20180182 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_FINAL_20210216

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20180182 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 02/16/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal -2/16/2021
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* C' Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
rJ Stream 17 Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Kevin Tweedy [e-mail]
Project Information
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20180182 Version:*1
Existing ID## Existing Version
Project Type: r DMS C•' Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Red Barn Mitigation Bank
County: Surry
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Red Barn_MY1_FINAL.pdf 23.95MB
Rease upload only one R7Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Cidney Jones
Signature:*

Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, LLC
ECOSYSTEM 1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
Raleigh, NC 27511
PLANNING &
EPR RESTORATION Phone: [phone]
www.eprusa.net
Mr. Steve Kichefski
151 Patton Ave, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
January 19, 2021
RE: Final Monitoring Year 1 Report
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Surry County, North Carolina
SAW-2017-01927
Dear Mr. Kichefski,
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, PLLC (EPR) has prepared the Final Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1 (MY1) Report following the revised DMS Monitoring Guidance Templates
(released October 2020) and based on comments provided in the As-Built/MY0 credit release of the
Red Barn Mitigation Bank letter dated October 28, 2020.
As noted in the report, during MY1 most wetland gauges on the Site are not meeting the
hydroperiod performance criteria. EPR is evaluating options for the wetland mitigation crediting
and will not request the release of any wetland mitigation credits for MY1.
Additionally, EPR is in the process of releasing three areas from the recorded conservation
easement. These areas include a pedestrian crossing over UT2c where a pedestrian bridge will be
installed; a riffle crossing connecting the properties on either side of UT3c; and an area along the
property line of UT1a where leaving an existing fence will help protect the easement against
encroachment. These easement corners have been marked and the draft paperwork to release
them has been submitted USACE for review.
If you have any questions regarding the Monitoring Year 1 Report, please contact me at 919-999-
0262 or via email at [e-mail].
Sincerely, Kevin Tweedy, PE
-- ..- - Providing ecosystem planning and restoration services to support a sustainable environment - -

Year 1 Monitoring Report
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Surry County, North Carolina
Monitoring Year 1
Data Collection Period: Submission Date:
October 2020— November 2020 January 2021
ar? r r fi i� 4b
rY - '{ d i4e-g S•cw ,Y� / +F� F 1 1 b b�+,�e
" Y. r..0-'p: A iska;:A 1 1P F `1 •
• f � etc • }
h
,. ' .' ° ° mil'- ¢• -
.. r . .... -a te k- w k sr
.++. � #z 3Y � .� �lj odz�P e 4 fi o-u'"'_ � tamer,,. i �u $_
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01927
Prepared For: Prepared By:
US Army Corps of Engineers Ecosystem Planning and Restoration
Wilmington District 1150 SE Maynard Road, Suite 140
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 E P R Cary, NC 27511
Asheville, NC 28801

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 1
1.1 Goals and Objectives 2
1.2 Performance Criteria 2
2.0 MONITORING DATA ASSESSMENT 10
2.1 Stream Monitoring 10
2.1.1 Stream Dimension 10
2.1.2 Stream Profile 11
2.1.3 Channel Stability 11
2.1.4 Stream Hydrology 12
2.2 Riparian Vegetation Monitoring 13
2.2.1 Vegetation Monitoring Data 13
2.3 Wetland Monitoring 14
2.3.1 Wetland Hydrology Monitoring 14
2.3.2 Wetland Vegetation Monitoring 15
3.0 REFERENCES 17
TABLES
TABLE 1. PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES AND CREDITS 3
TABLE 2. SUMMARY: GOALS, PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS 6
TABLE 3. PROJECT ATTRIBUTE TABLE 9
FIGURES
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP 18
FIGURE 2. CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW (CCPV): OVERVIEW MAP 19
FIGURE 2A. CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW (CCPV): ASSET MAP 20
FIGURE 2B. CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW (CCPV): ASSET MAP 21
FIGURE 2C. CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW (CCPV): ASSET MAP 22
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina
rPR

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data
Tables 4a. through 4d. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Tables
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Photo Log
Vegetation Photo Log
Bankfull Evidence Photos
Stream Gauge Photo Log
Wetland Gauge Photo Log
Appendix B: Vegetation Plot Data
Tables 6a. through 6c. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Tables
Table 7a. through 7b. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Tables
Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross Section Plots with Annual Overlays
Tables 8a. through 8i. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 9. Monitoring Data - Cross-Section Monitoring Data Table
Appendix D: Hydrologic Data
Table 10. Stream Flow and Bankfull Event Verification
Figure 3. Monthly Rainfall Data
Precipitation and Water Level (Stream Flow and Groundwater) Hydrographs
Table 11. Wetland Hydrology Annual Summary
Appendix E: Project Timeline and Contact Information
Table 12. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 13. Project Contacts Table
Appendix F: Conservation Easement Annual Monitoring
Pre-Closeout Conservation Easement Annual Monitoring Form
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina
rPR

PROJECT SUMMARY
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration, PLLC (EPR) implemented the Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Site (Project; Site) to provide cool water thermal regime stream mitigation credits (SMCs) and
riparian wetland mitigation credits (WMCs) in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin, Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 03040101. The Project restored and enhanced 7,586 linear feet (LF) of three
perennial unnamed tributaries (UT) to Stewarts Creek, and one intermittent tributary to
Stewarts Creek. The three main perennial tributaries are referred to as "UT1", "UT2", and
"UT3", while the intermittent tributary is referred to as "UT4." The Project also created and
rehabilitated 3.67 acres of wetland hydrology by raising and reconnecting the restored stream
beds to an active floodplain to restore a stream-wetland complex within the 25.3-acre
conservation easement. Mitigation assets are listed in Table 1.
The Site is located in the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Division
of Mitigation Services (DMS) Targeted Local Watershed 03040101100010. The Project location
is shown in Figure 1. The Site was historically utilized for agricultural and cattle practices. As
such, wetlands and streams at the Site were adversely impacted by direct cattle access, farming
activities, and stream channelization. The Site is in a rural but developing area of Surry County.
Land use within the UT1 and UT2 watersheds is comprised of 37.3% pasture lands, 27.4%
deciduous forest lands, and 35.3% residential development. Land use within the UT3 watershed
is comprised of 49.2% cultivated crops and hay, 30.5%forest land, and 20.2% urban land, with
2.3% of the urban land being impervious. Prior to construction activities, all four Project
streams had either sustained significant cattle damage and/or had been channelized to
maximize agricultural production. The adjacent wetlands were drained by channelization of the
Project streams, and in the case of WA and WB, were also trampled heavily grazed by livestock,
and drained by multiple ditches. Pre-construction, or pre-existing, Site conditions are provided
in Table 3 (below) and in Table 8 (Appendix C). Photos and a more detailed description of Site
conditions before restoration are available in the Mitigation Plan (Final version submitted
November 2019).
This report references the revised As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report submitted in September
2020 to, and approved by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT) on October 28,
2020. The As-Built Monitoring Report approval letter notes that there are three areas within
the conservation easement that need to be released, and that cattle exclusion fencing and
signage needs to be installed at these locations. All cattle exclusion fencing and signage have
been installed at the Site; signs and fencing are shown in Appendix F. At this time, EPR has
provided a draft easement release to Unique Places to Save (UP2S) and the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) for review. Following review and comments on these draft
documents, the releases will be executed by the long-term steward (UP2S) and the landowners.
This process is expected to be resolved before the next monitoring report. The other issues
noted as concerns in the USACE letter dated October 28, 2020 are addressed in relevant
sections of this report.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rEPR Surry County,North Carolina
1

Goals and Objectives
The Project goals were established based on an assessment of Site conditions and restoration
potential, with careful consideration of the stressors identified in the Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee
River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) Report (NCEEP, 2009) and the NCDWQ Yadkin Pee-Dee
River Basin Plan Summary (2008). Goals and objectives are presented in Table 2.
Site construction was completed in March 2020 and the as-built survey was completed in May
2020. Planting occurred in March and April 2020. A detailed timeline of the Project activity and
reporting history are provided in Appendix E. Repair work was performed in July 2020 to move
the culvert on UT3 out of the easement and reconfigure the fencing and gates in this area. The
July repair work also included some minor grading, seeding, and matting to repair some
hillslope rilling adjacent to Reaches UT2b and UT3a that resulted from the large flood event
that occurred in April 2020.
Performance Criteria
Project success criteria were established in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—
Wilmington District Public Notice: Notification of Issuance of Guidance for Compensatory
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District (October 24, 2016).
Table 2 details the USACE success criteria that evaluate whether Project goals have been met
throughout the monitoring period. For more detailed success criteria, refer to the Final
Mitigation Plan or the As-built Baseline Monitoring Report.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina
2

Table 1. Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits
Original Original
Project Original Original
Mitigati As-built Mitigation Priority Mitigation
Component on Plan (ft/ac) Thermal Regime Restoration Level Mitigation Credits Notes/Comments
(reach ID,etc.) (ft/ac) Category Level Ratio(X:1)
UT1a 1567 1567 Cool R P1 1.00000 1567 Creditable length begins following utility
easement.
UT1b 538 538 Cool P1 0.00000 0 E channel through wetland may not maintain
high-water mark.
UT1c 688 688 Cool R P2 1.00000 688 Culverted crossing not included in mitigation
length.
UT2a 1186 1186 Cool R P1 1.00000 1186
Culverted crossing included in mitigation
UT2b 1011 1023 Cool R P2 1.00000 1023 length.Channel re-aligned during
construction to avoid bedrock.
UT2c 240 240 Cool El 1.50000 160 Pedestrian crossing not included in mitigation
length.
UT3a 1378 1378 Cool R P2 1.00000 1378 Culverted crossing not included in mitigation
length.
UT3b 190 190 Cool EI - 1.50000 127
UT3c 1087 1087 Cool R P1 1.00000 1087 Riffle crossing not included in mitigation
length.
UT3d 97 97 Cool E I I - 2.50000 39
UT4 134 130 Cool EI 1.50000 86 Jurisdictional point moved downstream
during construction.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina
3

Table 1. Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits (continued)
Original Original
Project Original Original
Mitigati As-built Mitigation Priority Mitigation
Component on Plan (ft/ac) Thermal Regime Restoration Level Mitigation Credits Notes/Comments
(reach ID,etc.) (ft/ac) Category Level Ratio(X:1)
Planted,excluded livestock,plugged ditches,
and encompasses section of Priority 2 reach.
Wetland A(WA) 1.400 0.830 0.830 RR 1.50000 0.55 There was a calculation error in the approved
mitigation plan that was revised in the As-
Built Monitoring Report.
Wetland B(WB) 2.400 1.030 1.030 RR 1.50000 0.69 Planted,excluded livestock,plugged ditches,
and encompasses section of Priority 2 reach.
Planted,excluded livestock,plugged ditches,
Wetland C(WC) 0.800 0.540 0.520 RR 1.50000 0.35 and encompasses section of Priority 2 reach.
Riffle crossing that is excluded from the
easement was relocated during construction.
Wetland Planted,excluded livestock,plugged ditches,
0.000 1.290 1.290 RR 3.00000 0.43
Creation and encompasses section of Priority 2 reach.
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Stream Credits Riparian Wetland Credits Non-Rip Wetland Coastal Marsh
Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 6929.000
Re-establishment
Enhancement
Enhancement I 373.000
Enhancement II 39.000
Rehabilitation 1.590
Preservation
Creation 0.430
Totals 7341.000 2.020
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rPR Surry County,North Carolina
K 4

Table 1. Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits(Continued)
Total Base SMCs 7341.000
Credit Loss in Required Buffer -238.490
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer 929.870
Net Change in Credit from Buffers 691.390
Total Adjusted SMCs* 8032.390
*Credit adjustment for Non-standard Buffer Width calculation using Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator(Updated 1/19/2019)
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rPR Surry County,North Carolina
K 5

Table 2. Goals, Performance and Results
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results
Uplift
• Reduce the amount of land in active • Recordation and
livestock pasture. protection of a Fence,gates,easement markings,and
Reduce • Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, conservation crossing signs have been installed.
sediment streams,and wetlands. easement meeting There has been a vehicle
inputs and • Increase distance between active USACE guidelines. encroachment causing no lasting
stream farming operations and receiving • Visual inspection of Visual Assessment damage on UT3 that has been
turbidity waters. fencing installed to Conducted yearly addressed with all parties.
• Restore riparian buffers to filter runoff. exclude cattle from throughout the easement.
• Stabilize eroding stream banks. the stream and Easement has been recorded.A draft
• Reduce the amount of land in active ' The exclusion of
livestock has riparian buffer, easement release for three areas has
livestock pasture. demonstrating no been submitted to USACE for review.
• Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, removed a direct
p source of nutrients, encroachment.
streams,and wetlands.
coliform,and
• Increase distance between active Permanent Vegetation
Reduce sediment from the farming operations and receiving Plots At the end of Monitoring minimum 30 Year 1,all
nutrient system,as well as a
waters. ft.buffers between 11 permanent vegetation but one(1)of the 11 permanent
inputs • Restore riparian buffers to filter runoff. major contributor plots,0.02 acre in size riparian vegetation plots have met the
p to channel Project streams and p g
• Decrease drainage of surrounding (minimum),surveyed success criteria of 320 native
instability.
restored/enhanced wetlands, agricultural and during As-built,Years 1,2, stems/acre in Year 3.Two(2) plots are
promotinghigher water table • Restored riparian 3,5,and 7 between 1st dominated bya single species.
g buffers will provide suburban land uses. July g p
conditions,and denitrification. ■ Vegetation success and leaf drop.Data Supplemental planting will be
woody debris and
• Reduce the amount of land in active detritus for aquatic criteria of 320 native collection includes species, performed before the next growing
livestock pasture. stems/acre in Year 3, height,planted vs. season.
Reduce • Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, organisms,reduced volunteer,and age.
water temperatures 260 native stems/acre
Fecal streams,and wetlands. and increased in Year 4 and 210
Coliform • Increase buffer widths between active dissolved oxygen native stems/acre in
Inputs farming operations and receiving Year 7. Annual Random Vegetation
concentrations,as Plots
waters. well as shade to the ' Trees must average 7
• Restore riparian buffers to filter runoff. feet in height at Year 10 randomly selected Nine(9)out of the 10 randomly
stream resources.
• Restore riparian buffer vegetation to 5,and 10 feet in vegetation plots,0.02 acre selected vegetation plots met the
filter runoff and provide organic matter height at Year 7. in size(minimum), success criteria for stem density in
Restore/ and shade. • Any single tree species surveyed during As-built, MY1.Five(5)plots are dominated by a
Enhance • Rehabilitate existing riparian wetlands can only account for Years 1,2,3,5,and 7 single species.Supplemental planting
Degraded and decrease drainage of created 50%of the required between July 1st and leaf will be performed before the next
Riparian riparian wetland areas. stems per monitoring drop.Data collection growing season.
Buffers • Protect riparian buffers,streams,and plot. includes species and
wetlands with a permanent height.
conservation easement.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rEPR Surry County,North Carolina
6

Table 2. Goals, Performance and Results
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results
Uplift
■ Restore minimum 30-foot riparian Stream Profile A full longitudinal survey of the
Reduce buffers between suburban homes and Full longitudinal survey on Project streams was conducted during
Urban/ all restored and enhanced
receiving waters. As-built monitoring.No signs of
Suburban • All streams must stream channels.Data
Stormwater • Protect riparian buffers,streams,and maintain an Ordinary were collected during As instability or degradation were noted
Runoff wetlands with a permanent High Water Mark built survey only(unless during MY1 monitoring,so a new
conservation easement. (OHWM),per RGL 05- otherwise required). profile was not surveyed.
05.
■ Riparian buffers and • Bank height ratio Cross Sections
P g The Year 1 monitoring cross-section
wetlands will (BHR)cannot exceed Cross sections are surveyed
• Restore stream channels with during Years 1,2,3,5,and 7. survey indicates that the Project
appropriate dimension,pattern,and provide diverse 1.2 for all measured streams are geomorphically and
stable
profile. aquatic and cross sections on a 18 total cross sections. some restored reaches have aggraded
terrestrial habitatsgiven reach. 5 cross sections on UT1,
• Install in-stream structures to provide slightly during Monitoring Year 1.Due
that are appropriate •■ Entrenchment ratio 6 cross sections on UT2, to small channel dimensions,the Due
Reduce stream channel and stream bank 6 cross sections on UT3,
for the ecoregion (ER)must be 2.2 or
Stream stability. gand change in BHR occurs with small
Channel and • Restore riparian buffer to provide bank and setting. above for all adjustments in dimensions.
Stream Bank protection and stability. • The addition of in- measured riffle cross- 1 cross sections on UT4
Instability • Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, stream structures sections for C/E
streams,and wetlands. helps to ensure stream types and 1.4 Stream photo points and visual
• Protect riparian buffers,streams,and channel stability or above for B stream Visual Assessment assessment indicate that all restored
wetlands with a permanent and will provide types. Conducted yearly on all streams are in good condition and
conservation easement. greater bedform • BHR should not restored stream channels. performing as intended.No significant
diversity,enhancing change by more than stream problem areas were observed.
aquatic habitat for 10%in any given year
native species. for a majority of a
given reach. Additional Cross Sections No instability was documented during
• Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, • Documentation of Only surveyed if instability
streams,and wetlands. four bankfull events in is documented during MY1 monitoring,so no additional
Improve • Restore stream channels with different years monitoring. cross sections were surveyed.
Aquatic appropriate dimension,pattern,and throughout the
Habitat profile. monitoring period.
• Install in-stream structures to provide Bankfull events were documented on
improved aquatic habitat. Visual Assessment all Project streams for this monitoring
Photos of Flood Indicators
year.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rEPR Surry County,North Carolina
7

Table 2. Goals, Performance and Results
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results
Uplift
• Documentation of 30 Stream Hydrology
days of consecutive Monitoring• gauge a data from MY1 indicate
• Raise and reconnect the restored Wetland hydrology stream flow in all 7 pressure transducers and g g
and in-channel that all Project streams met the
stream beds to an active floodplain. reaches each a rain gauge will record established success criteria of 30 days
• Decrease drainage of hydraulics have monitoring year. precipitation and y
been improved by or more of consecutive flow
restored/enhanced wetlands, ■ All wetland areas must streamflow data throughout the year.
restoring Project g
promoting higher water table maintain a continuously through the
Improve conditions,and denitrification. channels to their hydroperiod of 10%of monitoring period.
Wetland • Exclude livestock from riparian buffers, historic valley, the growingseason,as
p Wetland Hydrology
Function raising the
streams,and wetlands. defined from April 8 to Only streambeds,and Monitoringone well located in WC met the
• Protect riparian buffers,streams,and connecting them to October 26(USDA 9 pressure transducers and hydroperiod performance criteria for
wetlands with a permanent 2007) a rain gauge will record growing season 2020.No wetland
conservation easement. adjacent wetlands • Wetland creation
at lower flows. precipitation and water mitigation credits are requested for
• Restore wetland vegetation. areas must document surface elevation data release for MY1 as EPR evaluates
the development of continuously through the wetland resources onsite.
hydric soil indicators. monitoring period.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
EPR Surry County,North Carolina
8

Table 1. Project Attribute Table
Project Background Information
Project Name Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
County Surry County
Project Area(acres) 25.3
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude) 36.489800,-80.641100
Planted Acreage(Acres of Woody Stems Planted) 22.2
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin Yadkin Pee-Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040101 USGS Hydrologic 3040101100010
8-digit Unit 14-digit
Project Drainage Area(Acres and Sq.Mi.) 233.1 acres/0.47 Sq.Mi.
Project Stream Thermal Regime Cool
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 1%
CGIA Land Use Classification Pasture(22.5%),Forest(27.3%),Residential (21.3%),
Cropland(17.4%),Urban(7%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters UT1 UT2 UT3 UT4
Length of reach(linear feet) 2255 2449 2752 130
Valley confinement(Confined,
moderately confined,unconfined) Unconfined Unconfined Confined Confined
Drainage area(Acres and Square Miles) 47.4 acres/0.05 sq. 93.23 acres/ 82.21 acres/0.25 10.22 acres/0.02
mi. 0.15 sq.mi. sq.mi. sq.mi.
Perennial,Intermittent,Ephemeral Perennial Perennial/ Perennial Intermittent
Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality Classification N/A
Stream Classification(existing) B5 B5/F5 B/G5,B4c,and F4 B5
Stream Classification(proposed) C5b/C5 C5/B5c B4/B4c/C4 B4c
Evolutionary trend (Simon) Stage 2/5 Stage 2/5 Stage 3-5 Stage 5
FEMA classification AE/X AE/X AE/X X
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Docs?
Water of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Nationwide Permit No.27 ID#SAW
2017-01927
Water of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes DWQ 401 Water Quality Certification No.4134
-ID#18-0182
Division of Land Quality(Erosion and General Permit NCG010000-ID#SURRY-2020-
Sediment Control) Yes Yes 015
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Appendix 5 in Mitigation Plan
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes
Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA or No N/A
CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Yes Surry County Zoning Permit approved
8/23/2019
Essential Fisheries Habitat No - N/A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site
Year 1 Monitoring Report
rEPR Surry County,North Carolina
9

MONITORING DATA ASSESSMENT
Monitoring Year 1 (MY1) data were collected in October and November 2020. Current Site
conditions and monitoring data were described in the following sections to evaluate whether
the Project is meeting the success criteria established in Mitigation Plan (Final version
submitted November 2019).
Stream Monitoring
Stream monitoring involves field data collection to assess the hydrologic, hydraulic, and
geomorphic functions of UT1, UT2, UT3 and UT4. Monitored parameters, methods,
schedule/frequency, and extent are summarized in Table 2. These monitoring parameters
follow USACE guidance, but will also allow for monitoring of other parameters to document Site
performance related to the Project goals listed in Table 2. The locations of the established
monitoring cross sections are shown in Figure 2 Current Condition Plan View (CCPV).
2.1.1 Stream Dimensior.
Eighteen (18) permanent cross sections were installed across the Site; 5 on UT1, 6 on UT2, 6 on
UT3, and 1 on UT4. Nine (9) cross sections were installed in riffles and 9 were installed in pools.
Each cross-section was marked using a length of rebar and T-posts on both streambanks. The
location and elevation of each pin facilitates data comparison from year to year. Cross-sections
were surveyed using a Topcon RL-H5A Self Leveling Laser Level. Reported data include
measurements of Bankfull Elevation (consistent with the Baseline As-Built Report), Bank Height
Ratio (BHR), Low Top of Bank (LTOB) Elevation, Thalweg Elevation, LTOB Max Depth, LTOB
Cross-Sectional Area, and Entrenchment Ratio (ER). BHR measurements were made using the
DMS Cross-Section Tool by holding the bankfull area recorded in the Baseline As-built report
constant and adjusting the bankfull elevation. All other geomorphic measurements were made
by maintaining a constant benchmark bankfull elevation as recorded in the Baseline As-built
report. Reference photos were taken of both streambanks to provide a visual assessment of
any changes that occurred.
The Year 1 monitoring cross-section survey indicates that the Project streams are
geomorphically stable and restored channel dimensions have not changed significantly during
Monitoring Year 1. Stream cross-sections showed only minor fluctuations compared to the As-
built condition. Six cross-sections did not meet the performance criteria as established in the
Mitigation Plan and shown in Table 2:
• Cross-section 7, riffle on UT2a the BHR was reduced by 16%.
• Cross-section 8, pool on UT2b the BHR was reduced by 14%.
• Cross-section 11, riffle on UT2c the BHR and ER were both reduced by 19%.
• Cross-section 12, riffle on UT3a the ER was reduced by 15%.
• Cross-section 18, riffle on UT4 the BHR was reduced by 21%.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 10
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina

These results are largely due to the small size of the channels where small adjustments
(generally 0.1 foot) lead to larger changes in the calculated BHR and ER values. However, there
is evidence of some aggradation within reaches UT2c, UT3a, and UT4 (Cross-sections 11, 12,
and 18, respectively). Within these reaches, sandy hillslopes that were exposed during
construction to frequent rainfall events have led to some deposition within the channel and
floodplain. EPR does not expect the aggradation to continue and cause instabilities; conditions
within these reaches will be monitored to determine whether adaptive management is needed.
The cross-section plots, photos, and data summary (Table 9) are included in Appendix C.
L.1.: Stream Profile
A full longitudinal profile was surveyed in May 2020 for the entire length of the restored stream
to document as-built conditions. This survey is tied to a permanent benchmark and includes
thalweg, water surface, right bank and left bank features. Profile measurements were taken at
the head of features (e.g. riffle, pool) and at the max depth of pools.
The longitudinal profile will not be surveyed during annual monitoring unless vertical channel
instability has been observed during monitoring and remedial actions or repairs are needed.
..1.3 Channel Stability
Channel stability is assessed on a yearly basis using photographs to visually document the
condition of the restored Project streams. Photographs are taken from the same location in the
same direction each year. Thirty-two (32) photo points were established during baseline
monitoring and are shown in the CCPV (Figure 2). Visual assessments of channel stability and in-
stream structure condition were also made regularly throughout Monitoring Year 1.
Stream photo points and visual assessment indicate that all restored channels and in-stream
structures are in good condition and performing as intended. No significant stream problem
areas were observed. Minor floodplain rilling along the floodplain for UT1 Reach 1 that was
noted after construction has stabilized and these areas are vegetated with dense herbaceous
vegetation.
Areas of concern specifically noted during the NCIRT site meeting on June 10, 2020 are
discussed below:
• As shown in photo point 19 in Appendix A, the pedestrian bridge has been installed.
Photo point 26 shows the riffle crossing on UT3c. Both crossings are clearly marked with
easement signs and no encroachments were noted surrounding these crossings in this
monitoring year.
• Photo Point 10 has been revised to include photos facing both downstream (10A) and
upstream (10B). This area is maintaining a sand bed channel with OHWM. While the
area is shaded by established canopy, vegetated ground cover is establishing.
• There is concern about the potential for flow to form an alternate flow path around the
large bend of UT1a, in the vicinity of Cross-section 2. The ground cover in this area is
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 11
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina

dense, as shown in the photos for Cross-section 2 and nearby Photo Point 4. Field
investigations in this area did not find any alternate flow paths or significant erosion in
the floodplain.
2.1.4 Stream Hydrology
Two (2) pressure transducers were installed on UT1, UT2 and UT3, and one pressure transducer
was installed on UT4 (for a total of 7 stream gauges) to document stream flow and the
occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period. The locations of these gauges are
shown in the CCPV (Figure 2). Gauges were installed in the downstream end of pools. The
constructed bankfull elevation at each gauge was recorded, as well as the elevation of the
downstream controlling grade (thalweg elevation at the head of riffle). These elevations were
compared with the gauge readings to determine whether the stream is flowing and if a bankfull
event has occurred. Photos were taken of flood indicators such as debris lines and sediment
deposition on the floodplain whenever it is apparent that a bankfull event has occurred.
A tipping bucket rain gauge was also installed and maintained to accurately document rainfall
at the Site. The rainfall data were compared to the flow gauge data to verify that high flows at
the Site were correlated with rainfall events. The monitoring gauges were downloaded
regularly throughout Monitoring Year 1 (MY1) and rainfall data are presented in the flow gauge
plots in Appendix D. Note that while May, June, and July saw a statistically lower than normal
amount of rainfall than normal, the following three months of August, September, and October
saw rainfall amounts that were above normal.
Flow gauge data from MY1 indicate that all Project reaches met the established success criteria
of 30 days or more of consecutive flow throughout the year. The upstream end of UT2a and
UT4 are both intermittent, while UT1c is a restored reach that is expected to be intermittent.
All gauges except SG2 on UT1c recorded continuous flow during the sampling period. SG2 was
dry on the day it was downloaded and shows that while baseflows were documented between
April —June, starting in July the gauge began to go dry; baseflows returned within UT1c in
December 2020. A short stretch of UT1c below the culvert but upstream of the SG2 location
was dry during the NCIRT site meeting on June 10, 2020, even though there was water in the
channel observed at SG2. The following will be performed as adaptive management:
• EPR will move SG 2 from its current location to the first pool downstream of the culvert.
The location and data for this gauge will be provided in the next monitoring report.
This year marks the first year of monitoring and evidence of a bankfull event in this monitoring
year is provided in Appendix D. There were 21 rainfall events that caused some out-of-bank
flows at the Site in the monitoring year. Storms flooded the entire Site on April 13, 2020 and
November 11, 2020; and Hurricane Zeta (October 29, 2020) also registered bankfull events at
all 7 stream gauges. These three large events were the only bankfull events for the stream
gauge on UT3a (SG7); other rainfall events were approximately 0.1 feet shy of inundating the
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 12
}} - Year 1 Monitoring Report
1 Surry County,North Carolina

floodplain. Bankfull events were further documented by photographs of other flood indicators,
which are also provided in Appendix D. The date and timing of these bankfull events correlated
with significant rainfall events recorded by the tipping bucket rain gauge.
Note that most of the gauges show an increase in baseflow when comparing the May-July
period of record to the August-October period. UT4 is such a small channel that this shift led to
frequent exceedance of the bankfull elevation at this gauge. Gauge maintenance is performed
when data are downloaded. While this gauge was not found buried, EPR will continue to
monitor conditions and may need to re-install or move this gauge due to the very small depth
of UT4.
Riparian Vegetation Monitoring
Riparian vegetation monitoring evaluates the growth and establishment of planted and
volunteer vegetation across the Site. Monitored parameters, methods, schedule/frequency,
and extent are summarized in Table 2. These monitoring parameters follow USACE guidance,
but will also allow for monitoring of other parameters to document Site performance related to
the Project goals listed in Table 2.
Note that there are 11 permanent vegetation plots and 10 random vegetation plots for the Site.
Wetland vegetation monitoring is reported separately in Section 2.3 of this report.
.2.1 Vegetation Monitoring Date
Six (6) permanent vegetation monitoring plots were established across the Site (Plot numbers 1,
2, 6, 8, 10, and 11). The corners of the permanent vegetation plots were marked using steel t-
posts and the location of each plot was surveyed during the as-built survey. The individual trees
within each permanent plot were tagged and identified to facilitate annual monitoring. In
addition to 6 permanent plots, 7 randomly placed vegetation plots are established each year
and the location of these plots is recorded using a GPS. This year there are 8 random riparian
vegetation plots (Plot numbers 12, 131, 15, and 17—21). All vegetation plots for MY1 are shown
in the CCPV (Figure 2). Table 5 in Appendix A summarizes the results of a visual review of the
conservation easement, mapping bare areas, areas of low stem density, invasive species, or
easement encroachments.
Year 1 vegetation monitoring occurred in November 2020 before leaf drop and more than 180
days after planting. Annual vegetation data are compiled and summarized using the DMS
Vegetation Data Entry Tool in Appendix B. Planted stem counts for each plot ranged from 5
trees per plot (202 trees per acre) in VP-20 to 16 trees per plot (648 trees per acre) in VP-8. The
average density of planted stems from all 14 riparian vegetation plots (permanent and random)
was 11 trees per plot (428 trees per acre). All but VP-20 are meeting the interim success criteria
for stem density for Monitoring Year 1. For multiple vegetation plots, a single species (primarily
1 Plot 13 was intended to be a wetland vegetation plot and is near wetland A but not within,therefore there are 8
random riparian vegetation plots and only 2 random wetland plots this year.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 13
Year 1 Monitoring Report
EPR Surry County,North Carolina

sycamore, but willow oak was dominant in two plots on UT3) exceeds 50% of the stems in the
plot. Riparian herbaceous vegetation that was either undisturbed during construction, or
established after construction, is flourishing throughout the Site, and is shading the saplings.
• No specific problem areas are identified, but supplemental planting will be performed
throughout the Site before the next growing season. Supplemental planting with larger
bare root stock will focus on increasing species diversity and stem density throughout
the Site.
Invasive species vegetation were absent from monitoring plots. There was no evidence of
significant invasive plant growth or establishment. Some scattered multiflora rose and Chinese
privet was noted in very small amounts around the Project, and these will be spot treated as
necessary during Monitoring Year 2. There was also one small patch of bamboo noted in the
easement area along UT1. This will be cut and treated before the 2021 growing season.
The other permanent vegetation plots are located in wetlands and described in Section 2.3.2.
Wetland Monitoring
Wetland monitoring includes monitoring of the hydrologic functions and the growth and
establishment of planted and volunteer vegetation within WA, WB, WC, and the wetland
creation area. Monitored parameters, methods, schedule/frequency, and extent are
summarized in Table 2. These monitoring parameters follow USACE guidance, but will also
allow for monitoring of other parameters to document Site performance related to the Project
goals listed in Table 2.
..3.1 Wetland Hydrology Monitorinf
Two (2) pressure transducers were installed in WA, 2 were installed in WC, 3 pressure
transducers were installed in WB, and 2 were installed in the wetland creation area to
document hydroperiod at the Site during monitoring. The locations of these wetland gauges are
shown in the CCPV (Figure 2). Groundwater levels were recorded throughout the growing
season at 6-hour intervals. According to the Soil Survey of Surry County, the growing season is
from April 8 to October 26 (USDA 2007). The period of record for the 2020 growing season at all
wetland wells was from April 9, 2020 to October 28, 2020.
A tipping bucket rain gauge was also installed and maintained to accurately document rainfall
at the Site. The rainfall data were compared to the groundwater gauge data to verify that high
water levels at the Site were correlated with rainfall events. The monitoring gauges were
downloaded regularly throughout the monitoring year and data are presented in Appendix D.
Water level gauge data from MY1 indicate that only 1 (WG8) of the 9 wetland gauges met the
established success criteria of maintaining a hydroperiod of 10% of the growing season, as
defined from April 8 to October 26 (10% of 201 days is 20 consecutive days). WG8 is located in
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 14
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina

the center of Wetland WC, which is the groundwater fed wetland and the gauge documented
165 days of the growing season that water was within 12 inches of the ground surface
(saturated) and a maximum of 57 consecutive days. WG9 was placed at the upstream edge of
wetland C, per request by NCDWR in their comments on the mitigation plan, but due to GPS
inaccuracies, was mistakenly installed just outside the jurisdictional wetland boundary.
• EPR will move WG9 into WC before the 2021 growing season begins.
The wells within WB (WG5, 6 and 7) all show spikes in the water level following rain events,
that continue to keep the ground saturated following the precipitation, but failed to meet the
hydroperiod success criteria. These wells showed 38 to 53 days saturated within the growing
season, but the hydroperiod ranged from 7 to 12 days.
The four remaining wells, in WA and the wetland creation areas, exhibit very flashy
hydrographs and little to no retention following a rain event. The wells were saturated for 6 to
19 days during the growing season with hydroperiods of only 2 to 3 days.
• EPR is evaluating options for the wetland mitigation crediting and is not requesting the
release of any wetland mitigation credits for MY1.
Wetland Vegetation Monitoring
Five permanent vegetation monitoring plots were established across the Site wetlands (Plots
numbered 3, 4, 5, 7, and 9). The corners of the permanent vegetation plots were marked using
steel t-posts and the location of each plot was surveyed during the as-built survey. The
individual trees within each permanent plot were tagged and labeled to facilitate annual
monitoring efforts. In addition to the 5 permanent plots, 3 randomly placed vegetation plots
are established each year and the location of these plots is recorded using a GPS. This year
there are 2 random riparian vegetation plots (Plot numbers 14 and 16).2 All vegetation plots for
MY1 are shown in the CCPV (Figure 2).
Year 1 vegetation monitoring occurred in November 2020 before leaf drop and more than 180
days after planting. Annual vegetation data are compiled and summarized using the DMS
Vegetation Data Entry Tool in Appendix B. Planted stem counts for each plot ranged from 7
trees per plot (283 trees per acre) in VP-5 to 15 trees per plot (607 trees per acre) in VP-9. The
average density of planted stems from all 7 vegetation plots (permanent and random) was 11
trees per plot (457 trees per acre). All but VP-5 are meeting the interim success criteria for stem
density for Monitoring Year 1. For multiple vegetation plots, a single species (sycamore)
exceeds 50% of the stems in the plot. Riparian herbaceous vegetation that was either
undisturbed during construction, or established after construction, is flourishing throughout the
Site, and is shading the saplings.
2 Plot 13 was intended to be a wetland vegetation plot and is near wetland A but not within,therefore there are 8
random riparian vegetation plots and only 2 random wetland plots this year.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 15
Year 1 Monitoring Report
EPR Surry County,North Carolina

• No specific problem areas are identified, but supplemental planting will be performed
throughout the Site before the next growing season. Supplemental planting with larger
bare-root stock will focus on increasing species diversity and stem density throughout
the Site.
Invasive species vegetation were absent from monitoring plots. There was no evidence of
significant invasive plant growth or establishment. Some scattered multiflora rose and Chinese
privet was noted in very small amounts around the Project, and this will be spot treated as
necessary during Monitoring Year 2.
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 16
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina

REFERENCES
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2008. Yadkin Pee-Dee Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. Wilmington District Public Notice: Notification of Issuance
of Guidance for Compensatory Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for
Wilmington District.
USDA. 2007. Soil Survey of Surry County, North Carolina. United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site 17
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Surry County,North Carolina

y 'r hiernorn1 -r. 4.
p
1 Par;
I sr
TrI
' m * 1i. Qp �7hY7i
F d� ;i 57, H • .,a0
J SURRY COUNTY �� ?*
j }1 7
2 r'. Rrre r de
• b
I Pad.
1 a ky b f '
'"" .. ., d
L ��f� ' 1nde9el`d�Ce SW N l Oak St $�
Site Coordinates "a`d'�5 e°ur �� 4'
0 CustornGolf • -_=1At pine St tioasr
36.4898 °N a.4 Center r Old '�a e' Pt-Ps", IIAtAIry
p off.. st -.--
G 80.6411 °W 7 7r Rcd i s
gt
s
m Oak RrdgeQ tYk t'-`� ` la jlv+fS'P/ "o
0 1.0 ii sr
•
9
w @‘ 8t4ernant Rd N u `Sr
N
4tl Brush Rd
cau
6V orIh St
N.
S.
Wed..
Z
ry Q6 34O
di
Mlle
FStl7 yCr ParkAiryi y O y` t � ryr
p 1 44
A
*C 4)•
l Can& i
Wae v
Rd h
PirteY1EW orwt
d ❑
Carter 5t C
a , par
G` pe Chondirr. Rp � mih''Os
4
-o
n
6
"' q 3
0 Scott guet-d Rns Craek
Legend `k
'�Ey� �s o
Conservation Easement '" �ek;,1nc "� x
RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE PREPARED BY:
0 1,500 3,000 ECOSYSTEM
Feet PLANNING &
VICINITY MAP
EPP RESTORATION
FIGURE 1 SURRY COUNTY, NC JAN 2021

ice. 7 ar. rm., _.. izzill.
F
rj 4, S. i
•Y{ .. 3 -, - �, -•• ,f Tit;y Y I'd
r�
l - .. '; s
4,7
r. , 1: i i'
�.— FIG RE ';
`,,
I I
- 6bc. • - , .5. �''"'I '1—
J '
', • •,'
•
hr ' J
1y _ r1
FF'GUR' '.0
f i�. .
41 - .
`r� ry f
Photo Points Cross Section Vegetation Plots Monitoring Gauges
- Gates Wetland - Creation Fixed Plot-Successful • Baro Gauge
I— E Fencing .... Wetland - Existing Fixed Plot- Unsuccessful ® Rain Gauge
Project Streams Structures Random Plot-Successful ® Stream Gauge
Conservation Easement Top of Bank Random Plot- Unsuccesful • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
0 300 600 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: OVERVIEW MAP PLANNING&
1 inch=600 feet MY 1: 2020 EPR RESTORATION
FIGURE 2 SURRY COUNTY, NC JAN 2021

e
�1,;•; — . _rt Bamboo to be treated in Winter 2020 b
U T1 a -
X
4
XS2— VPR12 3 0 I
E�-- VPF1
VPF2 SG1
Xp / kt.,. t • Jo
,. :_ . , „,. ,
PR13
, . .
„; -k ,..
. ., _.
, , _
_.,N-
WA • .x. _ L'
•
'I' 1 VPF3':
UT1b •
i• f ,., I.
WG3•• •� a
4 i
RAIN GA E(1) 41
• r 0 r
r .
.
•,- • A
-" "ram t,om
R XS4
. 2� • G4 WB
XS5
emir W.GS
0 Photo Points — — Cross Section Vegetation Plots Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation Fixed Plot-Successful • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
Fencing Wetland - Existing Fixed Plot- Unsuccessful ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Random Plot-Successful ED Stream Gauge Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement Random Plot- Unsuccesful • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
o 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP PLANNING&
1 inch=200 feet MY 1: 2020 APR RESTORATION
FIGURE 2A SURRY COUNTY, NC JAN 2021

is •
I-R,• XS4 ..
2 WG4 WB - '
•
XS5 • ,
UT1 c WG5 .:...
WG6 • - .
14
--XS9 ,.:./ •:,. ..XS7SG3 V.1311
10430E
\13 + VPF6
�.. WG7
VPR1 11 .
0 VPF7. ... -
10 _ XS6
I ® UT2a
Et I - UT2b �, 'i
18
,i .
SG4 VPF8 k :4
UT2c -X,.1 _��_
Pedestrian Crossing
®VPR1: •
;
3 0
`1 �k
29 •f ;s. 7
XS1
i c_
UT3d 1.'
r 4
wc8 •' :-
UT3c �... •vv_ 4411
_. :
, lass f i .j '4
0 Photo Points Cross Section Vegetation Plots Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation N. Fixed Plot-Successful • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
Fencing Wetland - Existing Fixed Plot- Unsuccessful ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Random Plot-Successful ED Stream Gauge Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement Random Plot- Unsuccesful • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
o 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP PLANNING&
1 inch=200 feet MY 1: 2020 APR RESTORATION
FIGURE 2B SURRY COUNTY, NC JAN 2021

•
'
�.. it 4+11 _}
WC • %
._
r
► A , '
,,
ii .WGs i.
D • BA - 4
it
XS16 Riffle Crossing #
SG5®
WG9 . VPF10 lir AR.
UT3c ® �y
0 UT4
,XS15
UT3b / S A Conservation Easement
XS141 31 Va. Encroachment Area
33 G6 Sitl SG7 XiS13 •
® I
VPR19
OD
l UT3a VPF11
t . . r ,/ WD
• 4 7
• i Jlti
a - • r
0 Photo Points Cross Section Vegetation Plots Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation N. Fixed Plot-Successful • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
Fencing Wetland - Existing Fixed Plot- Unsuccessful ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Random Plot-Successful ED Stream Gauge Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement Random Plot- Unsuccesful • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
0 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP PLANNING&
1 inch=200 feet MY 1: 2020 APR RESTORATION
FIGURE 2C SURRY COUNTY, NC JAN 2021

Appendix A
Visual Assessment Data
Tables 4a. through 4d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Tables
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Photo Log
Vegetation Photo Log
Bankfull Evidence Photos
Stream Gauge Photo Log
Wetland Gauge Photo Log

Table 4a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT1
Reach ID UT1
Assessed Stream Length (ft) 2793
Assessed Bank Length (ft) 5586
Number Total Amount of % Stable,
Major Channel Category Metric Stable, Number in Unstable Performing
Performing As-built Footage as Intended
as Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor 0 100%
Bank growth and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears
Toe Erosion likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, 0 100%
or collapse
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 52 52 100%
grade across the sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence
Bank Protection does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in 33 33 100%
DMS monitoring guidance document)
Appendix A ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Table 4b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT2
Reach ID UT2
Assessed Stream Length (ft) 2449
Assessed Bank Length (ft) 4898
Number Total Amount of % Stable,
Major Channel Category Metric Stable, Number in Unstable Performing
Performing As-built Footage as Intended
as Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor 0 100%
Bank growth and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears
Toe Erosion likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, 0 100%
or collapse
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade 42 42 100%
across the sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence
Bank Protection does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in 38 38 100%
DMS monitoring guidance document)
Appendix A ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Table 4c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT3
Reach ID UT3
Assessed Stream Length (ft) 2792
Assessed Bank Length (ft) 5584
Number Total Amount of % Stable,
Major Channel Category Metric Stable, Number in Unstable Performing
Performing As-built Footage as Intended
as Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor 0 100%
Bank growth and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears
Toe Erosion likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, 0 100%
or collapse
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 99 99 100%
grade across the sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence
Bank Protection does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in 70 70 100%
DMS monitoring guidance document)
Appendix A ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Table 4d. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT4
Reach ID UT4
Assessed Stream Length (ft) 130
Assessed Bank Length (ft) 260
Number Total Amount of % Stable,
Major Channel Category Metric Stable, Number in Unstable Performing
Performing As-built Footage as Intended
as Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor 0 100%
Bank growth and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears
Toe Erosion likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, 0 100%
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, 0 100%
or collapse
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 8 8 100%
grade across the sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence
Bank Protection does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in 0 0 -
DMS monitoring guidance document)
Appendix A ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Planted Acreage 20.7
Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Combined Acreage % of Planted Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous 0.1 acres 0.00 0.0%
material.
Low Stem Density Woody stem densities clearly below target levels 0.1 acres 0.00 0.0%
Areas based on current MY stem count criteria.
Total 0.00 0.0%
Areas of Poor Growth Planted areas where average height is not meeting 0.25 acres 0.00 0.0%
Rates current MY Performance Standard.
Cumulative Total 0.00 0.0%
Easement Acreage 25.4
Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage
Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and
within the easement and will therefore be calculated
against the total easement acreage. Include species
Invasive Areas of with the potential to directly outcompete native, 0.1 acres 0.01 0.04%
Concern young, woody stems in the short-term or community
structure for existing communities. Species
included in summation above should be identified in
report summary.
Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon.
Encroachment to be mapped consists of any
Easement violation of restrictions specified in the conservation
Encroachment Areas easement. Common encroachments are mowing, None 0.1 0.2%
cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has
no threshold value as will need to be addressed
regardless of impact area.
Appendix A ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Red rn
Monitoring YearBa 1 - PhotoMitigation LogBankto Points)(Pho
UT1
.4 ^ } ram s k 4 'E-, x' }- ,c
•
11,4 Ott '' T� J
''' 1,"!":4',1.,„...:: ,rititg.14-.;te -,,V4,,,...14;4,,,c,Yik. ,,r 514N,;,,t1t,'..2.4.,i_i„..„::;,S.k, :, .!,,. '----'7'."":0coi#t:4:..;,:f1.-::...'•;.'i..:. ;:' ,„lii,'.4.. .i.",.4'.:: .;:-.',,v-i• -.4.1,`"„
..tA
„,,,,..,1,„„,..„.„..:.,,:.....,_,,., -04,--!,-.:s-,---.-,,,,.-;,,..T..,.--:..t,.4-,,,j.,:.,:. ... . ---1..,,....-, . -._-...„..,-.:
•LASW:,'''';"--:$.:-.,,,,,,i''''',:,,,i':',..41 ,`?.,,e14.4:4,,f..rL,W;4'o eoNt...!::-,- .--'1::'-''' ,- .., -,' li.j ..,1;,*0.7-,b. .. ' ',--"''';'.,,,41,....-"-'--I-4,m
•
` .. ,'�:n"s13. , 3 i,- ..'.5 �''I''''.41j:Pt:',04,...„-„,,,,,,..,....:,,,:;,:,-....:..;,,,...4.,,,,,_,,,,,:.,..,...,„,,,:,,,,,,,,,: ir';',1' '''.... -'...1.,',..!! v...t.q....4,f ki.,;-;.,•',-1.4.4.1.•••,,'J.,,,•,•••:‘fik.-3,..6.;,X.,-/„...,:- ..-...; .,,,-..I.,,o,.,,,,..„.4
t rr �h xc�
Photo Point 1 —Sta. 12+25 Photo Point 2—Sta. 14+35
Facing Upstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
I.
' .., -.'4 r''':*A'itii:C-44''''ttl:j'j:, ' -.- :',-ii,-",--::IA'.,-,7'..,. . \`,:e„
� �'! r •�--! � �:f^c- �, I&t $,- jet � 7*t }I��'n&� F"--r T��,r r: �§.,�?. � SAs""',�i �%��+,+__f.
a
•- iF •�� ,Y :- , � 'ye�t ad d RK1 - �, r r
t t,� ii p-, '- &z*-a ey { d 3 - - a � E
14
Photo Point 3—Sta. 14+40 Photo Point 4—Sta. 21+70
Facing Downstream 11/10/2020) Facing Downstream(11/10/2020)
u
u
•
f' j� # �' f 4 t"," t:� ,`. ' j r w _ .a ? .14 , x r '
_�'" .."'� F a° '#�a ter;
r
-, :z Toy`�,
Photo Point 5—Sta. 23+80 Photo Point 6—Sta 129+60
Facing Downstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
Appendix A
EGO5Y5TEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
RESTORATION

UT1
- sdd •' ,44„.4u.:.Aon, ., ::
.
•
Y ,4
r., :. ., .-.- . . .... ...,#.,-„e„.....„.,...-1,,.;,:-,4;;;",...i'';',',.-:1',,,i44.`',;';'-, .4''*..-fei,: '-'''''''''''., '''A.:-'''':V.'1:.; , '
•
' Tsr•
".`t# 11 d• ✓f'u '
h �'{l/..4• '^(A5: yY .4 'fin r s-„ .T•'k' P G -sa ' 'i
rA
Photo Point 7—Sta. 31+50 Photo Point 8—Sta. 31+50
Facing Downstream(11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/102020)
',p.„ig4'?rA',.::,'-,•;..''4',„.1 4,i,..-.,,-,T'..l'.,',''-:,.,„-x-,kk.1,.',.,,7f;:-,4,,0',(f;:.,,0-..4,2:,-?-:i„,4t':...-4-:,.,5;.,.,:'t,,,.,,.?-',..:;,..1,.0:,:.,i...„,44,;,,,..',::i.,,
-W:
'41':4 I;i6 i.rf"„.,X,.,N,.,,.'
_,i--t..-7:::.,.-1•:-'
UT2
xE",sr ks3 "
ems" s 1 r
.Myp
1 ;YaY-q4' 5 " . ; 0A k.,dR,'e'7 f� 4i,.?„ _ , `°, tF b..t i-,'i -- - d, - - - -
i A� y, 4 ,"e V` „E,.'' ' 4' :'. -•�r"-1 S :.,13 .� . "4Y7 7 " Y
`�� . +.kn-E -..v ", t 0,_4r 4 ' � a - - 7A
d" i p dui, 4'
i. a .= ' r`k .,"A;
A°"' ; ,'�.. mot, _ r'at '#,• g'a�_
r�
.,1 L,"i'?,,'..:O-,k'.,?,6';,-:.-1,"e',,;',':'crV,,--.",.,`ke,'..,-%-:'.1:,,'.'-.:,N,'%7_ik4.,,.•V'.0•..',./,„-,.'':----:',:r0-:':yeA'-:f',:''_.F-,:
r d ';F aft ' :Y .`,3. y V. i r x --
+ A rosy: 1' p. 7k .. R 1 1' .:1: '
. '"1� - 4'N �; i 1s.,`'t`� s�.. a° - ' .',�,'& z., " Fps 4, ' i� fr°:Photo Point 9—Sta. 34+40 Photo Point 10A—Sa. 10+4FacingUpstream (11/10/2020) FacingDownstream (11/10/20 ): _ y ;, i s
s' 'l } Ip
•
{ • hE ',6 i d _e ' e. ., Sw7 r f -2Y s ,,, r 4 yTF r .,� i ' tb r � xi 1 i dy , ,n ,q a i .r � 4 45 4 1 ;?. hi R i �._ .
- 't P z...
•
O.ri
441
•"'- ; .�-".�w, +x-._ M �+'. - � •
� �' s#g`v l a {i .. i415 3 `�' '��.1(gs �r 3 ,� y'(, _.sem " stb ?.,-;0 :. 1 1';-:?-. 7„Y j- zy�t bw� dr :�� . �� ' +4 ..1.'' . ' 1.1Y ." s.-a 'e , b ,fie �Y c _
Photo Point 10B—Sta. 10+ +
Facing Upstream (11/10/202040) Facing Photo UpPoint stream11 —(11/1 Sta.0/20214750)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
' RESTORATION

•
UT2
1 ¢ i ,, 1s y i rti1t1_1r i !- 1 rl f't! ridJ 1. l' 11.
tl••
•
fku � - r wig t ' _ h e ��q4
4.'
,41, ie.,',:, ...',4,&P,-,,,,i„AY:-,,,;";•.:;.
•
,,,,.53ww,,,,
h1, h 34 p �.A ,r k + wS " 'i a. �.sx 9 � .�u 4S, C'E � + ^� � it 5 $ k :,-. 1 C . ,' 1Y },��'w� y . 44a#( " i fl� r9 ,a ` i }h ti .!..,,,,,,,,,,,,,titn 5f h � _�S _ �'`'k -Y A. i), a ; z r '�.1:4y f Se
747-
# zr �¢ f ry- a �1}+ C 1 + �� �wtw� .1 K' f;; i\ r1 � dM � �+r yJ` [ ' y �,,•r *a, \,k 'I -'-
411),,,„.
Photo Point 12—Sta. 15+80 Photo Point 13—Sta. 18+65
Facing Upstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
a�� �„P¢
K Y s n
•
r,q� .-s _ ..U�•4 j, -,,'k ,- AL i,f-�y'4'` , c^• qy� �y y.,, S' �i... Y 4
x� t5v}x orft.: 0. y sx -°A ," a� -ck � J �., .. '""' ; 1' - �� .-t "s
"t ,a. i (fit r w 0� t 7:771 i 7-7'.' '. ` „w.
� 4 u h -. y' 1- ( T r.. ` ,.04 5- v � "ice,,-M a. `
yyyp nY � r ��q 'r
Photo Point 14—Sta. 22+00 Photo Point 15—UT2 Culvert
Facing Upstream (10/20/2020) Facing Upstream (10/20/2020)
q .a;P
r. •
f,. N & bA - §.
•
Ph 16— t . +
Facingoto DownstreamPoint UT2(10/20/2020)Culvert Facing Photo UpPoint stream17—(1 S0a/20/20229500)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank " PLANNING&
RESTORATION

UT2
Wirlitt" !1',)j-- - ',-,- -
a '�a
'
t �
ti 5
Photo Point 18—Sta 31+36 Photo Point 19—Sta 34+10
Facing Downstream(11/10/2020) Facing Upstream, Pedestrian Crossing (11/10/2020)
UT3
v
. ' ,, . ,R.„ : --- . ., ,t, '',,,l-lif,:.-'
t
Photo Point 20—Sta. 13+50 Photo Point 21 —UT3 Culvert
Facing Upstream (10/20/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
•
_ - '�' ib
,q m ',, a`ssa„ ,` � as �xii
w $-'tn P i
v i a �
',,t .,F-z, ' ,`',.TI"'""*.?::t# '4.1'i' '‘.a''=.:-- -.'-.:_'37, - • -' „•:r.' : :\.,.. .4. *--.'''',;;;•1";',.',..',- .„.,41
/ e
a.
Photo Point 22—UT3 Culvert Photo Point 23—Sta. +
Facing Downstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)2200
Appendix A
ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
RESTORATION

U T3
^'
g v-k s . 3 xa' 't gyp' try.
6
•
•YEs a 1
Photo Point 24—Sta. 25+50 Photo Point 25—Sta. 28+05
Facing Upstream (11/10/2020) Facing Downstream(11/10/2020)
_r +I tit 0 1 O ry f 'a ._ S /1
Ly-,:,fl + ,. _ 7�-. k.' -t ', `' "5 0,:, it ,t4: u.-#+• ",47 s '7 � r b P' ira V 'ten..
Ry' ?a'vi 7.1`y�S.P -F+ q t'4,r.
R -
•
xjc9 ^w yl,'e 3 ,y_y a "'4 �ewl.� - y a; ��A+" yk`
1
,, ., ,t;..,,,...v.30.1.T.,ti..., ....,;1/
,.....".7„.....„4„ 0,,,.. .:. ..,i $,, . .
7 g�t5§fir.< .Fjw^ r ", W"- 'r9'4' ,ji' w y s,- r _ rya` � .5,r -- - :..v _
*`. ,2' ` f4 i - f - �� `� ¢�. * '�.-'�3 ;M a' FjE :J'M' '�+ s' L i
•
- , py�.k• y 1 '_. ate 4 '' tt.-Y4 k.- -r , -am't�
Photo Point 26—Sta. 30+75 Photo Point 27—Sta. 33+00
Facing Upstream,ATV Crossing (11/10//2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
„ems A Y i' ' & ' 551r47/..1r -'" >'.: s-1 hL -.`,
'ia�T � j k/ • 4i Ili 'I„ i + 1,. ,' •r`k A '"�{ 8¢x 1 r 'R.7 -
�i � p aF.rY Y' • - i'
'ett,E.,,Aii-. 4,-&..1-,,*:-.4-,:r..,,,,,orseriiio2voir,irolr: „,
lir
-`- .. - , .i:'. � > i i. s T ''+ . . 1: '� ` 's - ;: . :yf; 6 f
4,,,
,,
r
-'> P4s v. v p• '�a . -. P'@ 7 � r R 9' y a� A L tfi '` Y ' � q, � ''�, .. �,, „,,,� .. , E ; ' t s.. y # � + $� .. r _ ti p. %, . 4 ', �� ',� f ° 1 ' � "/ x ',v f 44 l! d4 I - a � s� ��
mil,t_,, ; k - � 43
i ,J1
K;' Ice'-:«yk -f•ti "' -" �; - •.<7N.�
- - 74E .f'
Photo Point 28—Sta. 36+00 Photo Point 29—Sta. 36+65
Facing Upstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream(11/10/2020)
Appendix A
EGO5Y5TEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
P. TORATION

'
44:'`d• �": a ate_ c 7 �� �cq;§id 4
wir..,.,74',..::::..;,,A,..i.,,,,,,-*,..kr,,,,,i:74.W.v.„4„.:74%1.7.,',,'.7.,,'Sf‘ ,.:'::,.,...--":„..;,:!„.2,=,7!",,,.;,..1,..,,tio:1,1?-i:
=',--'4,,5r*::'44-or,-;i '-,4::::7,-.:,,,--.:,:.-.;::"..440.,,,v,,,N.,-.4:8-'5,..,0
-tf,,,,",4-..,„, ,,...,,,,„2,i, ,-,""iv37,:".., .e.,,,,, - ...,44z.0.10; -.:11A-,4.1
'4.A.:'')l!'4,iiii15.= 1:2M :fN,.3 il
Y f 1 .� eta �' '
- ''.1 i',F,k,riV'A-..„..f..,,,...0„,,,,,,-,:...-_,,..,:ik.::,-;,,,..----r , -,,,:„,,tv.,"-t---
,-.r;1,-,v. ,,.--'",,t„,0.,4c... -;„,, v. 7C f=.0 '''' V`f;/.:, 4',4,.1;#/4,,,?, 4f,..
Photo Point 30—Sta. 36+85
Facing Downstream (11/10/2020)
UT4
Tr Nyiti y
- ,r
• . . 4 .'. .
,444,..A-, t lott.1, -....1,,*,, ' 4.- #' ' -
y A�1� ,{ �iP`
'.� pp, m' r -.s,'4 . ..IL 1, tSPE y -= {1 � �' r ''',,' ' ;t• ,� 4 X � ' * t z l w � A�r7 " fa a v4 a '�. 1,6 R, y ti C (,, mhr4 ` 4r ' 4.-1'k y ` €
•iii`.:0,:t4 5.:Wer,f4 '41.,.' - 'ir'..A.::''' 't"...:''''-:?.,(1444.:: :;14'.2i''ft.71.;:1,10";";;:;,:-.4-,7--,:1:'Z'''','.-g
kt, ..,;i4f:,)7,'''''''t;''...' -'..-''".''' .-,:',.1--..1'i:•'"•,..'',-;.:._.,,,'1,,i'j,1774-....1"t''-'1.4'''''''''''''';`!).'''Vi'Ll:'''.'::'!-::::;1'1°'\:,•;,',;-',•-.:',.':'0 ;--,1'
1.
�r .7.1��{@ } 4 p
t.
Photo Point 31 —Sta. 10+25 Photo Point 32—Sta. 11+00
Facing Upstream (11/10/2020) Facing Upstream (11/10/2020)
Appendix A
ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
' RESTORATION

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1 -Vegetation Photo Log
, 4.N.,,,its ....-.....--,
l" " #u s, �A car f m 'fir' ''..' ':
# .� t Ir ` .
'" , ,�g 1,. _ / /`
Vegetation Plot 1 (Fixed)—NW Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 2 (Fixed)-E Corner(11/10/2020)
1.
-
Vegetation Plot 3 (Fixed)—N Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 4 (Fixed)—W Corner(11/10/2020)
°
p x
Vegetation Plot 5 (Fixed)—SE Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 6 (Fixed)—W Corner(11/10/2020)
Appendix A
EGOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . &
RESTORAPLANNINGTION

,;t ,i „ ,
may{ f x 'r r gar
A� �3�E f �r ,' _ . F..p A� t �' � to
3 r+S_ y ".�' �' 1 4t�p $9` 'X . " gam. +` �''/
r
Vegetation Plot 7 (Fixed)—W Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 8 (Fixed)—W Corner(11/17/2020)
•
71
' k'R t ,' fix x� i +t F
,:,7 ,:11.-„.-1=.4,,J.-„.•,-.;.:,'4.,•',4),,i'r5,A',?,-k-1 ;" wry, y },; % C s,
1y.. ta - J G p T v+d�FE , ;.
•tll••-t-°4:'•f-74-10-i,.-;.'.:?1'-:•..•-t--•-4/-'.....,5.,,.-...,".:-•••—•.'''*1--:4-.-..4A,,.,41 ri,:.L'r4.4--a,-_
ax
4 :st I . , i;k fit': z 5a i I', f,4 w , 4. 0 , ' 0z.,'.-,.',--....•,V",,,4--,-:.''(-o,i.A-'*.',,si...4.49.-•44,•r,,4,.!,,,i ���� 7.k,-.,.-:,•,y.,-4,,..,- ` �� 4n4-'..,s;±•..F=;.-.-)„„',.i:
,
LR
:..„..-;
„�
Fh' , , `hf "�'�4c0,y , Iwb �-,. . ..P :s� <&&yy- 10
1
: .B!
Vegetation Plot 9 (Fixed)—S Corner(11/17/2020) Vegetation Plot 10 (Fixed)—S Corner(11/17/2020)
• g�. r p lbw J1 )
� , a`
�'F:I--•
sg
"
,-
F «,, .'. fir. u _
-S`- . Ir `9z A..
Vegetation Plot 11 (Fixed)—SE Corner(11/17/2020) Vegetation Plot 12 (Random)—NW Corner(11/10/2020)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
RESTORATION

r4
4 r t ,4 S - 4 h aS, 4' �`1j<C aW '' �'I1�'�
•
... .. . . .,-,.ern
'` gad .. , •
Vegetation Plot 13 (Random)—NE Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 14 (Random)—NE Corner(11/10/2020)
'
-- - .� - `a* '47 .;;;; §gilt x ,
>
tAT4115,;r7h,-"Alf•*-41'.'it '7'''- '''.7:1.`'ele,41,.0*-'-:•:-.'172
t•4.„,,, ....,
.. . .
.,
,,,,,. _„.. . :- ,
-..,„
Y.a=w:... ._. ..,..,
Y .,,,,, ...„,.:,-.,.' _i
,,,,,,,,,..., .„_,..,,
Leh ... . ,
..„...„,„
. 4-..i.,,,,.,. „ ..;.,,,,A74,1` ,7.R,41,-..:m.,
Vegetation Plot 15 (Random)—NE Corner(11/10/2020) Vegetation Plot 16 (Random)—S Corner(11/17/2020.c._, ........„;,..,„
Wf y'RF d t ' I
• i s # kz# � xc a 4` I.
� M3£ t p . a "P;4'; F 4 r '�k 4• - d.4
1-' ? '+ x c ��- n9"� a!k '� - a a -✓ 3'B Rxis y '1aq'y-p -€ ..1.tr rJ 6 N ?-a ,.
ds .•-.� Y ?rx ,�,7d b*-' a �}3,�e1° ' ; •� ..k '. ti ''"* . - r - -✓ . .t
1.
4.
.„,„„..,...,m,...,..,.,,,..„...:, ,, .,,,:......
j i F t 3': tit- `r�y Fps '' ' t ,�_Ay,$�" , S q 61 .re '"6'.s' ?"` ' 'i'l+kcr37at
d "L oa,, ayr.,, 4 f s 3^ax s' �4� _?` x�4 e xt.„,
Iy 3
..,., ,,
, , 7'' t 'q
1-. r ...-
.tc " + as ,
'S- ,It i s,- ef' bar 1i``
Vegetation Plot 17 (Random)—SE Corner(11/17/2020) Vegetation Plot 18 (Random)—S Corner(11/17/2020)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
RESTORATION

xkF
�� I �ti�� z
a
yA M1 T
. z
.,, N Pd E', yk e"
am .� q a',;
Vegetation Plot 19 (Random)—SE Corner(11/17/2020) Vegetation Plot 20 (Random)—NE Corner(11/17/2020)
ck p/� i d
yx� L _. e i� Lf �.k ml n ..
1,40,:',1i.' .'00,:' A
‘40*
li°
A.. . 3', `,k, i�rx g�.l'V. ` i&3 .Ivy
•
�� }�� � �� � �� q�f^P °.r � 'A
,C z w '' `' a
Vegetation Plot 21 (Random)—NE Corner(11/17/2020)
Appendix A
ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
RESTORATION

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1 — Bankfull Evidence Photos
z
i
Photo 1 —UT1 Bankfull Wrack Line and sediment Photo 2—UT1 Bankfull Wrack Line and sediment
deposition (4/20/2020) deposition on floodplain (4/20/2020)
- A
' -;ems{ _ ..r'hy. : ..
apyTc� *R
q •
Photo 3—UT1 Bankfull flow in channel following Photo 4—UT1 Bankfull flow in channel and
bankfull rain event(4/14/2020) backwatering from flooding Stewarts Creek downstream
wnk (4/14/2020)
�;" q w,y, ''.14#`1 ,�-i E
t-yil
} l 4Oj b 1 4. b
b1wi '' ' n.e i t1 ' ,may r 1\'.
!7]-:.':,::$4:Vrip,:',:.:',3.,:01.4:_'•••••:,': 4.,-;v71_:,.i'i
ary` � " te a " :
,,..+,:::.,..:.#7
'1:$ ems.; '1
u �
a
g_` err:
' . .
Photo 5—UT2 XS 6 with sediment deposition on the
floodplain (11/10/2020)
Appendix A
ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
PLANNINGS
RESTORATION

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1 — Stream Gauge Photo Log
•
z �w3t.trz"4'aK a
yJ r,.. a-
•
- .�r a i I r + r 1.3 77 ` A ' '" s- , ''
•
_!.} 'r • k °r� rt X ' x,- 4 {, 4 ;r a t s .w w . • t, , . ,4„.,„,, ' f , v"3 an ^ P is , _t i :. t - �, tl ft � £fi 2 r S � � Yf Y W te„ o f -' • k;, 1. �f , r 1 ' •,',z4a�_ _ N I -� f\ 1�x
•Stream Gauge 1 —UT1 —(11/10/2020) Stream Gauge 2—UT1 —(11/10/2020)
14111.114
CR K 4_
3
3 .V / Tom' •d RF' ' "�mi f JY'$ [ C] it f a - tJ� �
. ?• ..__ • r'Yr r .r, aC ma's 5�,i , ..ems..
Stream Gauge 3—UT2—(11/10/2020) Stream Gauge 4—UT2—(11/10/2020)
` S,f� x t a
..'•:'''''..'
�' .. _ .'I. " `"yit4,,.,.. .::.:.„,:,.._,.....,_.,:._.::.•::'-,'•"f,,.e, n .,,,, ". e' lit. y,st¢I:17_a d-, ,� s " ^4ir41''_ ' ` .1 � "F.. t'?�; r .T v --E,r.' �, -} '' '- �"'Z , __,•,,.a,. 4...E[1 1 =,. ^ � ''', ra_ -.' ' aa F a c 11."'�'� 5 w ate r • t` f -
- ��' s �,,k, M; a Ka, � -. �.,E G:r � sr a -f
yrt. 1- ri`-"v g�-, ate,. a'� '�
'P. '4^ �:3''. .,,f..�';4R. 0..'�;S_`_ . .. 'I
Stream Gauge 5—UT3—(11/10/2020) Stream Gauge 6—UT4—(11/10/2020)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . PLANNING&
RESTORATION

4 4i°,, mt k4.y k " i �x°i; * ay r a ,ti0cpw � a}'
,� 4'
t �z �,
4,•,...,,,-- -rw-... 4.4. 1-. ,-,',-.-44,0,---tA.,;11,...17'.,-,-. 7,:l
t°.' .tea '
s: y
W4
Stream Gauge 7—UT3—(11/10/2020)
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
RESTORATION

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1 —Wetland Gauge Photo Log
r§
a� '#3"s v , $ i
a Y xI
g 3ra ,s;. .,9 1 Y g ;2i�'
IYrr i, 4 k z 7 r S n4 $ 7 c
3, x 'Q,, - �Y 7 -p �a'� R r IA
k. 1a' S"d art x, ' a >a- 4, °,
41.,- ''.".rC7V.‘",, -'r."4470418V.(44-;—° ,-,-li0.Lr''6.,---,-;.• „-X-4 - ,--- IP --,ko- ,., ,
c_ ''`,Y'n c, r• r ' 1 - `_�\ �' fi- `:.'° "y. ,'`y-• Ora.
Wetland Gauge 1 —(11/10/2020) Wetland Gauge 2—(11/10/2020)
air
x Ky i ,,r`#syi.-'. �x, 7i..7"' �, w I� ,. ,.,, �t, W '' F�,g ?, ��'sf3 • .; da- ,
Z,,`-3 't >5 �'' t ' ,,, - ' y R x y7,ti� r, `+ d.3� ti
�'z 3. e' - ,-,, a+h h{tl < ,5, .41 A C K'w, e r +Y
,t
::,7-X6z,,,4--. -1A
,.v
r ,,`. 7` f t'S '' '�" .s .. 4..- 111 y# 5'fi s ' ,i aK.
nt
Wetland Gauge 3—(11/10/2020) Wetland Gauge 4—(11/1!::::;./2,_,Ox:.0,., )
''.^�� • rv- � '�'I`��i'r'.67�5-c-} • ` sa"y¢¢t iW' a ''�fie
` _- hr • d i;7 :la e • vf?
y. tl K ' 'A I '3 1-t- -t y,t{. .. J1d iC +, ---.y� '
4,
kt ,,,,......0., ,,,.. ...,,..,,, . .,..,, ,. .„, . , .. ,,,‘„,f. ,_. ,, ,,r
:11
,,,,4,:.?::.„; c,Aole„ . ..
., ,,,,.,,,
_ ,r - a, 6 a °1� .,,�'' �'` Ia'i „e ,� �' `..� - 4 3r� ,y
S ii �' + Y - S �i.1t -�`fir -Yr - •z W t Y x;. ., ;41,,,��f.4 • .i cry
,,,w.,
� � irr a k End:, v Yr
,„...,,....„,....i.v.,,,,zoso.:. ,,.
s ,� w, - �{ s ^ _ aka, i t 4 '�'- -..` .. .li i °q.r �z" -. b' '� s�
..,47, 1a 3 'Ins' -,1Y-4Y,.�". ki f.j z?d '1 a . •
Wetland Gauge 5—(11/10/2020) Wetland Gauge 6—(11/10/2020)
EGO5Y5TEM
Appendix A
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
' RESTORATION

•
�k'3 fi �4� 'x Y�' '�R iX F r > y- �'- Pe : 4q .lj PCs'
�� -r f .. -.-, ,1 .,-- t �� . R^''..1'•••',...'...' ••c•%'-•'..hz°,`7?i' I(R .c
., 5`� I `'r ,,, r < . ,, ,gaga a a R % v ''t
1.
Ar-'Y" :P W �`! I' �' /i r .` r A r„ a p 1 arty
r �� �, `sr x '. a
,,
z S b a grad +�` '.'' '- ' ,
r,4.:-.1v, t,I.I.,,,..1,.,.-74.4-,.-,14.4,:fi-Iv2,,,
.' �S ' 6 '.',: ,!,,,;,,,.t,, ,,..5,,,„,qi.,,,,;,-.. w g �� +sue rah
ar 1.1,..,;$1 ,.:,-
hxi rc v � rf >„ 4.jdrr j° e
r ; r z }� �. 1 i, y y '
-^ bff. � ,' a e- i yam., .�/ o 3 s,-,y
Ike j L e 1 rti"' • x yt r k .!( ay �.
f� J Jf 6y YP X ,y / K,.. t ��d,� 1 1 '.
{ Y i S f�}f �; � ''V p"E�` '{�(i� Td fi , j i K - _4
4
-,- ,a f'a- .f ..- f 11/10 .a ,G, ,. .0 1.: i�. �, !���. "i�•:-� '�,i t .. J . 3-'sx
Wetland Gauge 7—(11/10/2020) wetland Gauge 8—(11/17/2020)
oii,,,,,,4 ::,-,:...,„ .,„t-irt,frvi.„,f,,,,,.., :,,,,,..,,,,. .,,,,,,,,,
R
,,,.,„,,,,,,,,;,..„-„c„.4-.,,, ,-.,,,„...,,,.....,,,,,......„:„„..,.,,,,,,,,,,„ ,,,
4,,:l!,iititAtsi-444.'444:i '..i.E.it,"*N.e" '''''N:41`..:'r 'c't:'1,1Iti't
''';*.V,-:::'il'Cl*Ej',1'5,',A, rt:1::',Ve'INV.:'1.; .':;;:i*-ii-.:T.':-.I:;''...
c':$",.;,S.V.tee '5,,,iii,...i'''1,,*1#7,ar;,,,i/K, .."%k-N'...g::: -4 rt.
:1.7.:Y* ....- , , ' -,F42t..i,4-%,41••••,—.4 '.-7,--_,,, ,_•_. 4.- "'''',-
Wetland Gauge 9—(11/17/2020)
Appendix A
EGOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank . &
' RPLANNINGATION I=STOR

Appendix B
Vegetation Plot Data
Tables 6a. through 6c.Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Tables
Table 7a. through 7b. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Tables

Table 6a. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Planted Acreage 20.7
Date of Initial Plant 2020-04-01
Date(s)of Supplemental Plant(s) -
Date(s) Mowing -
Date of Current Survey 2020-11-10
Plot size(ACRES) 0.0247
Tree/Sh Indicator Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F
Scientific Name Common Name
rub Status Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 1 1 1
Carya glabra pignut hickory Tree FACU
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree FACW 1 1 2 2 1 1
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1
other 1 1 1 1
Species Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 4 4 3 3 2 2 9 9 3 3
Included in
Approved Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU
Mitigation Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU 1 1
Plan Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 1 1 4 4 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 3 3
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU
Quercus sp. 1 1
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 3 4
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry Tree
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1
Sum Performance Standard 11 11 10 10 11 12 14 14 7 7
Post Hamamelis sp.
Mitigation
Plan Species Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU 1
Sum Proposed Standard 11 11 10 10 11 12 14 14 7 7
Current Year Stem Count 11 10 12 14 7
Mitigation Stems/Acre 445 405 486 567 283
Plan Species Count 8 7 5 4 3
Performance Dominant Species Composition (%) 36 27 33 64 43
Standard Average Plot Height 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 4.0
Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
Meets Interim Performance Criteria — Does Not Meet Interim Performance Criteria

Table 6b. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Planted Acreage 20.7
Date of Initial Plant 2020-04-01
Date(s)of Supplemental Plant(s) -
Date(s) Mowing -
Date of Current Survey 2020-11-10
Plot size(ACRES) 0.0247
Tree/Sh Indicator Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot 10 F
Scientific Name Common Name
rub Status Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 3 3 1 1 3 3
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC
Carya glabra pignut hickory Tree FACU
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree FACW 1 1
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 2
other
Species Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 4 4 4 4 6 6 1 1 4 4
Included in
Approved Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1
Mitigation Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU
Plan Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 5 5 3 3 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 5 5 2 2 9 9 1 1
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 2 2 1 1
Quercus sp.
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 1
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry Tree 1 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1 5 5
Sum Performance Standard 13 13 12 12 16 16 14 15 11 11
Post Hamamelis sp.
Mitigation
Plan Species Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU
Sum Proposed Standard 13 13 12 12 16 16 14 15 11 11
Current Year Stem Count 13 12 16 15 11
Mitigation Stems/Acre 526 486 648 607 445
Plan Species Count 4 5 5 5 5
Performance Dominant Species Composition (%) 38 42 38 60 36
Standard Average Plot Height 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0
Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
Meets Interim Performance Criteria Does Not Meet Interim Performance Criteria

Table 6c. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Planted Acreage 20.7
Date of Initial Plant 2020-04-01
Date(s)of Supplemental Plant(s) -
Date(s) Mowing -
Date of Current Survey 2020-11-10
Plot size(ACRES) 0.0247
Tree/Sh Indicator Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 Veg Plot 13 Veg Plot 14 Veg Plot 15 Veg Plot 16 Veg Plot 17 Veg Plot 18 Veg Plot 19 Veg Plot 20 Veg Plot 21
Scientific Name Common Name rub Status R R R R R R R R R R
Planted Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 2
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1
Carya glabra pignut hickory Tree FACU 1
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree FACW
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1
other
Species Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 1 1 4 3 8 11 6 5 3 3 3
Included in
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU
Approved
Mitigation Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU
Plan Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 2 1 1 2 2 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 3 3 1 3 7
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 1 4
Quercus sp.
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry Tree
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 4 4 1 3 4 3
Sum Performance Standard 9 9 8 8 9 13 10 13 10 9 5 12
Post Hamamelis sp. 1
Mitigation
Plan Species Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU
Sum Proposed Standard 9 9 8 8 9 13 10 13 10 9 5 12
Current Year Stem Count 9 8 8 9 13 10 13 10 9 5 12
Mitigation Stems/Acre 364 324 324 364 526 405 526 405 364 202 486
Plan Species Count 4 3 5 2 2 5 4 4 3 3 3
Performance Dominant Species Composition (%) 44 50 38 80 85 60 38 40 44 60 58
Standard Average Plot Height 1.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0
Invasives 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
IMeets Interim Performance Criteria Does Not Meet Interim Performance Criteria

Table 7a. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 445 8 0 405 8 0 486 0
Monitoring Year 0 769 8 I 0 567 4 i 0 647 4 0
Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 567 0 283 0 526 IN ir 0
Monitoring Year 0 688 4 0 567 4 0 769 0
Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 486 0 648 0 607 0
Monitoring Year 0 850 0 728 0 728 0
Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 R
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 445 5 0 364 4 0 3 0
Monitoring Year 0 850 6 0 567 5 0
ill Meets Interim Performance Criteria+ 1 1 Does Not Meet Interim Performance Criteria
*Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot"groups". Random plots are denoted with an R,and fixed plots with an F.

Table 7b. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Veg Plot 13 R Veg Plot 14 R Veg Plot 15 R
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 324 5 0 364 3 0 526 2 0
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 16 R Veg Plot 17 R Veg Plot 18 R
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 405 5 0 526 4 0 405 4 0
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 19 R Veg Plot 20 R Veg Plot 21 R
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 364 3 0 202 3 0 486 3 0
Monitoring Year 0
Meets Interim Performance Criteria Does Not Meet Interim Performance Criteria
*Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F.

Appendix C
Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross Section Plots With Annual Overlays
Table 8a through 8i. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 9. Monitoring Data - Cross-Section Monitoring Data Table

Cross St -MY1
XS1-UTPlot1a
l Stationec 11+87 ion Poo
§ fir'! r• ,:b �- „� � j rt yd n x is f4 r �, ,' h
�� "� �z *+r. z A
�` i � � �'� >�" t4 a � 'A .. I y �1'T_" • -" c T �Fy :c ' a.-
s } tea t'. � :, ors 4� -
�;` • _ Y""�,''"'�� '� .���,,y, ilkIL �`-0 lam`�� ""f �1 ✓ ����t"�� ��• �`�%�
- 4 r. ' s 'at,`+ '+ Fi_--- -1''''Kir '',' %,,.,_4*'4--- A
tream• : LtL '
-.
XS1 looking upstream XS1 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1043.97 1043.98
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.97
Thalweg Elevation 1042.64 1042.78
LTOB Elevation 1043.97 1043.94
LTOB Max Depth 1.33 1.16
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 7.36 6.81 I
i - -
XS1 Pool- 11+87
1050
As-Built-
Entrenchment Ratio
May 2020
1049 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1048 —
1047 —
1046
c
IS 1045
a.)LT' 1044 - - -- - - — —
1043
1042
1041
1040
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS2-UT1a
Station 20+33-Pool
Li . - -',.,--All "Ark'Icti.i12,1:1t,*il,ft,';',A':-.11-lit'-',t7--,i'`. -t:';',.(1';'[..',,,N4
s S�- 1- ,fits .-' *, �' "-s>' -
r 3 tie-c lrl a s ,r �� ^. " -. "� 42 ., ' ?r of
:-!: a ,*r �' Z „ r : &' £ i a 'fi t, ' ::F c e`�mf
:'. .Qa.:,. 'u,, s:' �,. ., .a 7 �-. 1',✓.br..ate -n. '3 r � W _r �+` -
XS2 looking upstream XS2 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1023.76 1023.75
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.97
Thalweg Elevation 1022.85 1022.80
LTOB Elevation 1023.76 1023.72
LTOB Max Depth 0.91 0.92
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 4.14 3.90
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS2 Pool-20+33
1029
As-Built-May 2020
1028 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
I
1027
1026
I
1025
c
too1024 _-
ai 1
" 1023 ��,ri
1022
1021
1020
1019
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS3-UT1a
Station 22+60-Riffle
•
�*�. ,yy x� g,,, to 1 ! �f z�' '* *s '�..,f. a' Y. Sri Is y �,S
•
,r .. Y,CD s f `� ' -a ter ' ='' � ;�
t }} m ' ,,� ` i" dam eo-
:,.". ..'''. '41'''''' ',..,4,),,_.-",.t `':',-- ' ''''j.k4'„;1-:.:,,,„N
r r �� r w
ii. ,,,,4...1F,>,,,,,7"'_-r-,,,< ,,,,r..7,. , ..,17,-;>fi-- -. ":7_ ,"
ii ,,;g,' ka,P'g' 'fit,,SA ?� _, a - . �.,.^s
XS3 looking upstream XS3 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1021.58 1021.55
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.03
Thalweg Elevation 1021.11 1020.98
LTOB Elevation 1021.58 1021.57
LTOB Max Depth 0.47 0.59
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 1.73 1.83 I
Entrenchment Ratio >6.87 >7.3
XS3 Riffle-22+60
1027
As-Built-May 2020
1026 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1025 1
1024 —
1023
c
o 1022 — —
03
L' 1021
1020
1019
1018
1017
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS4-UT1b
Station 33+64-Riffle
` ' i 4 ,. >1.4 ate. " -
�.s-sal r t ,: x .ice.41r 4�,- .- s
�^ �' � � .�� '". � �� %k 3 4�r. l�,� ° .max^€ �:i
.._ - t ° r {to- "
e rg_ .-. " — � '
.s1; ,.,emSs 6 -3 .. �_� �' !<��A 3 a I. a m.,v;3ar.i ?r L.
XS4 looking upstream XS4 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1018.47 1018.46
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.07
Thalweg Elevation 1017.75 1017.75
LTOB Elevation 1018.47 1018.51
LTOB Max Depth 0.72 0.76
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 3.07 3.44
Entrenchment Ratio >9.29 >8.47
XS4 Riffle-33+64
1024
-As-Built-May 2020
1023 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
-MY1-2020
1022 I
1021 —
I
1020
j
_
1019
_1018 —
1017 -
1016
1015
1014
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS5-UT1b
Station 36+40-Pool
s � to , 5�p i a k P f
e� a '��" {i �`� t s r11A > ry fib ' ' Sr- v ,. 00:4§�° y
max- q Y � ''3- ', - r , k, ,��
a - s : , r a r ',u .)r
•
+ ;. .,,z� a sir,�t .�. s " +
h - e V .-.�.1 -+"�' `. k .may 5'Z L Y �( .. �,'{
a `ems '' - _ 'F = c + h.'.,. k� d
44
Yt3 T; ,'`sV rat' '* d-:: r � 7 -' b -'# .:
4
XSS looking upstream XS5 looking downstream
my() MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1017.76 1017.78
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.05
Thalweg Elevation 1016.70 1016.64
LTOB Elevation 1017.76 1017.84
LTOB Max Depth 1.06 1.20
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 5.10 5.69
Entrenchment Ratio - - I
As-Built
Bankfull
XS5 Pool-36+40
1023
-May 2020
1022 — — — anu
MY1-2020
1021
1020
1019
rz:za._....zv....o<
------..6\
ip 1018 \�-
ro
v
LL' 1017
1016
1015
1014
1013
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
X
Station 14+74-Pool
3 ey+.k, 4;y }w"+ t }F � W. }X' 5 Z' ,,. '}�.' � di p /
+ sa d' s f�,s`,.�``� *ro. S '.`'+' �' � '_�.'el�� '�kq, S`�' - s"" d
AtN
;� Y w' '' yak , ,&. t �: ,, 1 -" �f r
y } !a
" a � �.` - f�. - $ .� �; is §.' s, ' - . . `-
�: may.: i affi' , _ v
A'
! � "" : s d, a `z
sa
XS6 looking upstream XS6 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1023.50 1023.56
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.93
Thalweg Elevation 1022.13 1022.00
LTOB Elevation 1023.50 1023.45
LTOB Max Depth 1.37 1.45
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 7.90 6.81
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS6 Pool- 14+74
1029
As-Built-May 2020
1028 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1027
1026
i ::::
,7
v
L' 1023
1022
1021
1020
1019
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS7-UT2a
Station 19+16-Riffle
Tt% a cs • Sk
t _.tea ?''ti, -,4(-•a'_-',➢• F ,p-< . / -_�
a t v i 1 3n
- Wi
-
6! * -uei
XS7 looking upstream XS7 looking downstream
MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1019.49 1019.51
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.84
Thalweg Elevation 1018.79 1018.77
LTOB Elevation 1019.49 1019.39
LTOB Max Depth 0.70 0.62
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 2.95 2.19
Entrenchment Ratio >7.04 >6.45
XS7 Riffle- 19+16
1025
As-Built-May 2020
1024 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1023
1022
1021
1020 —
1
u' 1019
1018
1017
1016 —
1015
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS8-UT2b
Station 22+44-Pool
�t.- i v Y
GA
� .-s `� 54.x c e '.
ifs ",, 4 S 1ry 4 FR
:...1-13P"t,‘:e,-'.''-'„!.'.",-;.,z.
,t j' r+"44; 'ry t fi 4i3., -l.•,, ` x -° a d 4 1 J ,4- ;i:. l ,R._.
,,.,:•":?.,:,';.;1:?_'7';,"...:,.,.:
_-, $'s',,,ve '3, `. 1 fi # q
_�. „ ,1y , ti �a F�,L.,• ; N. I ',yx. ; �.... �., '" �" � , kas 'a, ,P,' j-�! +dt1trt
XS8 looking upstream XS8 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1016.72 1016.93
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.86
Thalweg Elevation 1015.25 1015.36
LTOB Elevation 1016.72 1016.71
LTOB Max Depth 1.47 1.35
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 8.47 6.36
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS8 Pool-22+44
1022
As-Built-May 2020
1021 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1020
1019
1018 \
c
o
1017 --
CO
ai
.....___...7-____—...—.2----
LL' 1016
1015
1014
1013
1012
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS9-UT2b
Station 24+41-Riffle
m;}g. rt �, t e r •. , t *� �� 4, c..' 7s.
5 a !x. ,
.,,(
�
F. . a *' `` r 4 mc�- d, ' ,.X�Y. 'ma's'
r� '�;, � � � � � 'k' � � r r ter, ," ��
,4� - ,` aka -- - — ` i .a'Sw '4 .,t
XS9 looking upstream XS9 looking downstream
MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1016.16 1016.19
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.02
Thalweg Elevation 1015.30 1015.30
LTOB Elevation 1016.16 1016.20
LTOB Max Depth 0.86 0.90
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 4.14 4.40
Entrenchment Ratio >6.40 >6.35
XS9 Riffle -24+41
1021
As-Built-May 2020
1020 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1019
1018
1017
c
1016
ro
v ~�
L' 1015
1014
1013
1012
1011
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross
XS10-UT2bPlot-MY1
Station 29+27-Pool
F 9
Sectiony
- . i_ 1;-:-:
. r - r
't #"r aYp x x ' .Z'a Ss � - ; � e� { ^ 4
"-, .1 -"xx a Jr X 4 tit � Y} 1 A t `„ � " y i,1y �e�� r v
`e '0 I-N3*141.A'1::'‘;--:..;1;;-' '' ^ '1":,1 \..,fri;
t. .-
�rPJ. "?_ WW . ,.�, °� <,�k . ''. ..:�.:?t ..r YI�aiS?t ,� .,,r.
XS10 looking upstream XS10 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1014.60 1014.61
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.00
Thalweg
1014.60 1014.61
Elevation 1012.53 1012.40
=I_M
LTOB Elevation
LTOB Max Depth 2.07 2.21
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 10.45 10.43
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS10 Pool -29+27
1020
As-Built-May 2020
1019 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1018 I
1017
1016 -
c
1015
ro
v
LT' 1014
1013
1012
1011 -
1010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS11-UT2c
Station 32+53-Riffle
.: 'gy k cpjpy�y', ' 1'H d5 r f> .E. $ a. 3`k 2 e
x
•
„ '"-1 � .., ;�; Sys s:*�' F i ..' S ,,.,, ,, K, - _
rt 1/4
XS11 looking upstream XS11 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1013.38 1013.45
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.81
Thalweg Elevation 1012.56 1012.76
LTOB Elevation 1013.38 1013.32
LTOB Max Depth 0.82 0.56
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 3.90 2.81
Entrenchment Ratio 4.48 3.63
XS11 Riffle-32+53
1020
As-Built-May 2020
1019 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
1018 MY1-2020
1017
1016
1015
LL' 1014
1013
1012
1011
1010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS12-UT3a
Station 11+20-Riffle
*-4; 'Y$
�G
� ccrema.✓
A .4 s'X" Yk 4 k"�+�vt!' dJfi '� e '
XS12 looking upstream XS12 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1070.58 1070.64
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.00
Thalweg Elevation 1070.07 1070.13
LTOB Elevation 1070.58 1070.64
LTOB Max Depth 0.51 0.51
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 1.57 1.58
Entrenchment Ratio 5.55 4.71
XS12 Riffle- 11+20
1076
As-Built-May 2020
1075 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1074
1073
1072
1071 —
ro
LT' 1070
1069
1068
1067
1066
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS13-UT3a
Station 17+81-Pool
y ) 1 a. I
% - q
,-,..,`,1.0tpitlr-:.
` � t � .
4 „.........„. .4
...,. - -
„.
¢' '� � p %. .r :'�iw &t xa ry "� 'ha 5q, lea +4 ,.s_ ,...i.:,..4•.,ey, .. ,y: r5 =.:..
....,..„.. „...
. ',,, $: $ ° , [� „ .;ors:x ° 3 '' +.h. .,.' r 1,_,
a
ri -`,' s �. - x. t ' < +� -� gyp '` � ti `'o
� K, r '" i - t
F N.
' gti , ,
XS13 looking upstream XS13 looking downstream
my
() MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
BankfullBankfull Area 1052.09 1051.92
Bank HeightElevation-Ratio-BasedBased onon AB-BankfuABBankfull Area
1.00 1.08
Thalweg Elevation 1050.32 1049.97
LTOB Elevation 1052.09 1052.08
LTOB Max Depth 1.77 2.11
LTOB Cross 8.79 10.78
EntrenchmentSectional Ratio Area
- -
XS13 Pool - 17+81
1058
As-Built-May 2020
1057 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1056 —
1055
1054
c
1053
ro
\/._._
v
L' 1052
1051
1050
1049
1048 •
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS14-UT3a
Station 21+94-Pool
q4 , •,..e x t � ,,fit r�
4
5 s !' 4ipt
ic
q't &-- -L-„ �+"r . ' Hai:4- . ' � �o-'�a ', ? ; # +..
tx/
'`?,_Te!:-1--0,14.r.'--.1.':-,iis; 1 =. 'ig4'-'.',,... P '-'7•1'7'. ::1,-,f4ft r-,:t.,- 4.4,-,f-_-!,.7ta> --- 7.-- kJ"' '-'-''' ,. --,;"--,,. :'''.Z.,--.;
XS14 looking upstream XS14 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1041.94 1042.04
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.93
Thalweg Elevation 1040.44 1040.47
LTOB Elevation 1041.94 1041.94
LTOB Max Depth 1.50 1.47
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 6.74 5.98
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS14 Pool -21+94
1048
As-Built-May 2020
1047 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1046
1045
1044
c
1043 ------------
C6
W
LT—I
1041
1040
1039
1038
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS15-UT3b
Station 24+12-Riffle
w it 1ai-i.i1, 'fit ,,! � r + .semis
4 +P�` ,4 ",, 3 ,v ;t.1"j lzed{Ar ". �. .4 F 4 " {#.`F e3
y,�, 5' $.z y•, a �' � r Q ,
, '
-",,t -4',::,',A'''` , ., -;;,
b
VI*
f ti ys,.. R 'n �— `Tr r.,..iLfe...-.0
�P l,I e 'g t, �Ya'
.' i. fay 7 �" :. 6 : Fi!.
XS15 looking upstream XS15 looking downstream
MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1037.67 1037.71
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.99
Thalweg Elevation 1036.90 1036.87
LTOB Elevation 1037.67 1037.70
LTOB Max Depth 0.77 0.83
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 3.74 3.67
Entrenchment Ratio 3.58 3.43
XS15 Riffle 24+12
1045
As-Built-May 2020
1044 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1043
1042 —
1041
c
0
+,
cc
v 1040
w
1039
I
1038
1037
1036
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS16-UT3c
Station 31+49-Riffle
,y ty 1 • i`C•
A+ t h id;A R� 4i . -�
-a� a * a ' K tee-, • e .e ,.�w
- J _
xtinripi-
feik 'C ..�. aw 1 -`" w :" 'ate. , 4'.�" w.'A`s. "...h_ _
XS16 looking upstream XS16 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1026.46 1026.52
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.09
Thalweg Elevation 1025.81 1025.91
LTOB Elevation 1026.46 1026.58
LTOB Max Depth 0.65 0.67
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 3.46 3.98
Entrenchment Ratio >5.13 >4.92
XS16 Riffle 31+49
1032
As-Built-May 2020
1031 — — —Floodprone _
— — —Bankfull
M
1030 Y1-2020
1029
1028
c
1027
v _
LL' 1026
1025
1024
1023
1022
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS17-UT3c
Station 34+91-Pool
,.. . 4 , '....141%1574
ia, E k r4 �, k i w J �. a ,,, 3
.:.'"kf5.'i:.,ik''':':''7.4Vf; .7A7;',Z.i';:i . .4:?,....w.,...,,,,-7:i),3,, ..,,A, Pi, ,s,....';`,-- , ,;:0- ,.,,,..,- 'Ik'..:"'"-' .A ,-.`1,77:::,- T,'.,' - ,----',
r
t
'- e. ,a _. +A a { '?era ' .,(_1' r r 4%�' ^ ``ors...' 'p, rc -
s.
XS17 looking upstream XS17 looking downstream
MVO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1020.20 1020.25
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.98
Thalweg Elevation 1017.74 1017.65
LTOB Elevation 1020.20 1020.19
LTOB Max Depth 2.46 2.54
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 12.74 12.13
Entrenchment Ratio - -
XS17 Pool 34+91
1025
As-Built-May 2020
1024 — — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1023
1022
--------_---\
1021
c
1020 14111N1/1 --------
ro
v
LL' 1019
1018
1017
1016
1015
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance(ft)

Cross Section Plot-MY1
XS18-UT4
Station 10+73-Riffle
T..� �, � Xt �X'
E,r✓ '� " s.. e`� ' < ` ;„w` "C �'�# � f.er
•
s`" �,�^' J✓`� r k' p�4 R ,J•} t+'w�Tl-�" & J r /
r� q..
XS18 looking upstream XS18 looking downstream
MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Bankfull Elevation-Based on AB Bankfull Area 1043.01 1043.09
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.79
Thalweg Elevation 1042.59 1042.69
LTOB Elevation 1043.01 1043.01
LTOB Max Depth 0.42 0.32
LTOB Cross Sectional Area 1.22 0.90
Entrenchment Ratio 2.76 2.70
XS18 Riffle 10+73
1049
As-Built-May 2020
1048 — — —Floodprone
— — —Bankfull
MY1-2020
1047
1046
1045 /
1044
LT' 1043
1042
1041
1040
1039
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance(ft)

Table 8a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT1a (1590 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 1 7 3.3 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.1 - 2 3.5 7.0 10.4 6.5 7.0 7.3 5.87 5.87 5.87 5.87 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 9.1 9.4 9.4 9.6 - 2 7.7 24.7 41.6 30.0 35.0 40.0 >40.3 >40.3 >40.3 >40.3 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.3 1 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 - 2 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 - 2 0.2 0.7 1.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 1 6 2.8 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.9 - 2 1.0 3.5 6.0 2.6 3.0 3.7 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 12.8 13.4 13.4 14.0 - 2 12.0 15.0 18.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.2 20.2 20.2 20.2 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 - 2 2.2 3.1 4.0 4.3 5.1 5.8 >6.87 >6.87 >6.87 >6.87 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.1 4.3 4.3 6.5 - 2 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 4.0 17.3 18.2 29.0 10.9 4 Total riffle length 50%of reach length 10.0 20.5 32.0 13.4 18.6 18.8 22.8 3.1 10
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.008 0.024 0.043 0.013 0.025 0.024 0.037 0.007 10
Pool Length(ft) 10.0 10.6 10.7 11.0 0.4 3 Total pool length 50%of reach length 7.0 13.0 24.0 13.5 20.0 20.6 25.8 4.8 10
Pool Max depth(ft) 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 2 0.4 1.7 3.0 0.7 1.2 1.6 0.9 1.7 1.6 2.2 0.3 10
Pool Spacing(ft) 17.9 25.5 20.5 38.0 8.9 3 10.4 29.5 48.7 16.0 36.0 50.0 29.3 38.1 35.9 50.2 7.8 10
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 13.0 21.0 21.0 29.0 8.2 4 N/A N/A 83.2 10 25.9 39 12.3 26.3 25.3 43.0 7.7 40
Radius of Curvature(ft) 22.0 61.6 47.0 130.0 40.9 5 7.0 21.7 36.4 14.5 16.5 20.5 12.0 18.0 17.7 23.8 2.9 41
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 3.7 10.4 7.8 22.0 6.1 5 2.0 2.8 3.5 2.1 2.4 3.0 2.0 3.1 3.0 4.1 0.5 41
Meander Wavelength(ft) 96.0 176.5 177.0 256.0 88.4 4 24.5 74.7 124.8 49 59.5 73 46.0 60.9 61.8 73.5 6.5 40
Meander Width Ratio 2.2 3.5 3.5 4.8 1.2 4 N/A N/A 8.0 1.4 3.8 5.6 2.1 4.5 4.3 7.3 1.3 40
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.54 0.60 0.30
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 93 75 63
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 32.7 33.6 26
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B5 C5b C5b C5b
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.5 30.0 3.6 3.1 3.1 5.8
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 3 30 10.2 10 10 10
Valley length(ft) 617 1292 1292
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 650 1590 1590
Sinuosity(ft) 1.1 1.2 to 1.6 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.021 0.0162 0.0165
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.021 0.0162 0.0167
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) 0.1 1.0 2.0
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks 36%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1.The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4.Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT1c (738 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 2 8 3.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.2 7.5 10.2 6.9 7.5 8.0 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.2 25.0 40.8 65.0 142.5 220.0 >57.4 >57.4 >57.4 >57.4 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.3 1.1 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.40 0.53 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.8 1.2 0.50 0.70 0.90 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 1.5 6.5 3.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.5 4.0 6.5 2.76 4.00 5.60 3.07 3.07 3.07 3.07 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.0 14.0 16.0 12.00 14.00 16.00 12.34 12.34 12.34 12.34 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.2 3.1 4.0 8.70 19.10 29.50 >9.29 >9.29 >9.29 >9.29 - 1
Bank Height Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total riffle length 50%of reach length 12.0 24.0 32.0 16.2 24.4 23.8 34.0 6.8 4
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.003 0.006 0.010 0.002 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.002 4
Pool Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total pool length 50%of reach length 11.0 16.0 22.0 12.5 19.3 19.4 26.0 5.3 4
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 1.8 3.0 0.9 1.5 2.0 1.1 1.4 1.2 2.1 0.4 4
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 30.0 41.3 52.5 20.0 30.0 53.0 41.0 49.0 50.5 54.1 5.3 4
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.7 23.0 81.6 26.8 38.6 47.4 29.4 38.7 39.0 45.7 3.8 11
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.4 14.0 35.7 16.7 20.7 23.7 14.3 20.4 21.3 25.7 3.2 13
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.0 2.8 3.5 2.2 2.8 3.2 2.3 3.3 3.4 4.1 0.5 13
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 29.4 48.5 122.4 64.0 76.0 83.0 58.5 73.0 73.8 83.2 8.1 11
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.5 4.5 8.0 3.6 5.2 6.4 4.7 6.2 6.3 7.4 0.6 11
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 - 0.09 0.10
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull - 27 30
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 - 1.5 6
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification - C5 C5 C5
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.6 22.0 3.7 - 0.6 3.9
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 4 33 13.0 - 12 12
Valley length(ft) - 537 537
Channel Thalweg length(ft) - 738 738
Sinuosity(ft) - 1.2 to 1.6 1.4 1.4
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) - 0.0032 0.0034
BF slope(ft/ft) - 0.0032 0.0031
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) - 1.8 0.6
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks -
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric -
Biological or Other -
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
g EPR RESTORATION

Table 8c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT2a (1197 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 2.5 8 4.0 7 13 13 19 - 2 4.6 7.6 10.1 6.9 7.5 8.0 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 10 50 50 89 - 2 10.1 25.3 40.4 40.0 70.0 100.0 >53.9 >53.9 >53.9 >53.9 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.4 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.6 - 2 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.40 0.53 0.70 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 - 2 0.4 0.8 1.2 0.50 0.70 0.90 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 1.8 6.8 3.8 4 4 4 4 - 2 1.8 4.3 6.8 2.76 4.00 5.60 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 12 52 52 91 - 2 12.0 13.5 15.0 12.00 14.00 16.00 19.62 19.62 19.62 19.62 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2 3 3 5 - 2 2.2 3.1 4.0 5.40 9.40 13.40 >7.04 >7.04 >7.04 >7.04 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.8 - 2 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 8 21 23 30 9 4 Total riffle length 50%of reach length 10.0 17.0 40.0 11.5 19.0 17.0 32.2 6.9 10
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.009 0.014 0.024 0.009 0.013 0.012 0.018 0.002 10
Pool Length(ft) 7.6 9 8 11 1.5 3 Total pool length 50%of reach length 8.0 15.5 29.0 10.0 18.9 19.3 28.0 5.6 12
Pool Max depth(ft) 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 - 1 0.6 1.8 2.9 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.2 1.6 1.7 2.4 0.3 11
Pool Spacing(ft) 18 26 21 38 8.9 3 30.4 41.8 53.2 25.0 41.0 54.0 30.3 43.2 40.6 55.6 8.5 13
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 67 67 67 67 - 1 16.1 23.0 80.8 19.3 29.3 48.2 23.2 34.7 33.9 50.1 6.9 22
Radius of Curvature(ft) 40 55 55 69 - 2 9.2 14.0 35.4 16.7 19.0 23.7 11.7 19.1 19.1 24.6 3.1 24
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 3.1 4.2 4.2 5.3 - 2 2.0 2.8 3.5 2.2 2.6 3.2 1.5 2.5 2.5 3.2 0.4 24
Meander Wavelength(ft) 288 288 288 288 - 1 32.2 48.5 121.2 48.0 69.0 83.0 48.4 66.9 66.9 82.6 9.1 22
Meander Width Ratio 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 - 1 3.5 4.5 8.0 2.6 3.9 6.5 3.0 4.5 4.4 6.5 0.9 22
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.17 0.27 0.22
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 41 58 50
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 9.4 16.3 15
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B5, D5 through wetland C5 C5 C5
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.6 18.9 3.8 2.3 2.4 4.7
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 4 34 14.4 14 14 14
Valley length(ft) 882 917 917
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 956 1197 1197
Sinuosity(ft) 1.08 1.2 to 1.6 1.28 1.3
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0091 0.0093 0.0092
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0091 0.0093 0.0091
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) 1.0 1.5 1.5
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks 44%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8cRed Barn Mitigation Bank
g EPR RESTORATION

Table 8d. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT2b (1062 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 3.8 16 6.0 8 8 8 8 - 1 6.0 11.0 15.0 8.4 9.9 10.2 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 - 1 13.2 36.6 60.0 40.0 55.0 70.0 >54.9 >54.9 >54.9 >54.9 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 - 1 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.60 0.70 1.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 - 1 0.5 1.1 1.8 0.70 1.00 1.40 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 3 15 7.2 6 6 6 6 - 1 3.0 9.0 15.0 5.04 7.00 10.20 4.14 4.14 4.14 4.14 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 12 12 12 12 - 1 12.0 13.5 15.0 10.00 14.00 15.00 17.85 17.85 17.85 17.85 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 1 1 - 1 2.2 3.1 4.0 4.30 5.90 7.50 >6.4 >6.4 >6.4 >6.4 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 - 1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 29 91.3 80 165 56 3 Total riffle length 50%of reach length 7.0 21.0 50.0 15.9 28.2 25.3 45.7 9.6 13
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.009 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.005 0.009 0.002 13
Pool Length(ft) 118 142 141.5 165 - 2 Total pool length 50%of reach length 13.0 26.5 39.0 19.0 23.9 22.6 35.7 4.8 10
Pool Max depth(ft) 1.3 1.8 1.8 2.1 0.3 4 0.8 2.6 4.4 1.1 1.8 3.1 1.4 1.7 1.7 2.1 0.2 10
Pool Spacing(ft) 128 246 272 339 88 3 44.0 60.5 77.0 26.0 55.0 69.0 44.5 56.3 57.3 67.0 7.6 10
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 127 127 127 127 - 1 21.0 23.0 120.0 19.3 43.8 66.3 23.2 46.4 47.9 62.7 10.8 13
Radius of Curvature(ft) 35 73 64 121 44 3 12.0 14.0 52.5 15.7 27.7 32.7 21.1 26.9 27.6 32.9 3.5 12
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 4.4 9.2 8.0 15.1 4.5 3 2.0 2.8 3.5 1.7 3.0 3.5 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.8 0.4 12
Meander Wavelength(ft) 542 542 542 542 - 1 42.0 48.5 180.0 86.0 101.0 165.0 78.3 102.6 97.7 152.8 17.3 14
Meander Width Ratio 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 - 1 3.5 4.5 8.0 2.1 4.7 7.1 2.7 5.4 5.6 7.3 1.3 13
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.19 0.13 0.09
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 25 33 26
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 11.1 8.4 9
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification F5 C5 C5 C5
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.6 30.0 3.9 1.9 1.6 6.8
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 9 90 27.8 20 28 28
Valley length(ft) 1065 840 840
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1095 1050 1062
Sinuosity(ft) 1.03 1.2 to 1.6 1.25 1.3
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.005 0.0032 0.0030
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.005 0.0032 0.0031
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) 0.3 1.1 1.0
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks N/A
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8e. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT2c (244 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 4 17 6.2 8 8 8 8 - 1 6.0 11.3 15.5 9.2 9.8 10.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 - 1 13.2 37.6 62.0 72.0 98.0 124.0 41.4 41.4 41.4 41.4 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 - 1 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.60 0.70 0.90 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 - 1 0.5 1.1 1.8 0.70 1.00 1.20 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 3 16 7.7 6 6 6 6 - 1 3.0 9.5 16.0 5.52 I 7.00 9.18 3.90 3.90 3.90 3.90 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 12 12 12 12 - 1 12.0 13.5 15.0 12.00 14.00 15.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 1 1 - 1 2.2 3.1 4.0 7.40 10.10 12.80 4.48 4.48 4.48 4.48 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 - 1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 29 91.3 80 165 56 3 Total riffle length 50%of reach length 9.0 25.5 32.0 14.8 23.2 23.9 28.4 4.6 5
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.005 0.006 0.014 0.003 0.005 0.004 0.009 0.002 5
Pool Length(ft) 118 142 141.5 165 - 2 Total pool length 50%of reach length 15.0 20.5 25.0 14.2 20.8 23.9 24.3 4.6 3
Pool Max depth(ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 - 1 0.8 2.7 4.5 1.2 1.8 2.6 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.5 0.3 3
Pool Spacing(ft) 339 339 339 339 - 1 45.2 62.2 79.1 28.0 48.0 50.0 41.0 45.9 47.6 49.2 3.5 3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.19 0.13 0.08
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 25 33 22
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 11.1 8.4 8
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification F5 B5c B5c B5c
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 3.3 5.8 3.9 1.9 1.6 7.2
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 10 93 29.8 20 28 28
Valley length(ft) 237 242 242
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 244 244 244
Sinuosity(ft) 1.03 1.01 1.0
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.005 0.0035 0.0030
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.005 0.0035 0.0030
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) 0.3 0.5 0.1
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks 56%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8f. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT3a (1410 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 2 8 3.5 5 6 6 6 0.7 3 4.2 7.7 10.8 6.2 6.2 6.2 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.6 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 6 8 8 10 1.6 3 5.9 14.8 23.8 9.0 11.5 14.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.3 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 3 0.2 0.6 0.9 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.0 3 0.3 0.8 1.3 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 1.5 6.5 3.2 2 2 2 3 0.1 3 1.5 4.0 6.5 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.57 1.57 1.57 1.57 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 9 12 12 16 2.7 3 12.0 15.0 18.0 13.00 13.00 13.00 19.93 19.93 19.93 19.93 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 2 2 0.1 3 1.4 1.8 2.2 1.40 1.80 2.20 5.55 5.55 5.55 5.55 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.9 1.3 3.3 1.0 3 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 3 9 9 15.8 4 5 Total riffle length 60-70%of reach length 4.5 15.0 29.0 12.5 17.9 17.5 27.6 4.1 11
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.024 0.033 0.043 0.021 0.030 0.030 0.042 0.006 11
Pool Length(ft) 2 10 10.1 17 6 4 Total pool length 30-40%of reach length 5.0 14.0 21.0 6.7 11.0 10.8 15.1 3.0 12
Pool Max depth(ft) 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.1 5 0.5 1.8 3.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.8 1.8 2.3 0.3 12
Pool Spacing(ft) 5.3 18.75 19.95 29.800 8.776 4 3.9 21.2 38.5 6.0 23.0 44.0 21.5 29.8 29.5 45.4 6.2 10
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.2 17.2 28.2 9.0 14.1 13.8 20.9 2.8 12
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15.7 20.1 27.1 18.1 24.1 28.1 28.1 4.4 13
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.5 3.2 4.4 3.2 4.3 5.0 5.0 0.8 13
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 45.0 61.0 141.0 47.4 78.2 79.7 132.6 26.2 14
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.5 2.8 4.5 1.6 2.5 2.5 3.7 0.5 12
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 0.57 0.7 0.43
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 85 117 82
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 9 17 21
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B/G 5 B4 B4 B4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.5 20.7 3.7 2.6 1.7 3.2
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 3.5 31 11.7 5 5 5
Valley length(ft) 1315 1395 1395
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1476 1410 1410
Sinuosity(ft) 1.12 1.1 to 1.2 1.07 1.01
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0241 0.0269 0.0256
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0241 0.0269 0.0258
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) 0.2 0.3 0.7
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks 30%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8g. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT3b (190 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 2 8 3.5 7 7 7 7 - 1 4.2 7.7 10.8 7.6 7.6 7.6 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 10 10 10 10 - 1 5.9 14.8 23.8 11 14 17 24.6 24.6 24.6 24.6 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.3 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 - 1 0.2 0.6 0.9 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1 0.3 0.8 1.3 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 1.5 6.5 3.2 4 4 4 4 - 1 1.5 4.0 6.5 4.50 4.50 4.50 3.74 3.74 3.74 3.74 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 10 10 10 10 - 1 12.0 15.0 18.0 13.00 13.00 13.00 12.76 12.76 12.76 12.76 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2 2 2 2 - 1 1.4 1.8 2.2 1.40 1.80 2.20 3.58 3.58 3.58 3.58 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 - 1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total riffle length 60-70%of reach length 15.0 20.0 25.0 8.9 14.9 15.0 21.2 4.3 6
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.020 0.020 0.027 0.022 0.029 0.030 0.038 0.005 6
Pool Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total pool length 30-40%of reach length 10.0 15.0 24.0 14.7 16.5 16.2 20.3 1.8 6
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 1.8 3.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.7 2.1 2.0 2.9 0.4 6
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.6 28.9 46.2 20.0 35.0 44.0 15.4 31.6 33.7 45.0 9.9 6
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 - 0.49 0.52
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull - 91 91
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 - 13 28
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification - B4c B4c B4c
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.5 20.7 3.7 - 3 3.6
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 3.5 31 11.7 - 13.32 13.32
Valley length(ft) - 183 183
Channel Thalweg length(ft) - 190 190
Sinuosity(ft) - 1.1 to 1.3 1.04 1.04
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) - 0.0155 0.0159
BF slope(ft/ft) - 0.0155 0.0153
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) - 0.1 0.1
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks -
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8h. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT3c (1097 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med I Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 2.5 9.5 4.4 8 8 8 8 - 1 4.9 8.6 11.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 9 9 9 9 - 1 >10.8 >10.8 >10.8 25.0 50.0 75.0 >40.0 >40.0 >40.0 >40.0 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.4 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 - 1 0.3 0.6 1.0 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 - 1 0.4 0.9 1.5 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 2 9 4.5 4 4 4 4 - 1 2.0 5.5 9.0 4.50 4.50 4.50 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio 15 15 15 15 - 1 12.0 13.5 15.0 13.00 13.00 13.00 17.73 17.73 17.73 17.73 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 1 1 - 1 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2 3.30 6.60 9.90 >5.13 >5.13 >5.13 >5.13 - 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 - 1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total riffle length 60-70%of reach length 5.0 14.0 29.0 11.4 19.2 18.8 29.1 5.1 12
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.014 0.022 0.042 0.013 0.018 0.017 0.025 0.003 12
Pool Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total pool length 30-40%of reach length 10.0 15.0 41.0 10.9 17.7 18.1 25.9 4.6 18
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 1.9 3.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.3 2.3 3.1 0.4 14
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 30.1 45.2 60.2 10.0 23.5 58.0 10.9 40.4 42.1 59.8 12.0 16
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17.2 23.0 92.8 17.0 26.4 39.5 16.9 26.6 25.3 35.9 6.0 18
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.8 14.0 40.6 15.8 19.1 24.8 9.2 23.0 25.6 29.8 6.6 20
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.0 2.8 3.5 2.1 2.5 3.3 1.2 2.9 3.3 3.8 0.9 20
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 34.3 48.5 162.4 59.0 75.0 95.0 46.0 73.6 78.7 85.9 11.4 16
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.5 4.5 8.0 2.2 3.5 5.2 2.2 3.4 3.2 4.6 0.8 18
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 - 0.63 0.54
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull - 108 94
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 - 19 35
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification F4 C4 C4 C4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.8 12.5 3.8 - 3.3 4.4
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 7 25 16.9 - 15.06 15.06
Valley length(ft) - 920 920
Channel Thalweg length(ft) - 1097 1097
Sinuosity(ft) - 1.2 to 1.4 1.19 1.19
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) - 0.0198 0.0201
BF slope(ft/ft) - 0.0198 0.0201
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) - 1.1 1.1
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks 70%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 8i. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site - UT4 (134 feet)
Parameter ' Regional Curve ' Pre-Existing Condition I Reference Reach(es) Data ' Design ' Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD5 n Min I Mean Med Max SD5 n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD5 n
Bankfull Width(ft) 1 5 2.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.4 5.1 7.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 - 1
Floodprone Width(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.4 9.7 16.1 7.0 9.5 12.0 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 - 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.2 0.8 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 - 1
IBankfull Max Depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 - 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 0.5 3 1.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 1.8 3.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.26 1.26 1.26 1.26 - 1
Width/Depth Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.0 15.0 18.0 13 13 13 14.72 14.72 14.72 14.72 - 1
Entrenchment Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.4 1.8 2.2 1.8 2.4 3.0 2.76 2.76 2.76 2.76 - 1
Bank Height Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.1 1 1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total riffle length 50%of reach length 10.0 10.0 18.0 20.0 22.9 22.9 25.9 2.9 2
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I I I I I 0.005 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.015 0.015 0.017 0.003 2
Pool Length(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total pool length 50%of reach length 9.0 10.0 15.5 13.8 19.0 19.0 24.2 5.2 2
Pool Max depth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 1.2 2.1 2.2 2.6 3.85 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.1 2
Pool Spacing(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.7 19.1 30.6 20.0 23.0 33.1 46.3 46.3 46.3 46.3 0.0 1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Radius of Curvature(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Wavelength(ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Meander Width Ratio N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 N/A 0.02 0.27
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull N/A 7 40
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 N/A 0 2
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B/G 4 B4c B4c B4c
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 0.7 18.0 3.5 N/A 0.5 0.5
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 2 9 5.3 N/A 0.62 0.62
Valley length(ft) 130 129 130
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 134 134 134
Sinuosity(ft) 1.03 1.1 to 1.3 1.04 1.03
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0241 0.0084 0.015
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0241 0.0084 0.015
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) N/A 0.2 0.05
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks N/A
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3
Note that the valley length has increased in the proposed alignment.
Appendix C ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
9 EPR RESTORATION

Table 9. Monitoring Data-Cross Section Monitoring Data Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
UT1a(1590 feet) UT1c(738 feet)
Cross Section 1(Pool) Cross Section 2(Pool) Cross Section 3(Riffle) Cross Section 4(Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
(2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 1043.97 1043.98 1023.76 1023.75 1021.58 1021.55 1018.47 1018.46
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.07
Thalweg Elevation 1042.64 1042.78 1022.85 1022.8 1021.11 1020.98 1017.75 1017.75
LTOB2 Elevation 1043.97 1043.94 1023.76 1023.72 1021.58 1021.57 1018.47 1018.51
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 1.33 1.16 0.91 0.92 0.47 0.59 0.72 0.76
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 7.36 6.81 4.14 3.90 L 1.73 1.83 3.07 3.44
Entrenchment Ratio - - - - >6.87 >7.3 >9.29 >8.47 M.
UT1c(738 feet) UT2a(1,197 feet) UT2b(1077 feet)
Cross Section 5(Pool) Cross Section 6(Pool) Cross Section 7(Riffle) Cross Section 8(Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation I Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
(2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 1017.76 1017.78 1023.50 1023.56 1019.49 1019.51 1016.72 1016.93
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.00 1.05 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.86
Thalweg Elevation 1016.7 1016.64 1022.13 1022 1018.79 1018.77 1015.25 1015.36
LTOB2 Elevation 1017.76 1017.84 1023.5 1023.45 1019.49 1019.39 1016.72 1016.71
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 1.06 1.2 1.37 1.45 0.7 0.62 1.47 1.35
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 5.10 5.69 7.90 6.81 2.95 2.19 8.47 6.36
Entrenchment Ratio - - - - >7.04 >6.45 - -
UT2b(1077 feet) UT2c(244 feet) UT3a(1410 feet)
Cross Section 9(Riffle) Cross Section 10(Pool) Cross Section 11(Riffle) Cross Section 12(Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation 1 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
(2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 1016.16 1016.19 1014.60 1014.61 1013.38 1013.45 1070.58 1070.64
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.00 1.02 1.00 1 1.00 0.81 1.00 1
Thalweg Elevation 1015.3 1015.3 6 1012.53 1012.4 1012.56 1012.76 1070.07 1070.13
LTOB2 Elevation 1016.16 1016.2 1014.6 1014.61 1013.38 1013.32 1070.58 1070.64
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 0.86 0.9 2.07 2.21 0.82 0.56 0.51 0.51
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 4.14 4.40 10.45 10.43 3.90 2.81 1.57 1.58
Entrenchment Ratio >6.40 >6.35 - - 4.48 3.63 5.55 4.71
UT3a(1410 feet) UT3b(190 feet) UT3c(1097 feet)
Cross Section 13(Pool) Cross Section 14(Pool) Cross Section 15(Riffle) Cross Section 16(Riffle)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY= Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation Base
(2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 1052.09 1051.92 1041.94 1042.04 1037.67 1037.71 1026.46 1026.52
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.00 1.08 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.09
Thalweg Elevation 1050.32 1049.97 1040.44 1040.47 1036.9 1036.87 1025.81 1025.91
LTOB2 Elevation 1052.09 1052.08 1041.94 1041.94 1037.67 1037.7 1026.46 1026.58
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 1.77 2.11 1.5 1.47 0.77 0.83 0.65 0.67
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 8.79 10.78 6.74 5.98 3.74 3.67 3.46 3.98
Entrenchment Ratio - - - - = 3.58 3.43 >5.13 >4.92
UT3c(1097 feet) UT4(134 feet)
Cross Section 17(Pool) Cross Section 18(Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+
(2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024 (2020) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 1020.20 1020.25 1043.01 1043.09
Bank Height Ratio-Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.79
Thalweg Elevation 1017.74 1017.65 1042.59 1042.69
LTOB2 Elevation 1020.2 1020.19 1043.01 1043.01
LTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 2.46 2.54 0.42 0.32
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 12.74 12.13 1.22 0.90
Entrenchment Ratio - - 2.76 2.7
The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward.They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area
and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows:
1 -Bank Height Ratio(BHR)takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2,then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey=10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank(LTOB)
elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator.This same process is then carried out in each successive year.
2-LTOB Area and Max depth-These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey(The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above.The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation(same as in the BHR calculation)will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth.
Note:The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection,therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement(as a percentage)is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed.
ECOSYSTEM
Appendix C PLANNING&
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Appendix D
Hydrologic Data
Table 10. Stream Flow and Bankfull Event Verification
Figure 3. Monthly Rainfall Data
Precipitation and Water Level (Stream Flow and Groundwater) Hydrographs
Table 11. Wetland Hydrology Annual Summary

Table 10. Stream Flow and Bankfull Event Verification
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Overbank Events
Gage ID MY1 (2020)* Days** MY2 (2021) Days MY3 (2022) Days MY4(2023) Days MY5(2025) Days MY6(2026) Days MY7 (2027)
18 separate events:
4/13/2020
5/27/2020
7/10/2020
8/5/2020
8/12/2020
8/15/2020
8/25/2020
RBSG1 8/31/2020
UT1a 9/17/2020 266
9/29/2020
10/11/2020
10/29/2020
11/12/2020
11/30/2020
12/4/2020
12/14/2020
12/16/2020
12/24/2020
21 separate events:
4/13/2020
4/30/2020
5/20/2020
5/28/2020
7/10/2020
8/5/2020
8/12/2020
8/15/2020
8/25/2020
UT1c 8/31/2020 81
RBSG2 9/17/2020
9/29/2020
10/11/2020
10/25/2020
10/29/2020
11/12/2020
11/30/2020
12/5/2020
12/14/2020
12/16/2020
12/25/2020
5 separate events:
4/13/2020
UT2a 10/29/2020
RBSG3 11/11/2020 266
12/14/2020
12/25/2020
*Indicates the number of separate bankfull events recorded throughout the monitoring year.
**Indicates the maximum number of consecutive days of flow recorded throughout the monitoring year.
Appendix D ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING
Red Barn Mitigation Bank &
g EPR RESTORATION

Table 10. Stream Flow and Bankfull Event Verification (continued)
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Overbank Events
Gage ID MY1 (2020)* Days** MY2(2021) Days MY3 (2022) Days MY4(2023) Days MY5(2025) Days MY6(2026) Days MY7 (2027)
21 separate events:
4/13/2020
4/30/2020
5/22/2020
5/28/2020
7/10/2020
8/5/2020
8/12/2020
8/14/2020
8/24/2020
UT2c 8/31/2020 266
RBSG4 9/17/2020
9/29/2020
10/11/2020
10/25/2020
10/29/2020
11/11/2020
11/30/2020
12/5/2020
12/14/2020
12/16/2020
12/24/2020
15 separate events:
4/13/2020
4/30/2020
5/27/2020
8/15/2020
8/31/2020
9/29/2020
UT3c 10/11/2020 266
RBSG5 10/25/2020
10/29/2020
11/12/2020
11/30/2020
12/4/2020
12/14/2020
12/16/2020
12/24/2020
11 separate events:
4/13/2020
4/30/2020
5/27/2020
10/11/2020
UT4 10/29/2020 266
RBSG6 11/12/2020
11/30/2020
12/4/2020
12/14/2020
12/16/2020
12/24/2020
3 separate events:
UT3a 4/13/2020 266
RBSG7 10/29/2020
11/11/2020
*Indicates the number of separate bankfull events recorded throughout the monitoring year.
**Indicates the maximum number of consecutive days of flow recorded throughout the monitoring year.
Appendix D ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
g EPR RESTORATION

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Figure 3. Monthly Rainfall Data
Monitoring Year 1 - 2020
2020 Monthly Rainfall -30th Percentile -70th Percentile
12.00
10.00
8.00
c
crs
= 6.00
>• d il
0
4.00
::: IlIFUhi
111H104
■
Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20
Month
Note:Historic rainfall data from WETS Station:Mount Airy 2 W,NC,1971-2019.Project rainfall data from HOBO Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge located at the Red Barn Mitigation Bank,3.5 miles SE.
Rainfall Summary
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Annual Precip Total 67.90 - - - - - -
WETS 30th Percentile 43.95 - - - - - -
WETS 70th Percentile 52.86 - - - - - -
Normal Y - - - - - -
*Note:2020 rainfall data does not include data from November or December because the gauge was last downloaded in October during MY1 monitoring.

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG1
1024 16
1023.8
1 111 14
1023.6 - -. IIIIIII•-- -------- -----
12
1023.4 —
• 01110
v 1023.2 • 4111111111 >
•° 1023 I _ 8 v
(15 t
U
w 1022.8 • • - 6 -
•
1022.E --•
- -
— -- - 4
1022.4 —
1022.2 _ _ — - 2
1022 • . .. ! 1 I `. .. .. "•� . •• • ......- =ft... ... 0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG1
Reach UT1a Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20727110 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1022.39
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1022.97
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1023.61
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 0.53
Bankfull Events 18

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG2
1019.1 I 16
i
141018.6IIII 12
• 11. • toollio
- 10
- 1018.1 • lit!
8N
U
w1017.E • I ---• v- �- ..— —LI - ------- i - - 6' ...if
:� IP 1r�4r�+ ww r ' �A�' — — — 4
1017.1 I .;— � "' - - - - •
•
•
�. . 1 _. . •
.. . . • L. . . _ ... :: • ..
1016.E • p
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG2
Reach UT1c Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20727117 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1017.30
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1017.61
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1018.45
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 81
Total Days of Flow 179
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 1.64
Bankfull Events 21

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG3
16
1020
1 14
. ------- --- ---- ---- -. .---- -- --
12
1019.5
IL- • • 10 ›..
— • (15
c -cs
o ---..
z 8 1,11
(15 1019 _c
> - 0
a) • 6 LTJ • -
- - - •
- -
-
1018.5 — — 4
—
1018
1 : -- .... .... •••• .11.
.".. •••• ••••. .... ... .... ..• .... s
•••• ''''
- - -- -::-- -
r •
Z • •: ::.. :4 ::: -
I : •. •
:. • • 4,„ ::... , :: :: •It. :• :•v: .• Z -... ::
••• .: . •• ! ::•-• ••• - i• •-• i .: :::(4 • •. - . • ...-• • : :•• .:: ... :• :"..e. :: ..*„.:- .:.. :e. •• z
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG3
Reach UT2a Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20727111 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1018.69
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1018.96
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1019.73
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 0.33
Bankfull Events 5

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG4
1014.5 16
14
1014
1013.5 • —
--- - --- I I ) - 12
• 10
1013 8 v
(15 t
U
LT) • -i. iv�w� rY W. ... _ C
1012.5 - — • 6
1012 _ _ _ = -I_ _ ' - i ,...1 ....
_ _ _ •
1011.5 - .. • -.. .... .. .. . . • .-. . . . .. ?Jr:—
:
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG4
Reach UT2c Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20234989 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1011.95
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1012.67
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1013.6
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 6.37
Bankfull Events 21

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG5
1027 16
1026.8
- 14
1026.E I --1- _ __ __I_ - 12
1026.4 —
• • - 10
v 1026.2 • (15
•° 1026 8 v
(15 t
U
LT, 1025.8 • - 6
- -- -
•
1025.E , � —•
- - - -- 4
1025.4
1025.2 _ _ — - - - - • 2
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG5
Reach UT3c Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20234995 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1025.15
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1025.80
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1026.47
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 1.04
Bankfull Events 15

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG6
16
1043.4
14
1043.2 - -
II 12
•
• 00 10
i :E .
6
•
1042.4 =� - - -• 4
- Oft
— •.1042.2 - - _ — I - - - - - - 2
�
1042 • . • .. I ...•. .. . .. . .. - -n.•. ... 0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG6
Reach UT4 Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20234987 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1042.40
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1042.61
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1043.05
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 0.68
Bankfull Events 11

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Streamflow Data
RBSG7
1 16
1051.5
1 I [ 14
1051.3
1 4_
1051.1
- . 12
— 1050.9 • • •
— • (15
c -cs
o 1050.7 ----,
7-, - 8 ',II
(15 _c
1050.5 L 0
c
LTJ • --- ----- ---- - . J,J _ • II u u 11 1 Ll II 1 1 11 11 6 —
1050.3 • ... --
1 ....
, ...- ...
.... — -- .... :.••• 4
... a...
1050.1 - •••• s
..... ........ __.. ., •••• ... ...• .... .... .... ..... .... 0. v... S
.. •... ..•• ...
.•1 ON.. S
". ::::.8 :. Fl 1 • P. :.1 ":...:::::. .... .... ....
1049.9 - ii
•• - :: •• 5. ii .
'• :* :: 1 :::::: e . .**. i E ;I:s• .. • •
•. - . • ...-• • . .•. .:: ••• :. :Vs": ;:t":•• ..------ .:IF: l'• Ei 3. 0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) ----•DS Riffle Elevation(ft) -Bankfull Elevation(ft) Daily Rainfall(in)
— — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile • 2020 Monthly Rainfall
Site Info Year 1(2020)Streamflow Data
Stream Red Barn Mitigation Bank Gauge ID RBSG7
Reach UT3a Start Date 1/1/2020
Date Installed 7/29/2020 End Date 12/31/2020
Serial Number 20234988 Flow Criteria (Days) 30
Reach Type Perennial Recordings Per Day 24
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Logger Elevation (ft) 1049.87
monthly rainfall data Controlling Grade Elevation (ft) 1050.38
Bankfull Elevation (ft) 1051.04
Most Consecutive Days of Flow 266
Total Days of Flow 266
Max High Water Level Above Bankfull (ft) 0.31
Bankfull Events 3

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG1
1021 16
- 14
1020
I - 12
1019
• • ~- -• fl10 -
-
m
wmwmovi I
� 8
- - - — • I 4
— _ _ I
'' L — — — - _ _ - - - - - - - I _ _ _
R i' I' 2
I.' A i, ,4 • • • }�11 'ri k II 8 n i i )ii, i 14 It
1015 .V..v_n_.' t I-,_-i•__`--- i._•_%_.S__ J L_.�L' `.a__•_--- , i , n
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG1
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20234991
Total Days of Well Data 200 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 2
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 1.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1017.36
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 6

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG2
1021 16
14
1020
1019
• I I I • I 12
I
1018 8 v
U
6 c
1017 E . � � - 1' - - - -
— —
1
- - - — • 1 4
- - _ _ I
i' L — — — — _ _ — — - - - - - - - I _ _ _
110
R i' I' so ! • 2
I.' A i, ,4 • • • }� 'ri k II h n i 1 )ii;VI, i 14 ii
1015 .V..v_n_.' ' ..t_.._.•_J`__'1i..•- ._.S__ j s_.iN `J`-_•_--- , i , n'
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG2
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20234992
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 2
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 1.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1017.31
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 9

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG3
1021 I 16
I
1020 I - 14
- - — I-
1019 I I I I I - 12
I _—
• •• •• —II"--— —_1—
= 10 >.
•° 1018 1I 8 I
v _ _ Lot- �ww�nwl�r� 6
w 1017 • � � - I- — -
— I
- - - — • I 4
— _ _ I
'' L - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - I _ _ _
I. 1
-- — 7r, — —It — . i 2
I.' A , ,4 • • • }� 'ri k II h n i i )ii;VI, hiIL
1015 1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG3
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20234993
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 2
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 1.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1017.34
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 7

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG4
1021 16
14
1020
12
1019 'I -4_
• • 10 ,t5
1018 \JLI[
8 \
\kta i
- - 1
w .. — — — — — — — — — — — ... 6
1017 1 —
— 4
is 1016 _ _ _ _ _ —� Li— — — — — — _ - - - - — — - - - - - -
— - - .. — It•- - - — —
I' ; — . 2
'I 'I ' , i II $ ' A
A Il 11 di .` i., 4.. • • • }. Sig �1 ii o . • 0 )., ,. A 4 ° i
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG4
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727104
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 3
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 1.5%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1016.81
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 19

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG5
1021 16
I 14
1020
112
1019 • 4 1\• L 10 CU
ra
▪ 1018 I I -- - ' (I
✓ ' I� - - ---I- -- ■ 6 0
\sw
w 1017 • - - _ - - .ki\Av,.......0,
Sl- - � -
- - .rI 4
'' L - - - - - _ - - - - - - - I _
1016 _ _ _ _!_ -;� - - ,� - - - - - •
- - - - - I t•- -
R �' ,' 2
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) - - -Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground - - -Begin Growing Season - - -End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall - - -30th Percentile - - -70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG5
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727107
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 12
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 6.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1016.91
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 53

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG6
1021 16
1020 14
12
1019 LirrcL
• • I r - 10
1018I • I I 11 I _.! i I 8 \
ai
1017 1 — — — — — — ,43
•
Lio;;Arwrer -
L — — ii 1, — • 4
i' L — — — — — _ - - — — — - - I _ _ _
R i' -
:' . 2
A j 11 AA , .` ' '1�. • • • }.11 i. �1 'i h n n ' ''i' �' �� ° i
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG6
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727112
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 7
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 3.5%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1016.79
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 38

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG7
1021 I 16
I
1020 ( . 14
ill A 1 12
1019 _ _. ! ! • _
III\
1018 I II
,,„
M :( 11-vivrov.ve ...T. ..
1
1, .. - 1 4
.' L — — — — — _ - - - - - - - I _ _ _
1016 — 1- -;'� - - ,, - - - - - - - - — It•- -
R �' 1' . 2
A II Ii AA , .` i' 4.. • • • II��..}. i. �1 'i h n n '� ''i' ,' t4 ° i
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG7
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727109
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 7
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 3.5%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1017.99
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 47

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG8
1024.7 16
1024.2 _ I 14
1023.7 \ 12
• \a„,,,,,%1\1\\.,
1023.2 • ---- - �- �- ---�I 10
1 (15
022.7 8 v
la t
U
, , 1022.2 . I 1 I - • • 6
t
11 - 0.
� - _ - S
11- _
1021.2 - 1 11 11 {{ 1 _ _�_ _ Mj1 1 2
11 11 11 • f ki I 1 11 11 4 ii)) 4
• 1 111 1 11 1 1 • WI 11
1020.7 .A.1'-^-11--'-) i l{�`-!-s.j1--..;�1_„% .-i---•I Lee" • • /�11 '1 1 11 11 All 1 I 1 i I 1 1 n :ft 11 ' 0
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) - - -Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground - - -Begin Growing Season - - -End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall - - -30th Percentile - - -70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG8
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727114
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 57
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 28.4%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1023.35
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 165

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Year 1 (2020) Groundwater Data
RBWG9
1030 16
1029.5 14
1029 12
z 1028.5 • • • 10 I
>.
ra 1028 8
Ik...1,- - .... .... .4fic es„
\\\,-, 6 —
1027 •
i� • — — — — ki:50\\4
4
1026.5 ;; ;i —� — ,, 2
1, 11 ,1 ■ 1. ; i A
• }i 111 ; 1 1� f, i 1 ' e;
1026 "Ate t_,%_ ,____ii fi4=—iA��!�__..;�i_„ni.-A___.1__.'��ur:; • • �1, �rl 1� li 1 it 11 iii, i,„ If1 0
.. . � / ._. �!N✓1�---�..1--'��---�1 hill,. /1.1---1 1_�.._1
1/1/2020 1/31/2020 3/1/2020 3/31/2020 4/30/2020 5/30/2020 6/29/2020 7/29/2020 8/28/2020 9/27/2020 10/27/2020 11/26/2020 12/26/2020
Date
Water Level(ft) — — —Ground Elevation(ft) 12 in.Below Ground — — —Begin Growing Season — — —End Growing Season
Daily Rainfall(in) • 2020 Monthly Rainfall — — —30th Percentile — — —70th Percentile
Site Info(Year 1) Growing Season Information(Year 1-2020)
Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Begin Date 4/9/2020 Gauge ID RBWG9
End Date 10/28/2020 Serial# 20727115
Total Days of Well Data 201 Growing Season Start Date 4/8/2020
*Percentile lines in reference to WETS historic Growing Season End Date 10/26/2020
monthly rainfall data Total Growing Season Days 201
NRCS Soil Series Dillard Fine Sandy Loam
10.0% Growing Season(Days) 20
12.5% Growing Season(Days) 25
Most Consecutive Successful Days Within Growing Season 2
Percent of Growing Season with Consecutive Successful Days 1.0%
Average Water Level Elevation During Growing Season(ft) 1026.92
Total Cumulative Successful Days Within Growing Season 4

Table 11. Wetland Hydrology Annual Summary
Red Barn Mitigation Bank Site Project
Performance Standard: 10%
WETS Station: Mount Airy 2 W,NC
Monitorin Growing Season: 4/8 to 10/26(201 days)
g Gauge Max.Consecutive Hydroperiod(%)
MY1(2020) MY2(2021) MY3(2020) MY4(2021) MY5(2020) MY6(2021) MY7(2020)
Days* %** Days % Days % Days % Days % Days % Days %
RBWG1 2 1.0%
RBWG2 2 1.0%
RBWG3 2 1.0%
RBWG4 3 1.5%
RBWGS 12 6.0%
RBWG6 7 3.5%
RBWG7 7 3.5%
RBWG8 57 28.4%
RBWG9 2 1.0%
Meets Success Criteria ccess Criteria
*Most consecutive successful days within the growing period
**Percent of the growing season represented by period of most consecutive days of gauge success.
Appendix D ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING
Red Barn Mitigation Bank EPR RESTORATION

Appendix E
Project Timeline and Contact Information
Table 12. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 13. Project Contacts Table

Table 12. Project Activity and Reporting History
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 0 yrs 9 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 0 yrs 9 months
Number of reporting Years: 1
Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery
Institution Date - Oct-17
404 permit date - Nov-19
Final Mitigation Plan 2018 to 2019
Final Design—Construction Plans - Nov-19
Site Earthwork Dec 2019 to April 2020 Apr-20
As-Built Survey Performed May-20 May-20
Bare root plantings - Apr-20
As-built Baseline Monitoring Report(Monitoring Year 0) May-20 Jun-20
Year 1 Monitoring Nov-20 Dec-20
Year 2 Monitoring 2021 Dec-21
Year 3 Monitoring 2022 Dec-22
Year 4 Monitoring 2023 Dec-23
Year 5 Monitoring 2024 Dec-24
Year 6 Monitoring 2025 Dec-25
Year 7 Monitoring 2026 Dec-26
1 =The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline
Appendix E ECOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING T Sc
g EPR RESTORATION

Table 13. Project Contacts Table
Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration,PLLC
Designer
1150 SE Maynard Rd.Ste 140 Cary, NC 27511
Primary project design POC Kevin Tweedy, PE(919)388-0787
Construction Contractor North State Environmental
2889 Lowery St,Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Construction contractor POC Darrell Westmoreland
Survey Contractor Turner Land Surveying, PLLC
PO Box 148,Swannanoa, NC 28778
Survey contractor POC Lissa Turner(919)827-0745
Planting Contractor North State Environmental
2889 Lowery St,Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Planting contractor POC Darrell Westmoreland
Seeding Contractor North State Environmental
2889 Lowery St,Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Contractor point of contact Darrell Westmoreland
Foggy Mountain Nursery
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Dykes and Son Nursery
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration,PLLC
Monitoring Performers
Stream Monitoring POC Cidney Jones, EPR(919)388-0787
Vegetation Monitoring POC Tom Barrett, EPR(919)388-0787
Appendix E
Red Barn Mitigation Bank ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING 8c
EPR RESTORATION

Appendix F
Conservation Easement Annual Monitoring
Pre-Closeout Conservation Easement Annual
Monitoring Form

71%0. 04
Unique Places
To Save
Pre-Closeout Conservation Easement
Annual Monitoring Form
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Name of Property: Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Property Acreage: 25.4 acres
Date Easement Granted: 8/28/2019
Owner Name: Ecosystem Planning and Restoration
Owner Email: [e-mail]
Owner Phone: [phone]
MONITORING INFORMATION
Date of Inspection: 11/16/2020
General Weather Conditions (temp, cloud cover, precip): Clear and cool, mid-50's, no
rain
Any Third Parties Attending Inspection: N/A
Time Spent on Inspection: 6 hours
Was Owner Contacted Prior to Inspection?: Yes
Is the Property Currently for Sale?: No

MONITORING OBSERVATIONS
Was fencing fully intact and in good condition?
(if no,please describe and mark on monitoring map location of downed fencing)
-All fencing was fully intact and in good condition.All gates were closed.
Are conservation signs visible and in good condition?
(if no,please describe and indicate how many signs need to be replaced and where on monitoring map)
-All conservation easement signs were visible and in good condition.
Is there any evidence of trespassing,trash dumping,vandalism or vehicular use?
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-There was evidence of easement encroachment noted along the north side of the
easement near UT3.It appeared that either the repair contractors or well driller had
driven partially through the easement for approximately 250 feet (see attached
photo and Figure 2C). The tracks extended approximately 5-8 feet into the easement
in some places. The conservation easement signs were in place at the time.There
were indentions in the soil from the tire tracks but there did not appear to be any
lasting or significant damage. The repair work and well drilling is complete and EPR
has been in contact with the contractor that will install waterers and water line to
ensure there are no additional encroachments while work on the Chandler property
is completed.
-In addition, EPR noted that there was a tractor parked partially within the
easement. This has been addressed with the landowner to ensure that this
encroachment does not continue.
Is there any evidence of animal grazing, mowing, or disturbance of native vegetation?
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-No, there was no evidence of animal grazing, mowing, or disturbance of native
vegetation.
Is there any evidence of erosion within the Conservation Area?
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-No, there was no evidence of erosion within the Conservation Area.
Is there any evidence of invasive plant growth or establishment?
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-No, there was no evidence of significant invasive plant growth or establishment.
Some scattered multiflora rose and Chinese privet was noted in very small amounts
around the project, and this will be spot treated as necessary during Monitoring Year
2.There was also one small patch of bamboo noted in the easement area along UT1.
This will be cut and sprayed in Monitoring Year 2.

Is there any evidence of new infrastructure, new roads,or soil disturbance?
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-No, there was no evidence of new infrastructure, new roads, or soil disturbance.
Describe any other activities that maybe inconsistent with the Conservation Easement:
(if yes,please describe and indicate on monitoring map)
-No other activities that are inconsistent with the Conservation Easement were
noted.
SUMMARY OF MONITORING VISIT
Does Unique Places to Save need to be informed of any changed conditions or activities
observed during the monitoring site visit?
(if yes,please summarize why UP2S needs to be informed)
-No.
Did the person monitoring the Property observe any potential violations of the
Conservation Easement?
(if yes,please summarize potential violation)
-Other than the temporary easement encroachment outlined above, no other
violations of the Conservation Easement were observed.
Suggest any actions that should be taken as a result of this site monitoring visit:
-EPR will remind all contractors performing work outside of the easement to stay out
of the easement. If necessary, ERP will install more frequent signs and posts through
this area to make the easement boundary more apparent.
Please suggest any actions that need to be taken for the next annual monitoring visit:
-The current contractors and the landowner have been contacted regarding the issue
and no other actions are recommended at this time.Additional easement signs will
be established if needed.

CONTACT INFORMATION & DECLARATION OF ACCURACY OF MONITOR
Name: Russell Myers
Affiliation (company): Ecosystem Planning and Restoration
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
12/14/2020
Signature of Monitor Date
*This report is a record of one person's observations during one visit.It is not intended to be a statement of landowner compliance of the
conservation easement.
DESCRIPTION OF ENCLOSURES AND ATTACHMENTS
Indicate the number of the following items accompanying this report:
Aerial photos
4 Ground photos
3 Maps and Illustrations
Other
If attachments are separated from this report, note their location:

Red Barn Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1
,
Y
I E•
�
� u P4� esgr4 z�� '
,i �i `�r�°F t� 4dp A� t f 3t�' s E zw .� t ,. F 3't
;-.i.. ,e,.. .., ,..r.1''''''',..:14,r4,,TA .2....ti-:4:-''244-t-1:‘' '41
,--'--',5./ :'..4t.'4.,e, ' 0. -,7.,1-r"l'-'11: 7'4,,,:".'-_ twi:c.:•4:.0,.4...:,.....:7, :_:,A,-*.zg.---,„.
'k :-1.:.;...1.1.fa, '7'..":1:t-.1:*';';1-L.,,,,,,,,-.--::: `7'.;:.;;; ;'rio;.i-t,•:::.'''..$41.V.KTJ.7fzgA.::',';',. 11%-:.:,.;4-1-!'''. .'':
Vehicle tracks through edge of conservation easement along UT3.
Facing west(11/16/2020)
Y, �S d l i
, ipl_ .�E$ fl '�r
' �. r a h� sty 1
yy �h{
v '� 9 k�`.'�-S h ,� r '-� �,� r "r tea"'-a - - � a.�' �" }- s,�' r.
¢ � +
s.]s� rc-7.
.„...,.. ..,_,, 7,--.."^i
,a � .,_.: „; ,:s: ts, .R °_, V -
e"' a f m'% - a ;- i
Tractor parked partially within conservation easement along UT3.
Facing east(11/16/2020)
EGOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
RESTORATION

5 ,,1 _. ..
•
10
. : ' _
L y S •f ' .'
.i',:' r•-• .r ••'
itt of
xy % - ,tea
1. Conservation
? Easement Area
No Mowing•No Cutting
F
No Vehicles
;fit llmque\pii es to Save , . �"
f
y, �/ 1 .
N __., �,
0 s
fYf • [5ra —.s:
a fa •L
LJ A
Alp .1
It.
,J ; I.' ' 'M ' ''c 2 :;
Conservation easement sign posted on a tree (6/3/2020)
I Illipot
T
w u: -t mo' , . 4, : ,, , - � ► a s. s i - t ,, ramr s �
il
1
Fencing installed along UT3.
Facing west(5/13/2o20
EGOSYSTEM
Red Barn Mitigation Bank PLANNING&
RESTORATION

e
�i„;•; — —. art Bamboo to be treated in Winter 2020 b
4
X 1 illal
2 I
XS2_ VP1 0
VP2 SG1
iiii
U T1 ,r.
`N
iNii it,
, Ilfl1:
• G2, `
, c v , VP3 . -
T
r1.
I+ / T 0. b
4• .; r WG3•
• .' y RAIN GAS E(1) Q, I.
CV::::\ . . 444 r ;
1
7 :,
�' XS4 -i,,,e+
• 2� • G4
y
•
gO VP4
VP5 .
Er XS5 •
VV 5'; :;.•
O Photo Points Cross Section Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
+I Fencing 1:�::: :•:?•:1 Wetland - Existing ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Vegetation Plots ED Stream Gauge j_J Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
0 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE
0
Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP NOV 2020
1 inch=200 feet MYO: 2020
FIGURE 1 A SURRY COUNTY, NC EPI ANkI(Era,
EPR RL ioi-ki,N

XS4 - 1
• 2 OA ED
O VP4
VP5
XS5 ED
WG5
WG6
/14 XS7SG3 SG3 1J
XS8 \
\ J �WG7 7 VP6
11
I OD 0 / VP7
10 XS6
0
I UT2
18
SG4 VP8 '
ED
— —X• I ------``
Pedestrian Crossing __ _
�, /
19 UT3 -.;•".. e
30
29 ".tiq.. x . .+r 1
XS1
WG8
.4
..
•BA
. 1
O Photo Points Cross Section Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
+I Fencing F:�::: :•:?•:1 Wetland - Existing ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Vegetation Plots ED Stream Gauge j_J Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
o 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE
NIZ
' Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP NOV 2020
1 inch=200 feet MYO: 2020
FIGURE 1 B SURRY COUNTY, NC Pl ANNI(FM
EPR RL�i of-k l oN

;DG8o BA `4*' _
VP9 Riffle Crossing #
SG5®
c •
WG9 # VP10
4 UT3� 5410 - {.i
iv.
XS15 '.
/ - Conservation easement encroachment area
XS141 18® '
33 G6 SiD SG7 XS13 ` �
® i ` `�
` �1
VP11
I
ti;, I
; �} XS12
•
,. .n
•
O Photo Points Cross Section Monitoring Gauges Structures
A Gates Wetland - Creation • Baro Gauge Top of Bank
+I Fencing F:::::�:•:?•:1 Wetland - Existing ED Rain Gauge Pre-Existing Streams
Project Streams Vegetation Plots ED Stream Gauge j_J Easement Encroachment Area
Conservation Easement • Wetland Gague NC OneMap Orthoimagery(2018)
0 100 200 N RED BARN MITIGATION BANK SITE
NZ
' Feet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW: ASSET MAP NOV 2020
1 inch=200 feet MYO: 2020
E
FIGURE 1 C SURRY COUNTY, NC Pl ANNI(Era,
EPR RL�i oi-l oN