discharge
(cfs) 31 26 26
-- : Data not available

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 5 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
2.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data
Table 3 Project History
Project Component Date Completed
Final Mitigation Plan (Phase I and II) August 3, 2017
401 / 401 Issued September 1, 2017
Final Design - Construction Plans March 1, 2018
Construction January 2019-May 2019
Bare Root / Live Stake Plantings May 2019
Baseline Data Collection Activities July-August 2019
As-Built Report and Record Drawings June 2020
Corrective Action Plan July 2020

Table 4 Project Contacts
Designers Wildlands Engineering Inc.
Construction Contractors Baker Grading and Landscaping Inc.
Planting Contractor Baker Grading and Landscaping Inc.
Seeding Contractor Baker Grading and Landscaping Inc.
Seed mix source Ernst Conservation Seeds and Green Resource
Nursery Stock Supplier Dykes & Son Nursery
Monitoring Performer Clear Water Environental Consultants Inc.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 6 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020

3.0 Performance Standards

In accordance with the provisions in CFR Title 33, "performance standards that will be used to assess
whether the project is achieving its objectives… and should relate to the objectives … so that the project
can be objectively evaluated to determine if it is developing into the desired resource type, providing the
expected functions, and attaining any other applicable metrics".

Success criteria were defined in the 2017 Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project Mitigation Plan
(Mitigation Plan). For each defined success criteria, quantitative (e.g. bank height ratio) or qualitative (e.g.
observations of fine sediment deposition on the floodplain), data is measured throughout the monitoring
period. Year to year comparisons for the various parameters will allow adaptive management to be
implemented early on in the monitoring period if necessary, in order to reduce the risk of widespread
problems.

3.1 Channel Stability and Morphology
3.1.1 Dimension
 Riffle bank height ratios (BHR) shall not exceed 1.2. Changes in BHR shall not exceed 10%
in year to year comparisons.
 Entrenchment ratio (ER) for riffles in reaches where ER is corrected through design and
construction shall be no less than 1.4. Changes in ER shall not exceed 10% in year to year
comparisons.
3.2 Hydrology
3.2.1 Bankfull Events
 At least 90% of the stream bed and banks shall remain stable through four bankfull events,
occurring in separate years, during monitoring years 1 through 7.
3.2.2 Continuous Flow
 Continuous surface water flow must be documented for 30 consecutive days at any point
during the monitoring year.
3.3 Vegetation
3.3.1 Woody Stem Plantings
 Density of 320 live, planted stems/acre at year 3; 260 live, planted stems/acre at year 5; 210
live planted stems/acre at year 7.
 Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5 and 10 feet in height at year 7.
 No more than 50% of a plot stem count shall be a single species.
3.4 Visual Assessment
3.4.1 Encroachment
 100% of fencing and signage to remain intact.
 No encroachments shall be made on the easement.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 7 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
3.5 Schedule and Reporting
Monitoring reports will be submitted to USACE and DWR by December 31 of each monitoring year. Based
on the (NCIRT) "Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update), the
monitoring reports will include the following:
 Project background which includes project objectives, project structure, restoration type and
approach, location and setting, history and background
 Map of project approach and structure
 Map with monitoring features and any problem areas indicated
 Assessment of the stability of the stream
 Annual photographs of monitoring features
 Assessment of vegetation
 Assessment of hydrology
 Recommended maintenance or corrective actions
 Any other observations from visual assessment such as indications of encroachment or wildlife

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 8 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
4.0 Methods
The ecological criteria for monitoring are linked to project success performance standards established in
the Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration Mitigation Plan (2017) and discussed in Section 3.0 of this document.
Evaluation of project success utilizes industry standard methods described in detail below. Project success
will be evaluated annually for 7 years per the proposed guidance set forth by the North Carolina Interagency
Review Team's (NCIRT) "Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update" -
October 24, 2016 (USACE 2016).

4.1 Channel Stability and Morphology
4.1.1 Dimension
Cross-Sectional Stream surveys follow the methodology contained in the USDA forest service manual
"Stream Channel Reference Sites (Harrelson, et al 1994). Cross-section surveys were conducted on July
17, 2019 and August 29, 2019. All cross-section monitoring locations were recorded with a sub-meter
accuracy Trimble GeoXT GPS device and monumented with a PVC stake and rebar set in concrete. Cross-
section surveys were performed by ClearWater Environmental Consultants (CEC) using a laser level, and
laser sensor attached to stadia rod, and measuring tape. Permanent cross sections were established at ten
locations within R and EI reaches, representing approximately 1/2 riffles, and 1/2 pools. Cross section
locations were established according to best professional judgement. Cross section data points were
collected at all major changes in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, water surface and channel thalweg
locations. Stream channel cross section dimensions and associated parameters were calculated using "The
Reference Reach Spreadsheet" version 4.3 L developed by Dan Mecklenburg. (Ohio Department of Natural
Resources).

4.1.2 Pattern and Profile
A longitudinal survey was performed by Ben Patton Land Surveying PLLC, with data points collected at
major changes in slope, including at the water surface and channel thalweg, head and tail of riffles, max
pool depth and at bankfull or top of bank locations. Stream channel longitudinal profile slopes were
calculated using Microsoft Excel, and AutoCAD.

4.1.3 Substrate
Stream substrate was evaluating using a modified Wolman (1954) Reach-wide pebble count method.
Reachwide sampling was collected during the baseline monitoring only, and will not be repeated in
subsequent monitoring years.

4.1.4 Photo Documentation
Photographic reference points (photo-points) were used to visually document stream conditions and include
both a downstream facing photo and an upstream facing photo at each photo reference point. Photo-points
were established at 30 stations along the entirety of the project streams. All photo-points were recorded
with a sub-meter accuracy Trimble GeoXT GPS device and monumented with a PVC stake The
photographer will make a reasonable attempt to capture the same perspective in each photo-point location
annually.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 9 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
4.2 Hydrology
4.2.1 Bankfull Events
Crest gauges were installed on riffle cross-sections XS3, XS6 and XS10 will be inspected on an annual
basis to document the occurrence of bankfull events.

4.2.2 Continuous Flow Monitoring
Streamflow stage will be monitored to document 30 days of continuous flow using a continuous stage
recorder. An automated level-logger will be set to record every 2 hours. Evidence of channel flow will be
documented with a photo and the stream level will be manually recorded at each data download.

4.3 Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring was conducted during the As-Built Monitoring and will be conducted in post-
construction monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Both Permanent Vegetation Plots (PVP) and Temporary
Vegetation Plots (TVP) were established. PVPs will be monitored in utilizing methods established by the
Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008) and the 2016 USACE Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Guidance. For all monitoring plots all woody stems, including exotic and invasive
species, were recorded. Exotic/invasive species will not count toward success of performance standards.

A total of seven permanent vegetation plots (PVP) and five temporary vegetation plots (TVP) were
established within the 14.14 AC planted area. Locations of PVP amd TVP were chosen in the field to
capture the heterogeneity of the species composition and spacing within the planted area. Permanent
vegetation plots were established by choosing a random origin point, with either a standard 10 meter by 10
meter square plot or a 5 meter by 20 meter plot. The vegetation plot corners have been marked and are
recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference photographs were
taken at the origin looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner and will be repeated each
monitoring year. Individual PVP data recorded will include woody stem identification, height, density,
vigor, damage (if any), and percent survival. Planted woody stems will be marked during assessment as
needed based on a known origin so they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be
determined from the difference between the baseline year's living planted stems and the current year's living
planted stems.

Temporary vegetation plots (TVP) were established in MY0, using a circular or 100 m2 plot. These
temporary plots will be reestablished in different and random locations throughout the planted conservation
easement in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. These locations will be indicated on plan view maps for the
corresponding monitoring assessment year. Temporary vegetation plot assessments will document the
number of stems, species type, and stem height within the plot. Please refer to Figures 4.0 through 4.5 for
the permanent and temporary vegetation monitoring locations.

4.4 Visual Assessment
Visual assessment will be performed annually to determine locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation, and
locations of any fence damage, vegetation damage, or boundary encroachments. Any areas of concern will
be mapped and included in the annual monitoring report.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 10 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
5.0 Adaptive Management Plan
Maintenance of the newly constructed channels and all structures associated with the restoration would be
accomplished by Tryon Equestrian Partners (TEP) if the monitoring parameters for restored streams exceed
the range of natural variability established during the 7-year monitoring period. Replacement planting
would be performed by TEP if stem counts fall below 320 stems per acre during the first 3 years, 260 stems
per acre through year 5, or 210 stems per acre through year 7. If any portion of the mitigation project fails
to meet the specified performance standards in a monitoring year, the reason(s) for this failure would be
determined and a corrective action plan (which would include proposed actions, a schedule, and monitoring
plan) would be prepared. TEP will also install and maintain the livestock fence for seven years. The
landowner will be responsible for maintaining the fence thereafter if the adjacent land uses include
livestock. If it is believed that corrective action to a problem area is not warranted, the corrective action
plan would state the reasons. Continued monitoring of the problem area may be required.

Project maintenance would be performed as described above. If, during the course of annual monitoring it
is determined the site's ability to achieve site performance standards is jeopardized, the applicant would
notify the Corps and DWR of the need to develop an Adaptive Management Plan. Once the Adaptive
Management Plan is prepared and finalized the applicant would:
 Notify the Corps and DWR.
 Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the Corps and DWR.
 Obtain other permits as necessary.
 Implement the Adaptive Management Plan.
 Provide the Corps and DWR with documentation of corrective action. This report would
depict the extent and nature of the work performed.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 11 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
6.0 Record Drawings- As-Built Condition

Sealed record drawings are located in Attachment B. The drawings include redlines for any significant field
adjustments made during construction that were different from the design plans. Specific changes by each
project area are detailed below:

UT1
 STA 3+00: Riffle broken into two to match existing pattern of stream
 STA 4+50: Brush Toe dropped as bank tied to existing grade without fill.
 13+71 - 13+80: Boulder Steps (2) added to increase stability at stream outlet.
UT2
 STA 12+47: Boulder Step added to stabilize existing small headcut in stream
 STA 13+34: Boulder Step added to reduce drop across individual boulder steps between STA
13+62.42 and 13+88.14
 STA 14+17: Boulder Step added to reduce drop across individual boulder steps between STA
13+62.42 and 13+88.14
 STA 14+06: Boulder Step added to reduce drop on individual boulder steps between STA 17+17.82
and 17+90.55
 STA 23+00 Stream Meander realigned to accommodate changes to Ford Crossing orientation
 STA 26+00: Log sill replaced with boulder sill
 STA 26+25: Log Sill dropped to allow stream bed to tie to large boulders/bedrock
 STA 27+48: Log Sill added for additional stability
 STA 28+91: Log Sill added for additional stability
 STA 29+32: Log Sill added for additional stability
 STA 29+60: Log Sill replaced with Boulder Sill
 STA 29+90: Log Sill replaced with Boulder Sill

UT3
 STA 102+00 (Reach 1): Brush Mattress not constructed, existing bank was vegetated and stable
 STA 104+80 (Reach 2a): Boulder Step dropped, not needed to tie stream back to stable stream bed.
 STA 107+30 (Reach 2b): Brush Toe replaced with Brush Mattress and Boulder Step, a better
solution for the instability at this location.
 STA 109+47 (Reach 2c): Two Boulder steps dropped from design as not needed to tie back to
existing stream. Brush Mattress at STA 110+50 moved to this location.
 STA 115+50 (Reach 4): Riffle added to supplement existing stream pattern
 STA 124+35 and STA 124+52 Boulder Steps (2) added for additional stability.
 STA 125+62 (Reach 4): Riffle added to supplement existing stream pattern

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 12 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
7.0 Baseline Data Assessment
MY0 baseline data collection was conducted in July-August 2019. The first annual monitoring assessment
(MY1) will be completed by December of 2020. The Site will be monitored for a total of seven years, with
the final monitoring activities scheduled for 2026.

7.1 Channel Stability and Morphology
As-built morphological data collection was conducted in July 2019. Please refer to Attachment C for data
tables, longitudinal profiles, cross sections, and Attachment D for stream photographs.

7.1.1 Profile
The MY0 profiles generally match the profile design parameters. Variations from the design profile reflect
field changes during construction as a result of field conditions. Stream profile will be assessed visually
during annual monitoring. No additional longitudinal surveys will be performed unless visual monitoring
indicates a need for remedial actions.

7.1.2 Dimension
Generally, as-built cross-sectional dimensions match design parameters with minor variations. Noted
differences are still appropriate for the channel type. Table 5 indicates the as-built cross-section
dimensions. Tables 6-8 compare typical design cross section dimensions to as built dimensions.

Table 5: As-Built Cross Section Dimensions
Dimensional
Parameter
XS1 XS2 XS3 XS4 XS5 XS6 XS7 XS8 XS9 XS10
UT2 Reach 3 (EI) UT2 Reach 4 (R) UT1 (R) UT3 Reach 2a
(EI) UT3 Reach 4 (R)
Riffle Pool Riffle Pool Pool Riffle Pool Riffle Pool Riffle
Bankfull
Elevation (ft) 885.69 883.93 845.81 845.74 831.24 831.4 906.9 905.1 848.39 846.33
x-section area
(ft.sq.) 9 16.8 5.6 11.6 6.8 6.4 11.5 5.3 11.6 7
width (ft) 8.8 10.6 7.9 8.7 8.9 13.4 10.3 8.9 12.5 10.5
mean depth
(ft) 1 1.6 0.7 1.3 0.8 0.5 1.1 0.6 0.9 0.7
max depth
(ft) 1.6 2.2 1.2 2.3 2.1 1.1 2.1 1 2.6 1.2
wetted
parimeter (ft) 9.6 12.4 8.3 10.2 10.3 13.8 11.8 9.2 14.3 11
hyd radi (ft) 0.9 1.4 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.5 1 0.6 0.8 0.6
width-depth
ratio 8.5 6.7 11.1 6.5 11.8 28.3 9.3 14.8 13.5 15.7
W flood
prone area
(ft)
19.1 N/A 31.7 N/A N/A ** N/A 21.8 N/A 67.8
entrenchment
ratio 2.2 N/A 4 N/A N/A ** N/A 2.5 N/A 6.5
Bank Height
Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
** Width of floodprone area exceeds survey boundary
N/A: Not Applicable

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 13 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020

Table 6: UT1 Typical Design Cross Sections vs Surveyed As Built Dimensions
Dimensional
Parameter UT1 “Typical” Design UT1 Surveyed As Built Dimensions
Riffle Pool Riffle Pool
x-section area
(ft.sq.) 8.4 -- 6.4 6.8
width (ft) 10 11 13.4 8.9
mean depth (ft) 0.84 -- 0.5 0.8
max depth (ft) 1.2 2 1.1 2.1
wetted
parimeter (ft) 10.46 -- 13.8 10.3
hydraulic
radius (ft) 0.8 -- 0.5 0.7
width-depth
ratio 11.9 -- 28.3 11.8
Reach Slope 0.01 0.0092

Table 7: UT2 Typical Design Cross Sections vs Surveyed As Built Dimensions
Dimensional
Parameter UT2 “Typical” Design UT2 Surveyed As-Built Dimensions
Riffle Pool Riffle 1
(Reach 3)
Riffle 2
(Reach 4)
Pool 1
(Reach 3)
Pool 2
(Reach 4)
x-section area
(ft.sq.) 6 -- 9 5.6 16.8 11.6
width (ft) 9 10.5 8.8 7.9 10.6 8.7
mean depth (ft) 0.67 -- 1 0.7 1.6 1.3
max depth (ft) 1 1.7 1.6 1.2 2.2 2.3
wetted parimeter (ft) 9.32 -- 9.6 8.3 12.4 10.2
hydraulic radius (ft) 0.64 -- 0.9 0.7 1.4 1.1
width-depth ratio 13.5 -- 8.5 11.1 6.7 6.5
Reach Slope 0.030 0.020 (Reach 3) ; 0.034 (Reach 4)

Table 8: UT3 Typical Design Cross Sections vs Surveyed As Built Dimensions
Dimensional
Parameter
UT3 “Typical”
Design
UT3 Surveyed As-Built Dimensions
Riffle Pool Riffle 1
(Reach 2a)
Riffle 2
(Reach 4)
Pool 1
(Reach 2a)
Pool 2
(Reach 4)
x-section area
(ft.sq.) 7 -- 5.3 7 11.5 11.6
width (ft) 10 12 8.9 10.5 10.3 12.5
mean depth (ft) 0.70 -- 0.6 0.7 1.1 0.9
max depth (ft) 1.0 1.8 1 1.2 2.1 2.6
wetted parimeter
(ft) 10.32 -- 9.2 11 11.8 14.3
hydraulic radius
(ft) 0.68 -- 0.6 0.6 1 0.8
width-depth ratio 14.29 -- 14.8 15.7 9.3 13.5
Reach Slope 0.022 0.037 (Reach 2a) ; 0.021 (Reach 4)

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 14 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020

7.1.3 Pattern
Pattern data is not applicable for high slope project streams that are either Rosgen A-type or B-type stream
(UT2 above ford crossing and UT3 Reach 1-3) For lower gradient streams with a wider valley and
floodplain were designed as Rosgen E stream type channels (UT1, UT2 below ford crossing and UT3 Reach
4). Sinuosity for these reaches was calculated as ranging from 1.12-1.3.

7.2 Hydrology
Bankfull events and coninouous flow monitoring recorded following completion of construction will be
presented in the Year 1 monitoring report.

7.3 Vegetation
The MY0 average planted density is 335 planted stems/acre for permanent vegetation plots (PVP) and 770
stems/acre for temporary vegetation plots (TVP). The total overall planted density representative for the
site is 563 stems/acre, which exceeds the interim measure of vegetative success of at least 320 planted stems
per acre at the end of the third monitoring year. Permanent vegetation monitoring plots 1, 4, 5 and 6 do
not individually meet the interim vegetative success criteria. A corrective action plan will be submitted
under separate cover that includes supplemental planting in portions of the site showing low survivability
of planted woody stems. Vegetation data tables can be found in Attachment E and photographs of each site
can be found in Attachment D.

Table 9: Vegetation Plot Total Stem Counts

Plot Stem Count
PVP1 3
PVP2 11
PVP3 14
PVP4 7
PVP5 4
PVP6 7
PVP7 12
TVP1 24
TVP2 19
TVP3 16
TVP4 15
TVP5 3
Average #
stems
11.25

Plot Area 0.02 Acres
Stems/Acre 563

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 15 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
8.0 Corrective Action Plan
Efforts to close out the construction phase of the Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation site are ongoing, and
will be described in a corrective action plan, which will be submitted under separate cover. The corrective
action plan will include the scope and timeline for remaining work necessary to meet the construction
phase requirements, including: (1) modification of fencelines, (2) signage installed to the Conservation
Easement boundary, and (3) a supplemental planting plan for low stem density areas. The corrective
action plan will be submitted to the Corps and DWR for approval.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 16 of 16
As-Built Report
June 2020
9.0 References

ClearWater Environmental Inc. and Wildlands Engineering Inc. (2017) Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation
Project Mitigation Plan
Harrelson, Cheryl C; C. L Rawlins; J.P. Potyondy. 1994. Stream channel reference sites: an illustrated guide
to field technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Mecklenburg, Dan & Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Copyright 2006. “The Reference Reach
Spreadsheet” version 4.3 L
Rosgen, David L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers, CATENA,Volume 22, Issue 3.Pages 169-199
U.S. Army Corps of Enbineers 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update” – October 24, 2016
Wolman, M.G. 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Transactions American Geophysical
Union. Volume 35. Number 6. Pp. 951-956.

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 10.5
Miles
32 Clayton St
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Vicinity
Figure 1
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT Date; 6.17.2020 CEC Project #747
Project Boundary
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 10.5
Miles
32 Clayton St
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
USGS Topographic Map
Fingerville West Quad 1:24k
Figure 2
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT Date; 6.17.2020 CEC Project #747
Project Boundary
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 1,000500
Feet
32 Clayton St
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Project Components
Figure 3
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT Date; 6.17.2020 CEC Project #747
UT1
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Phase I
Phase II
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing 0 1,000500
Feet
UT2
UT3
UT4
UT5
Phase I CE (3.84 AC)
Phase II CE (18.43 AC)
Sheet 3
Sheet 2Sheet 1
Sheet 5
Sheet 4
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 500 1,000250
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Cross-Sections (XS)
Permanent Vegetation Plots (PVP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Photo Points (PP)
Fence Line
Gravel Crossing
SheetBoundaries
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Figure 4.0Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.9.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT2
UT3
UT5
UT4
UT1
TVP3
PP-15
PP-30
PP-29
PP-28
PP-27XS-5X
S
-
4
XS-6
VP5
VP4
VP7
VP3
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Permanent Vegetation Plots (VP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Photo Points (PP)
Cross-Sections
Fence Line
Gravel Crossing
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Sheet 1
Figure 4.1
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.17.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT1
UT2
UT3
Mary's Branch
TVP4
TVP1
PP-11
PP-14
PP-15
PP-12
PP-13
PP-26
PP-25
XS-10 XS-4XS-3XS-9
VP3
VP2
VP7
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration Project (+/- 18.5AC)Ü0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Permanent Vegetation Plots (VP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Cross-Sections
Photo Points (PP)
Gravel Crossing
Fence Line
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Sheet 2
Figure 4.2
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.17.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT2
UT3
TVP5XS-1XS-2PP-4
PP-7
PP-6
PP-8
PP-5
VP1
VP2
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Permanent Vegetation Plots (VP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Cross-Sections
Photo Points (PP)
Gravel Crossing
Fence Line
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Sheet 3
Figure 4.3
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.17.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT2
TVP1XS-10XS-9
PP-15
PP-26
PP-25
PP-24
PP-23
PP-22
PP-21
VP7
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Permanent Vegetation Plots (VP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Cross-Sections
Photo Points (PP)
Fence Line
Gravel Crossing
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Sheet 4
Figure 4.4
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.17.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT2
UT3
UT5
TVP2
XS-7XS-8
PP-22
PP-21
PP-20
PP-19
PP-18
PP-17
PP-16
VP6
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project (+/- 22.28 AC)
Ü
0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement (22.28 AC)
Project Streams
Approach
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration
Crossing
Permanent Vegetation Plots (VP)
Temporary Vegetation Plots (TVP)
Cross-Sections
Photo Points (PP)
Fence Line
Gravel Crossing
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
As-Built Monitoring Features
Sheet 5
Figure 5.5
Polk County,
North Carolina
Drawn by: AKT 6.17.2020; CEC Project# 747
UT3
UT4
Attachment A: Recorded Conservation Easement

0Aw c PvwN
eAPBMx C Yv.E
�ntau
PYN P.t. f/tul
• FDMND ATOM PIN (rip)
O SET W- PIN (NIP)
POINT
Q NAIL OR RANJtOAD SPIKE
NIDRANT
TELEPIlQNE PE"OESTAL (PED}
II LrONT POLE pt LAMP
UNUTY POLE
WATER VAL1E
a WATER MErER (Ym)
CAS VALVE
SCKER MANHOLE
Q CONCRETE MONUMENT
® POONT or WAY MrYIUMENT
G s roNE
Property Lme
Ad' ' — (Sarwyed)
— —Ad)gi — (^.I earr•yad)
—Rghl er Y1by
— - —wryly Linaa
Aepna:
1
/ 1. D. Scott O.stk, Pre1...;o 1 L.ne S«r.y« H.. L-3001, 1. D. Scott fie.tic� c Ufy Not Ihl. plut was ar..n STATE Of NORTH CARWNA
c lily I.
one «more .f I_ fdlv.ing .e Mlaiwtea tn�a, canoe my ap.Ma« b.m .n gclual eurxy mega COUNTY OF POLK
my wpKrhi.n (xee M211pNen —dee �. f
I ® P, wcl lhla plot ]. or a tur.,•T of .mtNK wleq«Y. n` Book AS N ❑ : that Me bountlora. nal 1 Pc
yetl ve dearly fndic.iee q tlrv.n han ReNew OK.K of WK
e .4 tfia remmb Folien of e. t:ig pw,N h o rm lion f.ar16 m 13 a AS N07 ; that M< Cvvuty. c ly toot Na mop ar plul f..N
caulk-v.tlenf y «other e.cpuon to th, raL'u f preNal.n .e cofcWatee la 1:10000: to.l tltia cerlific. Ion h oMeed m 1 ell .[alum.,
tleMlllen of .ubtllHaion. this plat wva prep d KI .cw d— with G.S. ragWremanta for r «tllnq. A
47
-30 .. am.nced. ant-- my «Iginol a .lure, V
U_ SCOTT ROSTC PROFE59Cp LAND STIR regi.Lrt tlm numbK Outl wW [hl. _7Sr _ e.Y -
C wyor
.neu 01
[Rm lacan.. Na P-1108]
STATT 9 AlOMW CA.401L ,4
- $$/rf, N[GS Y�yWENT '91AtrfETfE'-��Ey
_ - lr39Ol - = hr +PJ-f-.FAN~ 'Sp].e.�a r �miriae. xl 1
l.L.yd�r Ao ';p' srrR�,'$: c M eyeara} me Yc eyaal
lt�Nrnrre .IM Y wx:xm [ Iue]iini] n 1 f �a�2oa1«aam.
R.EY.rr M PI•e.
NIP �)
584'OS'S1 �✓� � FHP
t22,82' S]gyy9g (�r.V) a
T39,)1• NIP S
pW0.xi NAxv rH
O
ODYA.�HAai.rl �'M1 I. Voa9 rxp��
xwrp.A.n° Knl.aw Fp �y]n
e/P119-4 2' ry
p.w. oe-[%fJ1 PHASE 1 CREEK
' IP CDNSERVATION AREA
Sirnor5 1E7,480 Sq It rl 2
3
.E4 A.., -sJ• �'
W—) \
/
Tf// pp1nA�KMWa
AxIK3 NA4 YAa1w
roea:PHY-.
ftEp
r.YK \
M eEA11 \
lAryu+EYC))[ \
Ne(eK oH6-a \
m-7
Nip (17r.E.1 I 1
A'u .ems YMS .1-N1O1T'5 EE.-'
]Aw r7>
fi�l N8 ]Q. w3.
ti ��' x: s.3tap.e. c,lgeTeeaae .It
ti. Lxw dn(m117, sPe Yc e]oel
'��w Is5,42'
y P„�Yn.e ms xc c..rx.es
NM NB4'S412�W
(r'r.evl
3]Oq, Elea]Sa6.61 ak
NIP W�1 (n.° ary1R�)�Cart,,.y
a xt]])
SURVEY FOR
HARMON DAIRY
PHASE 1 CREEK CONSERVATION EASEMENT
EASEMENT AREA LES ON THE LANDS aF
OOUOEAS HARNON N TAMES ALAN HARMON
DrrD BOOK OB-E PACE 231
PARCEL NIWRER P119-4
""EEN CREEK TOWNSHIP, POLK COUNTY. NC
PELD: I. CRAUDSMS, E. LANDIS MAP' E CRAUUS US
DAIS: JAN 23. 201T
YAPt, 23D81 HARMON DMRY CREEK CONSERVATION EA5EYIENT
GRAPHIC SCALE
• NOTES '
1 INCH = 100 FEET
4. rilyea '.purl la w..m.nu e} r.cwq
.,Inky —I.. lone .0'. cal ..y eee
untlrpaun. uNi1a.
' a °igvid °"0"' '°'ef• q°'• e'"°e' 11Ae'
PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING
ora o.awva^e x.arnc p� 6..wt
r be oa . pm1 al �. .wey
y
4. N. fpWn4 lacWw .two thaw lno.. .M1own.
[FIRM ULENSE NO. P-1136]
5- Tna .urwy rww pKlwnrtl .Naa.1 lh. b•rAt
r.ea.d.
z04 N- MAIN STREET
PO BON 11e1
6. tkepr[y M .ably! to teaks a+e rnvicOw
"eCO'eN K'AIK^b4'
RIITIE :F 82ON, NL 28130
PHONE: (B25} 38]-]059

NCGS Monument 'BILL"
N= 566, 503. 27
E= l , 090, 900. l 7
```� 1 1 1 1 ��� 1, Cameron S. Baker certify that this plat
�N CA Rp ��� was drawn under my supervision from an actual survey under
0 0Fess' 04, �/ �i my supervision, (deed description recorded in book 426
--- PRrL�1VINAR, URI�VCINigage 580 ) that the ratio ofprecision as calculated by
EAL - latitudes and departures does not exceed 1:10, 000 and that
EQR VIEW �QPQ.SEE Qhli gap was prepared in accordance with G. S. 47-30 as amended.
Witness my hand and seal this, day of , 20
,O� i1RON S.B;����
1111
Professional Land Surveyor No. L-4920
/, Cameron S. Baker
O Professional Land Surveyor, certify that this
Z
survey is of another category, such as
recombination of existing parcels, a court
ordered survey, or other exception to the
L2 I -L27 Are Tie Lines
Line
Bearing
Distance
L 1
5 0401 025" E
37.G7
L2
5 20025'55" W
1 18.2 P
L3
5 0G°03'59" E
11 7. 1 9'
L4
5 G301 2'52" W
90.G2'
L5
5 820201 3" W
140.G2'
LG
N 4G°00'40" W
I 17. G I'
L7
5 3504044" W
128.40
L8
N 0G°03'59" W
83.39'
L9
N 20025'55" E
1 1 7.80'
L 10
N 0401 025" W
54.22'
L 1 I
N 84039'48" E
1 34.88'
L 12
5 2302 1 '02" E
14G.84'
L 13
5 39042'48" W
1 70. 1 P
L 14
5 GG03 1 '20" E
139.77
L 15
5 2404748" W
I 1 9 . G I'
L I G
5 G801 3'05" W
1 05.05'
L 17
5 72030'34" W
1 44.G0'
L 18
N 42028'43" E
1 1 8.58'
L 19
N 2302 1 '02" W
147.59'
L20
5 2 1 °38'03" E
1 58.75'
L2 1
5 000 1 8'32" W
35.20'
L22
5 47045'07" E
90.34'
L23
5 42049' 1 2" W
15 1 .70'
L24
N 3504044" E
37.47'
L25
5 1 3003'30" E
25. 1 7'
L2G
N G802 1'30 E
25.0 P
L27
N 72030'34" E
1 42 33'
N
\ N 63°
\� N
5/8" EIS '
Phase / Creek Flush W/Ground ,
Conservation Easement �\
P. B. F Pg. 794
Ford
5/8" El,
Flush W/Ground
N= 542,45 1.54
E= 1,004,652,50
State of North Carolina
County of Polk
Review Officer of Polk County,
certify that the map or plat to which this certification is affixed
meets all statutory requirements for recording.
Review Officer Date
State of North Carolina, County of Polk
filed for registration on the day of 20
at o'clock M and recorded in
slide
in the office of the
Register of Deeds of Polk County.
Register of Deeds
By:
Deputy.
l /2" IPS
N= 543,710.05
E= 1,037,067.94
N
i Q
w
i W
definition of subdivision. AA / Spring \
3
Professional Land Surveyor L-4920 3 E 56/
/ QP
N 6��
QQ� AREA
82,
62°3/' — 43 W 726,02' —
°A
°2
i0g`2
Ford
h� I Q
\• � wl
0
AREA 2
6°38 58� :, /
Spring \ o /
24" CMP
/ \\ AREA 4
Al W
3
N �b /
0
1.2
23Q,0L6
Spring 36 /
° I
X(b
McDowell
D.B.555, Pg. 1678
P.B. E, Pg. 1236
Pin: P119-59
S 87°47'06" E 254.30' �g /
\ AREA 3
2
-EIS (In Stump)
Sob tti� ' - sue- ElS (In Stump)
� e I're /0'
Notes. _ �. T% 252'
/ . Property /s subject to all easements, restriction and right of ways of record. _ \ �� 0 0,34 \
2. The locations of underground utllltles are based on above -ground structures N 7Q0
337_ /- N
and record drawmgs provided to the surveyor. Locations of underground V W
utIlitles/structures may vary from locations shown hereon. AddItIonal 44p 34' _ \ L 1 \
buried ublitles/structures may be encountered.
3. Surveyor has made no Investigation or Independent search for easements of record, Tie Lin 05 62
encumbrances, restrictive covenants, ownership tale evidence, or any other facts that W\
an accurate tale search may disclose. Fence Pos�t � 2°3
4. The certification of survey and plat was prepared for the entity named in the title block \
hereon and does not extend to any other entity, unless recertified by the professional land
surveyor.
\ Jackson
5. All miscellaneous survey related materials, mcludmg but not limited to, project plans,
deed and ROW research, maps, field notes and data, survey reports, record tale report,
calculations, working drawmgs, estimates, and other materials acquired and/or prepared
by the surveyor as Instruments of service shall remain the property of the surveyor and a531gn3.
6. This drawing is not valid unless the original signature and stamp are attached. Any reproduction
or variance to this survey by e%ctron1c or any other means are not to be considered issued by the
professional surveyor.
7. Area by Coordinate Computation.
100 0 100 200 300
GRAPHIC SCALE — FEET
i
i
i
i
J Ridings
D. B. 394, Pg. 361
i P.B. F, Pg. 76
Pin: P110-74
i
i
i Ridings
D. B. 594, Pg. 358 I
P. B. F, Pg. 76 I
Pin: P110-76
D. B. 252, Pg. 2021
P.B. C, Pg. 977
Pin: P119-88
Vicinity Map
Global Positioning System Certification (RTK)
The Positional Accuracy Of The RTK Derived Positional
Information is 0.03' Horizontal & 0.03' Vertical
Horizontal PositionalAre Referenced to NAD 83 (NSRS 2011)
Vertical Positions Are Referenced To NA VD 88 (Geoid 12)
Combined Factor 0.99984087 (Ground To Grid)
Equipment Used: Carlson Supervisor + GPS Tablet
Legend:
EIP = Existing Iron Pipe
EIS = Existing lron Stake
IPS = Iron Plpe Set
® = 1/2" Iron Pipe Set
o = Unmarked Point, Unless Otherwise Noted
= Centerline of Creek
= Proposed Easment Lines
CMP = Corrugated Metal Pipe
A Portion 00hat Property a5 %Scribed
in D. B. 426, Pg. 580
Pl-opo5cd Ea5ement Survey OF
Harmon Paipy
Ph,35e 2 C.-ee% Con5em.3 on E.35eme17t
- Owner -
Jandy Land Company LLC
D. B. 426, Pg. 580
Pin: P119-4

Attachment B: As-Built Record Drawings

DocuSign Envelope ID: 11A2EF0D-206F-408F-B1DB-1E135EA5012B6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: F40506D0-7BB6-4F06-8721-452DEE012F176/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: A73DA6FC-64F9-42E1-83E0-FA8809A5BD126/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8B1DA690-994D-44AC-8540-53D709C98EBB6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 6F33A328-3A4C-4772-B13F-9B6FB4D60DFF6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4AB5BF50-A6C7-43F3-BCB0-BC85158332AB6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4EDAA886-3360-4140-8777-3FD00180A7A36/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: FCD4DC99-AC00-4CF3-B75F-01E109D2CFC76/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3D0B93EE-B3EC-44AE-AF75-53CF40772E2A6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: FDC01AB5-0A65-4197-8873-224EA91AA6BB6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: FF668E3A-3FDB-4413-885D-5BB3B36F3A9C6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: D0E4A574-EBF2-45E8-ADB0-927575B864796/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: C4B5196F-8A1B-4075-976D-DE1F484A3BF76/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3CB9E2A2-42C2-4A19-AB7E-1BA4A23C1F976/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: D37DE4AC-6C99-4090-93E8-DF1A8F7C09886/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: D89E5AF0-01EB-4C63-9540-5D699405006B6/22/2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3867936F-F704-4E4B-82DD-5B088508977F6/26/2020

Attachment C: Geomorphic Data

Cumulative
Riffle Run Pool Frequency
1  Silt/clay 0.0 0.0 < 0.06 8 0.0 8 8
2  Very fine sand 0.4 0.1 0.06 – 0.125 9 3.6 8 16
3  Fine sand 0.6 0.2 0.126 – 0.25 2 14 9.6 15 31
4  Medium sand 0.8 0.4 0.26 – 0.5 1 0.8 1 32
5  Coarse sand 1.0 0.8 0.5 – 1 2 3 5.0 5 37
6  Very coarse sand 1.2 1.5 1 ‐ 2 2 2.4 2 39
7  Very fine gravel 1.6 3.0 2 ‐ 4 0.0 0 39
8  Fine gravel 2.0 6.5 5 ‐ 8 6 7 26.0 12 51
9  Medium gravel 2.8 12.5 9 ‐ 16 20 4 67.2 23 74
10  Coarse gravel 3.0 24.5 17 ‐ 32 13 3 48.0 15 89
11  Very coarse gravel 3.4 48.5 33 ‐ 64 0.0 0 89
12  Small cobble 3.8 77.5 65 ‐ 90 5 19.0 5 93
13  Medium cobble 4.0 109.5 91 ‐ 128 3 12.0 3 96
14  Large cobble 4.2 154.5 129 ‐ 180 3 1 16.8 4 100
15  Very large cobble 4.5 218.0 181 ‐ 255 0.0 0 100
16  Small boulder 4.8 384.0 256 ‐ 512 0.0 0 100
17  Medium boulder 5.0 768.5 513 ‐ 1024 0.0 0 100
18  Large boulder 5.4 1536.5 1025 – 2048 0.0 0 100
19  Very large boulder 5.8 2048.0 > 2048 0.0 0 100
20  Bedrock 6.0 0.0 0 100
21  Woody debris 210.4 Index % Fines
Integrity Rating Habitat % 53 0 47 106 1.98 39
Fine Coarse
Gravel Gravel
8 31351511 0 0 0
Poor
Enter your counts in the white spaces corresponding to the 
appropraite size categories and habitats.  The spread‐sheet produces 
a cumulative frequency curve and calculates % fines and an index 
score.
Overall Composition
Silt Sand Cobble Boulder Bedrock Wood
D50
Stations Percent BankfullParticlesIndex 
Vaue Median Size Range (mm)Count Score
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
1234567891011121314151617181920
Cumulative Frequency
Cumulative
Riffle Run Pool Frequency
1  Silt/clay 0.0 0.0 < 0.06 0.0 0 0
2  Very fine sand 0.4 0.1 0.06 – 0.125 1 3 1.6 4 4
3  Fine sand 0.6 0.2 0.126 – 0.25 7 4.2 7 11
4  Medium sand 0.8 0.4 0.26 – 0.5 0.0 0 11
5  Coarse sand 1.0 0.8 0.5 – 1 2 5 7.0 7 18
6  Very coarse sand 1.2 1.5 1 ‐ 2 1 6 8.4 7 25
7  Very fine gravel 1.6 3.0 2 ‐ 4 2 3.2 2 27
8  Fine gravel 2.0 6.5 5 ‐ 8 10 16 52.0 26 53
9  Medium gravel 2.8 12.5 9 ‐ 16 18 5 64.4 23 76
10  Coarse gravel 3.0 24.5 17 ‐ 32 17 2 57.0 19 95
11  Very coarse gravel 3.4 48.5 33 ‐ 64 0.0 0 95
12  Small cobble 3.8 77.5 65 ‐ 90 3 1 15.2 4 99
13  Medium cobble 4.0 109.5 91 ‐ 128 1 4.0 1 100
14  Large cobble 4.2 154.5 129 ‐ 180 0.0 0 100
15  Very large cobble 4.5 218.0 181 ‐ 255 0.0 0 100
16  Small boulder 4.8 384.0 256 ‐ 512 0.0 0 100
17  Medium boulder 5.0 768.5 513 ‐ 1024 0.0 0 100
18  Large boulder 5.4 1536.5 1025 – 2048 0.0 0 100
19  Very large boulder 5.8 2048.0 > 2048 0.0 0 100
20  Bedrock 6.0 0.0 0 100
21  Woody debris 217.0 Index % Fines
Integrity Rating Habitat % 52 0 48 100 2.17 25
Fine Coarse
Gravel Gravel
02551195000
Marginal
Enter your counts in the white spaces corresponding to the 
appropraite size categories and habitats.  The spread‐sheet produces 
a cumulative frequency curve and calculates % fines and an index 
score.
Overall Composition
Silt Sand Cobble Boulder Bedrock Wood
D50
Stations Percent BankfullParticlesIndex 
Vaue Median Size Range (mm)Count Score
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
1234567891011121314151617181920
Cumulative Frequency
Cumulative
Riffle Run Pool Frequency
1  Silt/clay 0.0 0.0 < 0.06 0.0 0 0
2  Very fine sand 0.4 0.1 0.06 – 0.125 1 0.4 1 1
3  Fine sand 0.6 0.2 0.126 – 0.25 6 3.6 6 7
4  Medium sand 0.8 0.4 0.26 – 0.5 1 0.8 1 8
5  Coarse sand 1.0 0.8 0.5 – 1 2 2.0 2 10
6  Very coarse sand 1.2 1.5 1 ‐ 2 1 3 4.8 4 14
7  Very fine gravel 1.6 3.0 2 ‐ 4 0.0 0 14
8  Fine gravel 2.0 6.5 5 ‐ 8 4 2 12.0 6 20
9  Medium gravel 2.8 12.5 9 ‐ 16 4 3 19.6 7 27
10  Coarse gravel 3.0 24.5 17 ‐ 32 13 12 75.0 25 52
11  Very coarse gravel 3.4 48.5 33 ‐ 64 0.0 0 52
12  Small cobble 3.8 77.5 65 ‐ 90 12 9 79.8 21 73
13  Medium cobble 4.0 109.5 91 ‐ 128 11 6 68.0 17 90
14  Large cobble 4.2 154.5 129 ‐ 180 5 5 42.0 10 100
15  Very large cobble 4.5 218.0 181 ‐ 255 0.0 0 100
16  Small boulder 4.8 384.0 256 ‐ 512 0.0 0 100
17  Medium boulder 5.0 768.5 513 ‐ 1024 0.0 0 100
18  Large boulder 5.4 1536.5 1025 – 2048 0.0 0 100
19  Very large boulder 5.8 2048.0 > 2048 0.0 0 100
20  Bedrock 6.0 0.0 0 100
21  Woody debris 308.0 Index % Fines
Integrity Rating Habitat % 50 0 50 100 3.08 14
Fine Coarse
Gravel Gravel
0 14132548 0 0 0
Good
Enter your counts in the white spaces corresponding to the 
appropraite size categories and habitats.  The spread‐sheet produces 
a cumulative frequency curve and calculates % fines and an index 
score.
Overall Composition
Silt Sand Cobble Boulder Bedrock Wood
D50
Stations Percent BankfullParticlesIndex 
Vaue Median Size Range (mm)Count Score
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
1234567891011121314151617181920
Cumulative Frequency
Cumulative
Riffle Run Pool Frequency
1  Silt/clay 0.0 0.0 < 0.06 2 6 0.0 8 8
2  Very fine sand 0.4 0.1 0.06 – 0.125 1 0.4 1 9
3  Fine sand 0.6 0.2 0.126 – 0.25 3 1.8 3 13
4  Medium sand 0.8 0.4 0.26 – 0.5 1 4 4.0 5 18
5  Coarse sand 1.0 0.8 0.5 – 1 3 2 5.0 5 23
6  Very coarse sand 1.2 1.5 1 ‐ 2 6 1 8.4 7 31
7  Very fine gravel 1.6 3.0 2 ‐ 4 0.0 0 31
8  Fine gravel 2.0 6.5 5 ‐ 8 11 6 34.0 18 48
9  Medium gravel 2.8 12.5 9 ‐ 16 15 7 61.6 23 72
10  Coarse gravel 3.0 24.5 17 ‐ 32 8 4 36.0 13 84
11  Very coarse gravel 3.4 48.5 33 ‐ 64 0.0 0 84
12  Small cobble 3.8 77.5 65 ‐ 90 1 3.8 1 85
13  Medium cobble 4.0 109.5 91 ‐ 128 2 6 32.0 8 94
14  Large cobble 4.2 154.5 129 ‐ 180 2 8.4 2 96
15  Very large cobble 4.5 218.0 181 ‐ 255 2 9.0 2 98
16  Small boulder 4.8 384.0 256 ‐ 512 1 1 9.6 2 100
17  Medium boulder 5.0 768.5 513 ‐ 1024 0.0 0 100
18  Large boulder 5.4 1536.5 1025 – 2048 0.0 0 100
19  Very large boulder 5.8 2048.0 > 2048 0.0 0 100
20  Bedrock 6.0 0.0 0 100
21  Woody debris 214.0 Index % Fines
Integrity Rating Habitat % 57 0 43 95 2.25 31
Fine Coarse
Gravel Gravel
8 22411314 2 0 0
Bankfull
Marginal
Particles Score Stations PercentMedianCountSize Range (mm)Index 
Vaue
D50
WoodBoulder
Enter your counts in the white spaces corresponding to the 
appropraite size categories and habitats.  The spread‐sheet produces 
a cumulative frequency curve and calculates % fines and an index 
score.
Silt Sand
Overall Composition
Cobble Bedrock
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
1234567891011121314151617181920
Cumulative Frequency
Cumulative
Riffle Run Pool Frequency
1  Silt/clay 0.0 0.0 < 0.06 6 0.0 6 6
2  Very fine sand 0.4 0.1 0.06 – 0.125 7 2.8 7 13
3  Fine sand 0.6 0.2 0.126 – 0.25 4 14 10.8 18 31
4  Medium sand 0.8 0.4 0.26 – 0.5 1 7 6.4 8 39
5  Coarse sand 1.0 0.8 0.5 – 1 1 9 10.0 10 49
6  Very coarse sand 1.2 1.5 1 ‐ 2 1 2 3.6 3 52
7  Very fine gravel 1.6 3.0 2 ‐ 4 0.0 0 52
8  Fine gravel 2.0 6.5 5 ‐ 8 3 3 12.0 6 58
9  Medium gravel 2.8 12.5 9 ‐ 16 7 1 22.4 8 66
10  Coarse gravel 3.0 24.5 17 ‐ 32 15 1 48.0 16 82
11  Very coarse gravel 3.4 48.5 33 ‐ 64 0.0 0 82
12  Small cobble 3.8 77.5 65 ‐ 90 12 45.6 12 94
13  Medium cobble 4.0 109.5 91 ‐ 128 3 12.0 3 97
14  Large cobble 4.2 154.5 129 ‐ 180 3 12.6 3 100
15  Very large cobble 4.5 218.0 181 ‐ 255 0.0 0 100
16  Small boulder 4.8 384.0 256 ‐ 512 0.0 0 100
17  Medium boulder 5.0 768.5 513 ‐ 1024 0.0 0 100
18  Large boulder 5.4 1536.5 1025 – 2048 0.0 0 100
19  Very large boulder 5.8 2048.0 > 2048 0.0 0 100
20  Bedrock 6.0 0.0 0 100
21  Woody debris 186.2 Index % Fines
Integrity Rating Habitat % 50 0 50 100 1.86 52
Fine Coarse
Gravel Gravel
6 46141618 0 0 0
Poor
Enter your counts in the white spaces corresponding to the 
appropraite size categories and habitats.  The spread‐sheet produces 
a cumulative frequency curve and calculates % fines and an index 
score.
Overall Composition
Silt Sand Cobble Boulder Bedrock Wood
D50
Stations Percent BankfullParticlesIndex 
Vaue Median Size Range (mm)Count Score
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
1234567891011121314151617181920
Cumulative Frequency
Cross Section 1 - UT2 Reach 3 STA 13+26Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials9.0 x-section area (ft.sq.)19.1 W flood prone area (ft)8D50 (mm)8.8 width (ft)2.2 entrenchment ratio9.5D84 (mm)1.0 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)58 threshold grain size (mm):1.6 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio9.6 wetted parimeter (ft)0.9 hyd radi (ft)8.5 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power4.5 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness2 channel slope (%)40.5 discharge rate (cfs)0.06 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.1.17 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.82 Froude number11.8 resistance factor u/u*0.78 shear velocity (ft/s)33.1 relative roughness5.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)8838848858868878888898908910 5 10 15 20 25 30 35ElevationWidth Riffle
Cross Section 2 - UT2 Reach 3 STA 13+66Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials11.8 x-section area (ft.sq.)16.0 W flood prone area (ft)8D50 (mm)9.3 width (ft)1.7 entrenchment ratio9.5D84 (mm)1.3 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)68 threshold grain size (mm):1.7 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio10.7 wetted parimeter (ft)1.1 hyd radi (ft)7.4 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power5.0 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness2 channel slope (%)58.7 discharge rate (cfs)0.05 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.1.38 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.84 Froude number12.1 resistance factor u/u*0.84 shear velocity (ft/s)40.4 relative roughness7.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)8818828838848858868878888890 5 10 15 20 25 30ElevationWidthPool
Cross Section 3 - UT2 Reach 4 STA 28+73Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials6.7 x-section area (ft.sq.)36.4 W flood prone area (ft)10D50 (mm)9.2 width (ft)4.0 entrenchment ratio12.5D84 (mm)0.7 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)72 threshold grain size (mm):1.3 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio9.6 wetted parimeter (ft)0.7 hyd radi (ft)12.7 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power4.8 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness3.4 channel slope (%)31.7 discharge rate (cfs)0.07 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.1.46 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)1.01 Froude number10.4 resistance factor u/u*0.87 shear velocity (ft/s)17.6 relative roughness7.3 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)8448458468478488498508518528538540 10203040506070ElevationWidthRiffle
Cross Section 4 - UT2 Reach 4 STA 28+80Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials11.6 x-section area (ft.sq.)35.1 W flood prone area (ft)10D50 (mm)8.7 width (ft)4.0 entrenchment ratio12.5D84 (mm)1.3 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)119 threshold grain size (mm):2.3 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio10.2 wetted parimeter (ft)1.1 hyd radi (ft)6.5 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power6.7 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness3.4 channel slope (%)76.9 discharge rate (cfs)0.06 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.2.41 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)1.10 Froude number11.7 resistance factor u/u*1.12 shear velocity (ft/s)32.4 relative roughness18.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)8428448468488508528540 10203040506070ElevationWidthPool
Cross Section 5 - UT1 STA 7+20Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials6.8 x-section area (ft.sq.)65.2 W flood prone area (ft)8D50 (mm)8.9 width (ft)7.3 entrenchment ratio9.5D84 (mm)0.8 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)18 threshold grain size (mm):2.1 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio10.3 wetted parimeter (ft)0.7 hyd radi (ft)11.8 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power3.1 velocity (ft/s)0.035 Manning's roughness0.92 channel slope (%)20.8 discharge rate (cfs)0.06 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.38 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.67 Froude number11.4 resistance factor u/u*0.44 shear velocity (ft/s)24.3 relative roughness1.34 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)829829.5830830.5831831.5832832.58330 10203040506070ElevationWidthPool
Cross Section 6 - UT1 STA 7+51Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials6.4 x-section area (ft.sq.)61.7 W flood prone area (ft)8D50 (mm)13.4 width (ft)4.6 entrenchment ratio9.5D84 (mm)0.5 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)13 threshold grain size (mm):1.1 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio13.8 wetted parimeter (ft)0.5 hyd radi (ft)28.3 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power2.4 velocity (ft/s)0.035 Manning's roughness0.92 channel slope (%)15.6 discharge rate (cfs)0.08 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.27 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.63 Froude number10.3 resistance factor u/u*0.37 shear velocity (ft/s)15.2 relative roughness0.67 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)830830.5831831.5832832.58330 10203040506070ElevationWidth Riffle
Cross Section 10 - UT3 Reach 4 STA 122+11Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials6.2 x-section area (ft.sq.)55.5 W flood prone area (ft)5.5D50 (mm)9.8 width (ft)5.7 entrenchment ratio11.5D84 (mm)0.6 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)39 threshold grain size (mm):1.1 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio10.2 wetted parimeter (ft)0.6 hyd radi (ft)15.5 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power3.4 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness2.1 channel slope (%)21.3 discharge rate (cfs)0.08 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.79 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.78 Froude number10.3 resistance factor u/u*0.64 shear velocity (ft/s)16.8 relative roughness2.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)844.5845845.5846846.5847847.5848848.50 102030405060708090100ElevationWidth Riffle
Cross Section 8 - UT3 Reach 2a STA 104+96Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials5.3 x-section area (ft.sq.)21.8 W flood prone area (ft)8D50 (mm)8.9 width (ft)2.5 entrenchment ratio10D84 (mm)0.6 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)66 threshold grain size (mm):1.0 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio9.2 wetted parimeter (ft)0.6 hyd radi (ft)14.8 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power4.4 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness3.7 channel slope (%)23.4 discharge rate (cfs)0.07 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.1.33 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)1.02 Froude number10.4 resistance factor u/u*0.83 shear velocity (ft/s)18.2 relative roughness6.1 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)9039049059069079089099109110 102030405060ElevationWidthRiffle
Cross Section 9 - UT3 Reach 4 STA 121+34Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials11.6 x-section area (ft.sq.)40.0 W flood prone area (ft)5.5D50 (mm)12.5 width (ft)3.2 entrenchment ratio11.5D84 (mm)0.9 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)52 threshold grain size (mm):2.6 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio14.3 wetted parimeter (ft)0.8 hyd radi (ft)13.5 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power4.2 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness2.1 channel slope (%)48.5 discharge rate (cfs)0.06 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.1.07 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.82 Froude number11.5 resistance factor u/u*0.74 shear velocity (ft/s)24.6 relative roughness5.1 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)8458468478488498508518520 102030405060ElevationWidthPool
Cross Section 10 - UT3 Reach 4 STA 122+11Bankfull DimensionsFlood DimensionsMaterials6.2 x-section area (ft.sq.)55.5 W flood prone area (ft)5.5D50 (mm)9.8 width (ft)5.7 entrenchment ratio11.5D84 (mm)0.6 mean depth (ft)--- low bank height (ft)39 threshold grain size (mm):1.1 max depth (ft) --- low bank height ratio10.2 wetted parimeter (ft)0.6 hyd radi (ft)15.5 width-depth ratioBankfull FlowFlow ResistanceForces & Power3.4 velocity (ft/s)0.045 Manning's roughness2.1 channel slope (%)21.3 discharge rate (cfs)0.08 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.79 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)0.78 Froude number10.3 resistance factor u/u*0.64 shear velocity (ft/s)16.8 relative roughness2.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)844.5845845.5846846.5847847.5848848.50 102030405060708090100ElevationWidth Riffle
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT1 STA 1+66 to 14+1385185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)830832834836838150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT1 STA: 1+66 ‐6+50top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)XS6
XS5
825827829831833835650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT1 STA: 6+50 ‐11+50top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)XS5XS6
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT1 STA 1+66 to 14+138228248268288301150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT1 STA: 11+50 ‐14+13top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)890895900905790 810 830 850 870 890 910 930 950 970 990Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 7+95 ‐9+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)885887889891893895990 1040 1090 1140 1190 1240 1290Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 9+90 ‐12+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)Cross Section 1
Cross Section 2
87787988188388588712901310133013501370139014101430145014701490Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 12+90 ‐14+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)Cross Section 1Cross Section 28708728748768788801490 1510 1530 1550 1570 1590 1610 1630 1650 1670 1690Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 14+90 ‐16+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)86887087287487687816901710173017501770179018101830185018701890Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 16+90 ‐18+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)8608628648668688701890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT1 STA: 18+90 ‐20+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)UT2 Reach 4(Restoration)UT2 Reach 3(Enhancement I)85685886086286486620902110213021502170219022102230225022702290Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 20+90 ‐22+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)Reach Break8558578598618638652290 2310 2330 2350 2370 2390 2410 2430 2450 2470 2490Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 22+90 ‐24+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)85285485685886086224902510253025502570259026102630265026702690Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 24+90 ‐26+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)Cross‐Section 3
Cross‐Section 4
8438458478498518532690 2710 2730 2750 2770 2790 2810 2830 2850 2870 2890Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 26+90 ‐28+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)Cross‐Section 3Cross Section 4
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT2 STA 7+95 to 31+2085185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)83583783984184384528902910293029502970299030103030305030703090Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 28+90 ‐30+90top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)8308328348368388403090 3110 3130 3150 3170 3190 3210 3230 3250 3270 3290Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT2 STA: 30+90‐31+20top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT3 Reach 2B STA 107+49 to 108+0285185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)89289489689890090210740 10760 10780 10800 10820 10840 10860 10880 10900 10920 10940Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 2B STA: 107+49 ‐108+02top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT3 Reach 2C STA 108+70 to 109+4785185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)88688889089289489610870 10890 10910 10930 10950 10970 10990 11010 11030 11050 11070Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 2C STA: 108+70 ‐109+47top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)88288488688889089210930 10950 10970 10990 11010 11030 11050 11070 11090 11110 11130Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 2C STA: 109+30 ‐109+47top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT3 Reach 4 STA 115+24 - 125+6185185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+24 ‐18+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)84684885085285485611800118501190011950120001205012100Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 118+00‐121+00topEWCL85185385585785986111500115501160011650117001175011800Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 115+64 ‐118+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)84684885085285485611800118501190011950120001205012100Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 118+00 ‐121+00 top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)
Harmon Dairy Stream Restoration ProjectLongitudinal Profile As-Built (MY0)UT3 Reach 4 STA 115+24 - 125+6184084284484684885012100121501220012250123001235012400Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 121+00 ‐124+00top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)XS 9XS1083583783984184384512400124501250012550126001265012700Elevation (ft)Station (ft)UT3 Reach 4 STA: 124+00 ‐125+61 top of bankedge of waterstreambed (thalweg)

Attachment D: Visual Assessment Photographs

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 1 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 1 view upstream Photo Point 1 view downstream

Photo Point 2 view upstream Photo Point 2 view downstream

Photo Point 3 view upstream Photo Point 3 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 2 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 4 view upstream Photo Point 4 view downstream

Photo Point 5 view upstream Photo Point 5 view downstream

Photo Point 6 view upstream Photo Point 6 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 3 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 7 view upstream Photo Point 7 view downstream

Photo Point 8 view upstream Photo Point 8 view downstream

Photo Point 9 view upstream Photo Point 9 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 4 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 10 view upstream Photo Point 10 view downstream

Photo Point 11 view upstream Photo Point 11 view downstream

Photo Point 12 view upstream Photo Point 12 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 5 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 13 view upstream Photo Point 13 view downstream

Photo Point 14 view upstream Photo Point 14 view downstream

Photo Point 15 view upstream Photo Point 15 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 6 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 16 view upstream Photo Point 16 view downstream

Photo Point 17 view upstream Photo Point 17 view downstream

Photo Point 18 view upstream Photo Point 18 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 7 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 19 view upstream Photo Point 19 view downstream

Photo Point 20 view upstream Photo Point 20 view downstream

Photo Point 21 view upstream Photo Point 21 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 8 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 22 view upstream Photo Point 22 view downstream

Photo Point 23 view upstream Photo Point 23 view downstream

Photo Point 24 view upstream Photo Point 24 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 9 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 25 view upstream Photo Point 25 view downstream

Photo Point 26 view upstream Photo Point 26 view downstream

Photo Point 27 view upstream Photo Point 27 view downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 10 of 10
As-Built Photographic Documentation (7/17/2019 and 8/29/2019)

Photo Point 28 view upstream Photo Point 28 view downstream

Photo Point 29 view upstream Photo Point 29 view downstream

Photo Point 30 view upstream Photo Point 30 view downstream

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 1 of 4
As-Built Cross-Section Survey Photographs (7/16/2019 -8/29/2019)

Cross Section 1 Facing Upstream Cross Section 1 Facing Downstream

Cross Section 2 Facing Upstream Cross Section 2 Facing Downstream

Cross Section 3 Facing Upstream Cross Section 3 Facing Downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 2 of 4
As-Built Cross-Section Survey Photographs (7/16/2019 -8/29/2019)

Cross Section 4 Facing Upstream Cross Section 4 Facing Downstream

Cross Section 5 Facing Upstream Cross Section 5 Facing Downstream

Cross Section 6 Facing Upstream Cross Section 6 Facing Downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 3 of 4
As-Built Cross-Section Survey Photographs (7/16/2019 -8/29/2019)

Cross Section 7 Facing Upstream Cross Section 7 Facing Downstream 

Cross Section 8 Facing Upstream Cross Section 8 Facing Downstream 

Cross Section 9 Facing Upstream Cross Section 9 Facing Downstream
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 4 of 4
As-Built Cross-Section Survey Photographs (7/16/2019 -8/29/2019)

Cross Section 10 Facing Upstream Cross Section 10 Facing Downstream

Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 1 of 2
As-Built Vegetation Monitoring Plots (7/16/2019 and 7/17/2019)

Vegetation Plot 1 Vegetation Plot 2

Vegetation Plot 3 Vegetation Plot 4

Vegetation Plot 5 Vegetation Plot 6
Harmon Dairy Stream Mitigation Project page 2 of 2
As-Built Vegetation Monitoring Plots (7/16/2019 and 7/17/2019)

Vegetation Plot 7

Attachment E: Vegetation Data

Harmon Dairy Vegetation Monitoroing: Permanent Vegetation Plots (PVP)Data Collected 7/16/2019 ‐ 7/17/2019Site Planted April 2019PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAlnus serrulata Tag Alder, Smooth Alder, Hazel Alder Shrub Tree1 1 11 1 12 2 2Cephalanthus occidentalisButtonbushShrub Tree333777222222111111161616Hamamelis virginianaWitch HazelShrub Tree111111111333Physocarpus opulifoliusNine‐barkShrub1 1 1111Platanus occidentalisSycamore, Plane‐treeTree111333111333111999Quercus michauxii Basket Oak, Swamp Chestnut OakTree 1 1 1222333Rhus glabraSmooth SumacShrub Tree11Salix nigraBlack WillowTree1212Salix sericeaSilky WillowShrub Tree111222111555999Spiraea latifoliaBroadleaf MeadowsweetShrub111111Unknown22255522222211111111114141433311111114141477744477201212125858712225556663333335577779911121 121 121 445 445 445 567 567 567 283 283 283 162 162 162 283 283 809 486 486 486 335 335 410Color KeyExceeds requirements by 10%Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%PVP 2PVP 3PVP 4PVP 5PVP 6Volunteer Stem10.0210.02Species countStems per ACRE10.0210.02size (ares)size (ACRES)10.021Current Plot Data (MY0 2019)Current Plot Data (MY0 2019)70.17Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%10.02PVP 7Annual SummaryMY0 (2019)Stem count0.02Scientific NameCommon NameSpecies TypePVP 1