20030299 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20100507

EEP Project Closeout Summary
Project ID and Status Project Setting and Background Project Timeline
Project Basin: Cape Fear Restoration Plan: February
Name: Forest Hills 2003
EEP ID: 139 Physiographic Construction
Region: Piedmont Complete: Jan 2005
County: Durham Ecoregion: Triassic Basin Monitoring Year 1: Sept 2005
Project Stream 14-Digit HUC: 03030002060120 Monitoring Year 2: Sept 2006
Type: Restoration
Current 5 years of NCDWQ Sub- 03-06-05 Monitoring Year 3: July 2007
Status: monitoring basin:
complete Thermal Regime: Warm Monitoring Year 4: July 2008
Trout Water: No Monitoring Year 5: July 2009
Designer: KCI Associates of North
Carolina
Monitoring: KCI
Robert J. Goldstein &
Associates
Table 1. Project Restoration Components and Mitigation Assets

C v ?+
Drainage/Hydrology Component c ° ? «
d
W a J =3 LL N
4-1 V a Q
After culvert under East Forest Hills Blvd at 10+00 to 1 P2 R 1.00 1.00 2,038 2,038
University Drive and Vickers Avenue 30+90
intersection to culvert under East Forest Hills
Boulevard
After culvert under East Forest Hills 31+48 to 2 P2 R 1.00 1.00 899 899
Boulevard to the southern edge of the 40+31
conservation easement east of Forestwood
Dr. and Wilshire Dr. intersection
Asset Summary
Level Feet SMU
R 2,937 2,937
'N,
71
C)IiqSI!M
to
0
Ilk'
46
-AL
'PA19 SIM Ts@JO--J Ise!]
low
4,7
J
11.0 -
AR:
41p-
plie si/!H Maio

H
O
O
Z
a
C
O
u
00
a`
CL
E
N
0)
i
3
00
U.
r
`

" F,? f
l
;
r ..
ea
i , rt ?

Tsy 3

la•}
J? ri ?
iTi
sr ,}Af

r `1')
,
f rK Yam I 1?I.R ?.. i
ijlk!

I Y
t
A? 'f,Ry( ; s ?''3 t 1 , Y !f

! tr =
rl
i j
r

i"e
?y t
s ?e

0 ' . to "

M
E
N
N
O
O
OD
C
Y
O
J
I
a
a
Lfl
O
O
N
r-I
}

bt my ?? yl t

a r
All

O
r-I
O
7
O
G1
N
O
U

ni
v
m
LL

m
N
IA
CL
D
Y
O
O
J
I
.-I
a
a
L!1
O
O
N
e--I
}
O
01
l"I
O
ar
7
O
v
N
O
U
i
N
CL
Y
O
O
J
I
CL
In
O
O
N
}
O
r•-I
01
r-1
O
7
O
4J
N
O
U
Ln
G
m
i
N
m
C
W
H
I
a
a
,? A f
W?1T?rPfSS ? t%'
• ? y i
r 7
O
O
N
l"
}

?^ ?Al" y?? P-
i
1 4
,
a
-s
t? pr

lox

r`4f ... `Cyr' ,a".
..
fl.
(444, ? '• [,
O
rn
O
7
O
v
a
O
U
0
0
N
c-I
}
2
0
rn
v
O
7
O
G!
N
O
U
l0
R
i
C
O
c
tw
C
Y
O
0
a
a
O
O
N
r-1
c}
G

I ..

"Air
r

O
r-I
rn
O
0
O
U
Channel Stability
Dimension
Repeat survey data indicates project X-sections have been characterized by some incision and also channel
narrowing. Despite the incision, grade control structures still rated at or above 95 % stable in the
monitoring year-5 visual assessment indicating overall project stability. Narrowing was due in part to the
success of stream bank vegetation (primarily Salix nigra and Corpus amomum). As the site has matured the
system has stabilized and these problems declined. Four X-sections were installed on the site during the as-
built survey and surveyed for all five monitoring years. The endpoints for X-sections three and four could
not be relocated in 2006 and new endpoints were established based on available data. Figure 5 shows the
change in channel appearance that occurred between Monitoring Years 1 and 5.
Figure 4. Annual X-Section Plots
Cape Fear River Basin, Third Fork Creel:, XS 1 (riffle)
300
299
298
29?
0
296
w
295 - -I th Year - 09104:08
294
As•budt
293
0 10 20 30 40 io
.tit.'YT7U1! 7 fi'Pf l

B ankfiill
-G--5 th f ear - 06;03 09
-3rd?iear-0' 16'0'
luA ?"ear - lU 2;'U6
_ ?- 1?•tlear-0?
7
Cape Fear River Basin, Third Fork Creel:, ZS 2 (pool)
'
98
_
297

'
96
ti _
'
9-;
c
_
'
94

W _ Banl fiill
--a-; th Year - 06'02 +09
293 4th Year - 09+04.08
-3rd Year-0';160-
2nd Year - 1023 U6
292 1stYear-0?

As-built
'
91
_
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
Cape Fear River Basin, "Third Fork Creel:, \S 3 (riffle)
204
293

'
91
_
O
NO
J-
'
w
289 ?
-4th Year - Un:'o?: US*

'_8S

zs-
0 10 20
30 40 50
Strrhon r f ? r,
Tx-section ends could not be relocated in 2006. Ends re-established based on available GIS data and
best professional judgment.

/

Battkfull
-3rd Year - U? 1G : 0?*
----_tul Year - 10 __ Ofi*
--- 1 ?t fear - U
8
Cape Fear River Basin, Third Fork Creek, ZS 4 (pool)
29;

94

?93 - -
9'
_ r
'91
' d
0
r 90
\ ?- 5th Year - 06102/09'
-4th Yeas - 09105/08'
?g) 3rd Year - 07116/07'

2nd Year- 101222/OG
1st Year - 06
As-built
' Sankfull
S,
_
0 10 20 30 40
Statlulr e .feet)
* X-section ends could not be relocated in 2006. Ends re-established based on available GIS data and
best professional judgment.
Figure S. X-Section 1 Photo MY 1 and MY 5
MY 1 (2005)
v
c
Lri C
? CL
c o
? N
? Uf
N
? !p
v >,
>- 'o
Co c
c 'c
O
o
Y_
C O
O E
2 a,
c
N m
f6 -C
Y T
7 ?
? L
C N
'Y L
f6 a,
OA U C
a, Q) m
-p
CO C
Q m
a, E
cu _r_
E m
0 0 3
v s o
C m O
a, a)
a m
L
W" E O W
a
X. m E +•
Y Q
O O
3 a D
Y o v
C -0
N -0 i
Y C - E
m m m
QJ
t tE6 > aLi
N 4v a
U Y O
E t O
• Y `
??+ t m a
0 W
al O Q
a`
O Y to
C a, v
0.4 >
m O E
C Ln O 3
7 ? V to
Y C
a0 Y 0
C m ip
o E >
m O`
O O. O. m 7
A w Q fl ii.

L I

r
U I
f0

0 llf
ll

4a
N
CL

i
I
j

7

i

I
1

00 r- I
?
a*, N N N
N N N
(100j) uO!Iena13
o I'
M
h
X
0
o
M .Q
V
J
O
N

O
N ? o
N
C ?
O
o
CIO
O ~
E N
m
N
O
a O
Y' N
O
O ?
0
0
? p
I O
O
N OO
N
a ?
3
0
_ O
3 N
O ? o
a ?
N .--. O I O
N N N

I

t I
V
f0
d

I
t0
W
s.

c
3
o
O
I
I
R
O
M
n
O
O e
M Z
U
v
E
C7
4
O 33
N ?

O
O c
N O
y? ? o
.a
O o
w
M
O ^
^ n
00
co
N N
O
O R \
O c
.-y
01
O

t
I O
O
O

In a+
O
3 0

0
OI
o
0
tn ?t M N -- O O? 00 (` "D kn 8
01 00 00 00 00 00
N N N N N N N N N N N
(lea]) uOi4ena13
r-I
ri
Substrate
The restoration plan (KCI Associates of NC, 2003) reported the existing median (d50) channel grain size
was medium sand (0.31mm and 0.41 mm in the upper and lower reaches, respectively) and that the
project design would not attempt to alter the caliber of bed material. Repeat pebble count data shows
median riffle particles have ranged from very fine sand to coarse sand and recent visual assessments
indicate sand bar formation, particularly in the upstream portion of the project. This is likely related to
eroding stream banks upstream of the restoration site.
Table 2. Riffle X-Section Substrate Means
X-Section MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Average
XS 1 0.06 0.04 0.36 0.04 0.04 0.11
Very fine Very fine Medium Very fine Very fine Very fine
sand sand sand sand sand sand
XS 3 0.49 6.27 0.76 0.76 0.06 1.67
Medium Fine gravel Coarse sand Medium Very fine Very coarse
sand sand sand sand
Status of Engineered Structures and Stream Bank Stability
Grade control structures at the site consisted of rock cross vanes and j-hooks, and overall the structures
were stable and functioning as intended. Due to upstream, off-site sources, the first three pools
associated with cross-vanes at the northern end of the project are filled with fine sediment. However
this condition is not considered a structural failure and the fine sediment may be expected to be
mobilized out of pools depending on future reach sediment balances. A few j-hook structures have
experienced backcutting but project structure stability rated at or above 95 % in the monitoring year 5
visual assessment (Figure 6).
Some stream bank scour and slumping has occurred along the project, however, as the channel shape
stabilized and riparian vegetation became more established this problem declined. During the last
evaluation, less than 5 % of the total bank length was identified as erosional. This amount of bank
erosion is considered a
with pre-project conditions (Figure 2).
Figure 6. Grade-control structure at confluence of leftbank tributary (04/15/10)
12
Bankfull Hydrology Data
Onsite observations and evaluation of a crest gauge installed on 13 June 2007, indicated that the site
experienced at least one bankfull event during each monitoring year, exceeding the success criteria of
two bankfull events in separate years over the five-year monitoring period. Table 3 outlines bankfull
verification for the site.
Table 3. Verification of Bankfull Events
Date of Data
Collection Date of Occurrence Method
16 July 2007 13 June 2007 (crest gauge installation date) -16 July Crest gauge evaluation; On-
2007 site high water indicators
CRONOS data suggest 14 June or 11 July 2007*
12 October 16 July 2007 -12 October 2007 Crest gauge evaluation; On-
2007 CRONOS data suggest 28 July, 15 August, or 23 site high water indicators
August 2007*
6 May 2008 12 October 2007 - 5 May 2008 Crest gauge evaluation; On-
CRONOS data suggest 4 March 2008 or 27-28 April site high water indicators
2008*
28 October 6 May - 28 October 2008 Crest gauge evaluation; On-
2008 CRONOS data suggest 5 July, 28 August, 6 site high water indicators
September, and 26 September 2008*
6 March 2009 29 October 2008 - 6 March 2009 Crest gauge evaluation; On-
CRONOS data suggests 2 March 2009* site high water indicators
17 July 2009 7 March 2009 -17 July 2009 Crest gauge evaluation; On-
CRO NOS data suggest 5 June and 10 June 2009* site high water indicators
Based on data from State Climate Office of North Carolina NC CRONOS database (http://www.nc-
climate.ncsu.edu/cronos/) for ECONET station DURH and CoCoRaHS station NC-DH-6.
Vegetative Performance
Planted buffer vegetation is successful along the project. All 8 vegetation monitoring plots exceeded
260 planted stems per acre in monitoring year 5 and had an average planted density of 829 stems per
acre. In Monitoring Year 2, the CVS-EEP protocol was adopted and revised vegetation monitoring plots
were established. Given that the data collected in MY1 was not comparable to data collected in later
years, it is not included in Table 4.
As outlined in the 2003 Restoration Plan, park utilization requirements dictated that the 30-foot riparian
buffer adjacent to the channel could be fully forested, but the next 20 foot wide strip was planted with
native grasses. Additional portions of the buffer adjacent to existing utilities needed to be left free of
woody vegetation. The conservation easement depicted in Figure 1 has an average riparian buffer width
of at least 50 feet.
A number of exotic invasive species have been identified on the site. Of particular concern were
Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) and Japanese hops (Humulus japonicas). The site was
initially treated for invasive species in 2008 and follow-up treatments are scheduled for 2010 and 2011.
13
Table 4. Planted Live Stem Counts per Acre by Monitoring Year and Plot
Monitoring
Year Vegetation Plot
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Average
1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
2 1,335 1,173 1,295 486 405 1,578 688 405 900
3 1,295 1,173 1,254 445 405 1,537 688 405 880
4 1,416 1,173 1,335 445 405 1,295 688 405 875
5 1,335 1,173 1,173 445 405 1,173 688 405 829
Project Goals, Outcomes, and Conclusions
This report summarizes the key information provided in the project's restoration plan, mitigation plan,
and monitoring reports. Further details can be found in those materials, which may be accessed on the
NCEEP website (http://www.nceep.net/eep_projects.html). According to the 2003 Restoration Plan, the
project's goals and objectives were to (a) restore a stable channel morphology capable of moving the
watershed's flows and sediment; (b) reduce sediment-related water quality impacts resulting from
lateral bank erosion and bed degradation; (c) improve aquatic habitat diversity by establishing a riffle-
pool bed variability and using in-stream structures; (d) restore a vegetative riparian buffer using native
plant species; and (e) improve natural aesthetics in an urban park setting.
Geomorphic data collected on site over the 5-year monitoring period indicated that the restoration
project has resulted in a stable channel and robust riparian buffer. Although longitudinal profile and X-
section plots indicate some initial downcutting, this has stabilized. Similarly, lateral movement of the
channel declined as stream bank vegetation has become more established. Overall, the site maintained
a riffle-pool morphology and most in-stream structures were stable and helped create a variety of
aquatic habitats. Sediment loading from upstream sources is apparent, but the project reaches have
generally been effective at transporting input material. Planted vegetation density at the site was
excellent and a native riparian buffer was well-established.
EEP considers the project to be functioning well and seeks regulatory closure on the assets detailed in
Table 1.
14
U aCi °o
Z

E y
?
nr
LU

r

FL-
N O

O Q
W Z
U
O N

d

O
_ o Y N ? «0
N a? o
`a
O m L
T
96 EZ+04
o
U ul 0-
v _
-
ti y 00+Oti

3 u
L J

I I .

o
N
m o?
0

E • 1

a
v ^T 09+6E o
O
C
R
V,
c C N
N
1Y
O

- O , 00+6£
a 0 M o
f :t
O O N m co 09+9E
CO Q (/) t0 p n
w OO+9E 3
? ?
? I
?
Lx, H .... 09+LE F !. I
\. .?
00+LE
A"
OS+9E
C
00+9E f'++;
09+SE
OS+EE
v
00+££ U
OS+ZE
00+ZE
OS+IE
00+1£
0 OE
00+0E

N N N N
?
? Q Q ? ? ?O
rn o?oQ
O] Q Q r rr
W N O T Q W u?c u??
W W c0 O r

C r N W
?
O N m Q
•- CO W I Q
W W O
N O
N Q W M N r- W H O M
N Q N W M r
O r M O W r
L
t"' ?O W
N MLL).- M O A N
rU]Nr Q O Q W W
ran O
O M W cp Q (O W N N W
M O Q? t0 Q
o
Z o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W P

O O O O
Q r N !?
O W V Q Q Q Q

W M m r O O 0 0 0 0
W ?- N O> r t0
N N W O? LL? r

N
Q m O N
O ?O O N O .- M (D
W ul O Ot O) M W O r r
N O r M
C W u7 M r W W W O W ?!] W W W W 0
_ N .- M T O O W Q? M N N W O a
N N ?O r N r r m ?O W W O? W W O O

w

N N 0 o o

0 ",
N N N
o N N N N
N I
;
yoea?j weaiisuMo4
= a o 00+9Z yoea?j weajis In

??n for W of R'
?'?J
O ol

N
O M M Q ?
L
> C] 0- 09+9z
i
d
a
d
3
O
PAIS SHIM ISOJoj ISe3
V

z
? N
R

}
.L ; W 1'

c

3: 0
o c) co a
v 2

a
?) o
v ? a •?
C ~ N o
a v) ? m

C
x O
a i J C
o ? o ,
o m

O E a,
N N
O
c
G O Q V 0 O

to
oo+zz
OS+LZ
OO+tZ
OS+OZ
Oo+oz
0S+6L
o0+6L
09+9L
00+9L
05+LL
00+LL
0S+9L
00+9L
OS+SL
00+9L
os+roL
oo+ot
09+EL
OS+ZL.' 111
oo+Z L
oS+LL e
oo+LL
00*LZ
rn
v
n`
O
DS+9Z
yoeab eaiisumoo
oo+9z goea?A weailsdn
oo+9z
09+4Z
00 4z
OS+EZ /
a
OS+ O
0
t
00+0L PA[a SII!H 1SOJOJ ise3
L
Z m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
O
C
W ? N rv N N N N rv rv rv rv rv N N N
a o rv
U o
N ? K ? N o
d ? rv n a m ^ rv rv n c m m? m
? o f o
> v `a