20060268 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20110829

FINAL
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
BOLD RUN
STREAM AND BUFFER RESTORATION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(EEP Project Number 439)
Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
Submitted to
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
E ka o stem
E n ement
o�unM
August 2011
J�-046�
REcEl pl)
AUG 2 9 2011
ENHANCEM NT PROGRAA 1

FINAL
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
BOLD RUN
STREAM AND BUFFER RESTORATION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(EEP Project Number 439)
Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
Submitted to
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by
Axiom Environmental, Inc
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Design Firm
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
r~
�ortem
a ement
Axiom Environmental Inc uoc —
August 2011

Table of Contents
1 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY /PROJECT ABSTRACT
2 0 METHODOLOGY 1
2 1 Vegetation Assessment 1
2 2 Stream Assessment 1
3 0 REFERENCES 1
List of Figures
Figure 1 Site Location Appendix A
Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View Appendix A
Figure 3 Current Conditions Plan View Appendix A
List of Tables
Table 1
Site Restoration Structures and Objectives
Appendix B
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Appendix B
Table 3
Project Contacts Table
Appendix B
Table 4
Project Attribute Table
Appendix B
Table 5
Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Appendix C
Table 6
Vegetation Metadata Table
Appendix C
Table 7
Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Appendix C
Table 8
Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
Appendix D
Table 9
Verification of Bankfull Events
Appendix D
Appendices
APPENDIX A FIGURES AND PLAN VIEWS
Figure 1 Site Location
Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View
Figure 3 Current Conditions Plan View
APPENDIX B GENERAL PROJECT TABLES
Table 1 Site Restoration Structures and Objectives
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Attributes Table
APPENDIX C VEGETATION ASSESSMENT DATA
Table 5 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
CVS Summary Data Tables
Table 6 Vegetation Metadata Table
Table 7 Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
APPENDIX D STREAM ASSESSMENT DATA
Fixed - Station Photos
Table 8 Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
Table 9 Verification of Bankfull Events
Cross - section Plots and Tables
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Pebble Count Plots
Bold Run (final)
EEP ProlLct Number 439
Wake County North Carolina
Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
August 2011
page i

10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/PROJECT ABSTRACT
The Bold Run Stream and Buffer Restoration Site (Site) is located five miles northwest of the Town of
Wake Forest on Bold Hill Road, approximately 1 5 miles east of the intersection with Mangum Dairy
Road in Wake County The Site is located within United States Geological Survey Hydrologic Unit
03020201065010 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality Subbasm 03- 04 -08) of the Neuse River
Basin The Site was identified to assist the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program in meeting
stream and buffer restoration goals Primary activities at the Site included stream restoration and riparian
buffer restoration by stabilizing stream banks, installing in- stream structures, adjusting stream plan form,
and replanting riparian areas with native vegetation Project restoration efforts provided 640 Stream
Mitigation Units, 14 9 Buffer Mitigation Units, and 14 7 Nutrient Offset Credit This project was
instituted prior to October 11, 2007 and therefore is eligible for ripanan buffer restoration credit up to 200
feet from the top of bank of all perennial and intermittent waterways within the Site This report
summarizes data for year 5 (2011) monitoring
The primary components of the restoration project included the following
• Construct a stable, riffle -pool stream channel capable of moving sediments supplied by the
watershed so the channel neither aggrades nor degrades
• Stabilize stream banks, install in- stream structures, adjust stream planform, and replant riparian
areas with native vegetation
Improve water quality and reduce lateral erosion and bed degradation of stream channels by
establishment of nparian vegetation
Enhance aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat through improvements to stream water quality
including improved oxygen levels, reduced sediments and nutnents, and vaned stream bed
features
Success criteria dictate that an average density of 320 stems per acre must be surviving after five
monitoring years in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Quality Administrative Code 15A
NCAC 02B 0242 (Meuse River Basin, Mitigation Program for Protection and Maintenance of Existing
Riparian Buffers) (NCDWQ 2007) Based on the number of stems counted, average densities were
measured at 648 planted stems per acre surviving in year 5 (2011) The dominant species identified at the
Site were planted stems of green ash (Frazinus pennsylvamca), oak species (Quercus spp ), and elm
species (Ulmus spp ) In addition, each individual plot met success criteria based on planted stems alone
with the exception of Plot 14, which had 283 planted stems per acre However, when counting
appropriate natural recruit species stems such as box elder (Ater negundo) and green ashe this plot was
well -above success criteria with 850 total stems per acre
Success criteria for stream restoration reaches should show little to no change from the as -built channel
over the five -year monitoring period Year 5 (2011) monitoring measurements indicate that there have
been minimal changes in both the longitudinal profile and cross - sections as compared to as -built data In
addition, a total of seven bankfull event were documented to occur over the five year monitoring period
with at least one event occurring in each monitoring year
In summary, overall the Site has met mitigation success criteria for stream, buffer, and nutrient offset for
the entire five -year monitoring period, and is anticipated to be closed out in the Spring of 2012 Summary
information and data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and statistics
related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in table and figures
within this report's appendices Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in
these reports can be found in the mitigation and restoration plan documents available on EEPs website
All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from EEP upon request
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina page n

411NO I l i le] 11 "114VI
2 1 Vegetation Assessment
Following Site construction, fifteen plots (10- meters square) were established and monumented with
metal fence posts at all plot corners and PVC at each plot origin Five plots are located in the streamside
riparian buffer planting zone and ten plots are located within the remaining buffer area Plots were
surveyed in June 2010 for the year 4 (2010) monitoring season Sampling was conducted as outlined in
the CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4 0 (Lee et al 2006)
(http / /cvs bio unc edu /methods htm), results are included in Appendix C The taxonomic standard for
vegetation used for this document was Flora of the Carolinas Virginia Georgia and Surrounding Areas
(Weakley 2007) The locations of vegetation monitoring plots are depicted on Figure 2 in Appendix A
2 2 Stream Assessment
Five permanent cross - sections were established after construction was completed Measurements of each
cross - section include points at all breaks in slope including top of bank, bankfull, and thalweg Riffle
cross - sections are classified using the Applied Fluvial Morphology ( Rosgen 1996) stream classification
system Longitudinal profile measurements of the entire Site restoration reaches include thalweg and
water surface, with each measurement taken at the head of facets (i e riffle, run, pool, and glide) in
addition to the maximum pool depth Visual assessment of in- stream structures was conducted to
determine if failure has occurred Failure of a structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure,
undermining of the structure, abandonment of the channel around the structure, and/or stream flow
beneath the structure
30 REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T, R K Peet, S D Roberts, and T R Wentworth 2006 CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4 0 (online) Available http //cvs bio unc edu/methods htm
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 2007 Redbook, Surface Waters and Wetlands
Standards North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality Raleigh, North Carolina
Rosgen, D 1996 Applied River Morphology Wildland Hydrology (Publisher) Pagosa Springs,
Colorado
Weakley, Alan S 2007 Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas (online)
Available http //www herbarium unc edu/WeakleysFlora pdf [February 1, 2008] University of
North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wale County North Carolina page I

APPENDIX A
FIGURES AND PLAN VIEWS
Figure 1 Site Location
Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View
Figure 3 Current Conditions Plan View
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, /nc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wale County North Carolina Appendices

p + y y Directions to the Site:
a o , « From Raleigh, North Carolina
r• '`>� From Interstate 440 take the Six Forks Road exit, travel north for
I e approximately 8 miles
Turn left to stay on Six Forks Road, travel approximately 3 miles
Turn right on Highway 98, travel approximately 2.7 miles
Turn left on Stony Hill Road, travel approximately 2.4 miles
6F tH Turn left on Purnell Road, travel approximately 0.1 mile
�.1 s Turn right on Mangum Dairy Road, travel approximately 1.8 miles
�., Turn right on Bold Hill Road, travel approximately 1.5 miles
The Site is on the right
.'Wawa" \• 'wvrM«' I
0C
. Y 1T
FtTT 7tlY }Z t wfu q 1.
_ �•'1� a \� 4- - � `'�_� , / '�_�" .��._ y gl'. �4�. ,yam, _ \: ... I +,+.�.aw � ,...q
rb,%
rall+tAe91lik wtli�rxp'rt �i ... :..m �'�d..n..,..n �' l � •�
50 SfiR MFt .0, • 5 ,a
I �� ,`�? '714 J 3 ,U'i •C NARV •�` `
Rtx
frverest
KIINTA ,C.. w APPROX. -p
YI SITE
LOCATION
P �y{{ l•
V , t+.r,.�r ��•""`"'' j i -_, WV. . �.Fj . b' - •'dry
e:
VAh
. 0
Mtem � \ - . � _� ,:.,� .� :,, ��-•
0 1 mi. 4 mi. 1 )—'1 vt r•.eo � � ;rf
1:158,400
Source: 2003 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p.40. `,y e-,
Dwn. by:
2126 Rowland Pond Dr SITE LOCATION CLF FIGURE
Willow Spring, NC 27592 BOLD RUN RESTORATION SITE Ckdby: WGL
(919)215 -1693 Date:
19,x) 34, -3x39 fax Project Number 439 Oct zoos
11A Wake County, North Carolina Project: t 08 -001

LEGEND
STREAM THALWEG .......................
AS -BUILT TOP OF BANK ...................
MONITORING
(NC STATE
t`
AS -BUILT STRUCTURE ....................
OJ
RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT ---------------
- - --
PHOTO REFERENCE POINT .................
FASTING;
2121155.51
PROPERTY BOUNDARY .....................
VEGETATION PLOT #7
CROSS- SECTION-------------------
- - - - --
VEGETATION PLOT--------- --------
- - - - -- O
FORD CROSSING -------------------
- - - - --
I _
\ I \ \
uQ
/ I
I / V9GEfAT16NP 12
I I I
I/ //
I I II
\/,
VEGITA ION PL T13
Jill' IIII
VEGETATICINLOJT 11 \ \ \ \ \
/ 1 \ 1 l I I \\ \ \\ \ \\
VEGETATION PLOT 1d 1L� \; \_ \ \ ♦ \� \ `\ \ �1
I _ / I 11 I Ir / \Gaol+ PCO��I
I
nl( I / / �♦� \ 11 I� I I I / //1
1 1 I III
\, \\ \ I \ \ M T
J1N \\ III I 1 ; \V,\/ VENE;ATION PLOT 9 1 \) 1 1 \\ 1\ \ \ \ \ \ \I \ 1
lilli %v/ 1 O 11 I \ \ � \ � \ \jj\ ♦\
III /If- Imo/ II I I I ` ` \♦ \\mil\
VEGET%tl /ION PLOT 7
if
ATION PLOT 10
1 l i ) 1/ I I - I WEaE N PLOT 6
♦ \ \\ it I I. +' l I I I \ I I t�)� 1/
al// 1
ETkTJOW PLOT 8 ` / /C n6TfT /POfRf3 _ \ 11
CROSS- SECI)gk2
11¢ /,/ (I (/ / /I VEGETAT/ON O 1 WE W IONS
OT NN O _ O
AOSS- SECTION 5- JCJ /^ _ �• o / _ _
--
I Idyll I \ / i\Jl + PNT 4 j . %
HOT POI
7�/ /yam /, - ' � • =""��-
Z.
P \ \N\ \b\ - ��•- -- -
-60 -30 0 60 120
GRAPHIC SCALE
8
NOTES /REVISIONS
Project:
Bold Run
Restoration Site
Project No. 439
Year 4 (2010) Monitoring Report
Wake County
North Carolina
r` \ ATION PLOT 1
Title:
\
O Monitoring
& - Plan View
/\ 7 \ �\
Scale: FIGURE NO.
As Shown
Date:
�.
Mar 2010
Project No.:
2
08 -001
MONITORING
(NC STATE
FEATURE
PLANE, NAD
COORDINATE
83 FT DATUM)
CROSS - SECTION #1 LB
NORTHINQ
831093.83
FASTING;
2121155.51
FI FVATION
280.06
VEGETATION PLOT #7
NORTHIN(:
831477.30
FASTING;
2120576.84
RB
831155.50
2121208.69
279.59
831463.10
2120605.34
831433.44
2120590.84
CROSS - SECTION #2 LB
831049.33
2120942.72
278.24
831448.33
2120561.39
RB
831114.72
2120951.23
278.62
VEGETATION PLOT #8
831147.63
2120307.85
CROSS - SECTION #3 LB
831006.43
2120791.65
276.76
831114.72
2120306.17
RB
831069.17
2120753.34
276.91
831118.41
2120273.86
831159.80
2120277.98
CROSS - SECTION #4 LB
830948.40
2120624.58
275.33
RB
831008.85
2120590.40
275.80
VEGETATION PLOT #9
831629.35
2120277.54
831602.71
2120298.24
CROSS - SECTION 95 LB
830890.96
2120332.42
274.47
831583.56
2120271.75
RB
830944.24
2120283.35
273.44
831609.01
2120251.28
VEGETATION PLOT #1
831119.96
2121313.81
VEGETATION PLOT #10
831636.97
2120788.53
831089.59
2121326.32
831621.65
2120815.67
831077.54
2121297.15
831593.37
2120799.71
831107.67
2121283.87
831609.09
2120769.69
VEGETATION PLOT #2
831075.76
2120964.75
VEGETATION PLOT #11
831996.48
2120784.37
831044.32
2120972.81
831979.80
2120817.15
831034.59
2120941.70
831952.65
2120799.07
831067.36
2120933.60
831966.75
2120769.69
VEGETATION PLOT #3
831043.29
2120806.97
VEGETATION PLOT #12
832341.97
2120658.90
831013.34
2120819.51
832309.92
2120681.60
830998.97
2120791.33
832296.51
2120652.76
831028.34
2120777.34
832322.25
2120632.55
VEGETATION PLOT #4
831024.75
2120621.38
VEGETATION PLOT #13
832171.07
2120359.42
830994.57
2120630.89
832147.09
2120366.83
830981.52
2120600.74
832125.57
2120366.83
831011.99
2120589.78
832144.28
2120340.27
VEGETATION PLOT #5
830989.38
2120406.50
VEGETATION PLOT #14
83187135
2120195.95
830958.17
2120415.07
831893.48
2120221.92
830948.15
2120383.69
831865.44
2120242.78
830979.26
2120374.35
831846.92
2120215.30
VEGETATION PLOT #6
831361.63
2120827.91
VEGETATION PLOT #15
831851.69
2120584.90
831349.39
2120857.20
831836.83
2120620.00
831318.52
2120845.40
831808.82
2120602.25
831330.70
2120814.93
831821.30
2120572.14
ATION PLOT 10
1 l i ) 1/ I I - I WEaE N PLOT 6
♦ \ \\ it I I. +' l I I I \ I I t�)� 1/
al// 1
ETkTJOW PLOT 8 ` / /C n6TfT /POfRf3 _ \ 11
CROSS- SECI)gk2
11¢ /,/ (I (/ / /I VEGETAT/ON O 1 WE W IONS
OT NN O _ O
AOSS- SECTION 5- JCJ /^ _ �• o / _ _
--
I Idyll I \ / i\Jl + PNT 4 j . %
HOT POI
7�/ /yam /, - ' � • =""��-
Z.
P \ \N\ \b\ - ��•- -- -
-60 -30 0 60 120
GRAPHIC SCALE
8
NOTES /REVISIONS
Project:
Bold Run
Restoration Site
Project No. 439
Year 4 (2010) Monitoring Report
Wake County
North Carolina
r` \ ATION PLOT 1
Title:
\
O Monitoring
& - Plan View
/\ 7 \ �\
Scale: FIGURE NO.
As Shown
Date:
�.
Mar 2010
Project No.:
2
08 -001

M
Legend
Easement Boundary
Cross - sections
-'- Vegetation Plots
-F-+ Stream Thalweg
Asbuilt Top of Bank
Forded Crossings
Structures
Utility Easement Boundaries
- - - ditches
1:1 Stream Restoration = -640 If
0:1 Lacking 50 -foot Buffer= -469 If
0:1 Within Utility Easement = -519 If
Riparian Buffer Restoration = - 14.9 acres
Nutrient Offset = 14.7 acres
ri
I ,eu ro
j
Jay
I � �
Y
1
Imagery: 2010 Leaf -off CGIA
Aerial Photography
14
v
9 �f
5
O
+
N
0
0
13
F'
I
'
d
rat �� �t•�
•.+ �M..' 9, .•yam
�r
1 � �
e.
a
CD
0 0
- .. t N - •, O � � ,
o A N r_
1 • •1 :1 1 .1
r
Axiom Enwonn*nlal, Inc,
Prepared for:
r�
I' kX)SYStC'111
Project:
BOLD RUN
RESTORATION
SITE
Wake County, NC
Title:
CURRENT
CONDITIONS
PLAN
VIEW
Drawn by:
CLF
Date:
AUG 2011
Scale:
1:2500
Project No.:
10 -009

APPENDIX B
GENERAL PROJECT TABLES
Table 1 Site Restoration Structures and Objectives
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Attributes Table
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Protect Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina Appendices

Table 1 Site Restoration Structures and Objectives
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Protect Number 439)
*P2= Priority 2 P4= Priority 4
* *Awaiting guidance for asset reduction
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Protect Number 439)
Activity or Report
Data
Collection
Completion
Actual
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
November 2005
February 2006
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
July 2006
�_ L
C. �
C L
�
►�.
February 2007
Permanent Seed Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
Restoration Segment/ Reach
February 2007
Tree Plantin g
NA
February 2007
Stationing
Comment
ID
a
.r .r
a e
oio o
�
own
Year 3 Monitorm (2009)
June 2009
July 2009
Year 4 Monitoring (20 10)
July 2010
September 2010
Year 5 Monitoring (2011)
June 2011
August 2011
1 1 Stream Restoration
--
Restoration/
640
1 1
640
--
--
0 1 Stream Restoration Lacking
469
0 1 **
0
--
-
50 -foot Buffers **
P4 & P2
0 1 Stream Restoration within
519
0 1**
0
--
--
Utility Easement **
Riparian Buffer Restoration
0
Restoration
149
1 1
149
--
--
Nutrient Offset Buffer
0
Restoration
147
1 1
147
--
--
Mite ation Unit Summations
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Nonriparian
Total Wetland
Riparian Buffer
Nutrient Offset
Wetland
640
0
0
0
649 039
640327
*P2= Priority 2 P4= Priority 4
* *Awaiting guidance for asset reduction
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Protect Number 439)
Activity or Report
Data
Collection
Completion
Actual
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
November 2005
February 2006
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
July 2006
Construction
NA
February 2007
Temporary Seed Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
NA
February 2007
Permanent Seed Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
NA
February 2007
Tree Plantin g
NA
February 2007
Mitigation Plan/As- builts (Year 0 Monitoring-Baseline)
March 2007
March 2007
Year 1 Monitoring (2007 )
October 2007
January 2008
Year 2 Monitoring (2008 )
September 2008
October 2008
Year 3 Monitorm (2009)
June 2009
July 2009
Year 4 Monitoring (20 10)
July 2010
September 2010
Year 5 Monitoring (2011)
June 2011
August 2011
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (201 1)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina Appendices

Table 3 Protect Contacts Table
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Pro_lect Number 439)
Designer, Monitoring Year 0 Performer,
KCI Associates of NC
Monitoring Year 1 (2007) Performer
Landmark Center II Suite 220
Drainage impervious cover estimate (%
4601 Six Forks Road
Stream Order
Raleigh North Carolina 27609
Physiographic Region
April Davis and Adam S filler (919 ) 783 -9214
Construction and Seeding Contractor
Vaughn Contracting Inc
Ros en Classification of As -built
PO Box 796
Dominant Soil Types
Wadesboro North Carolina 28170
Reference Site ID
Don Vaughn (704 ) 694 -6450
Planting Contractor and Nursery Stock Supplier
Bruton Nurseries and Landscapes
NCDWQ Subbasm
PO Box 1197
NCDWQ Classification for Project
Freemont North Carolina 27830
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed9
Kelly Bruton (919) 524 -5304
Seed Mix Source
Evergreen Seed Company
Reasons for 303d listin g or stressor
[phone]
Year 2 -5 (2008 -2011) Monitoring Performer
Axiom Environmental Inc
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh NC 27603
Grant Lewis (919) 215 -1693
Table 4 Protect Attribute Table
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 439)
Project County
Wake County North Carolina
Drainage Area
16 square miles
Drainage impervious cover estimate (%
< 1 percent
Stream Order
Second
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
Ecore ion
Northern Outer Piedmont
Ros en Classification of As -built
C4-type
Dominant Soil Types
Chewacla Chewacla variant Chewacla - Riverview
Reference Site ID
Richland Creek
USGS HUC
Site- 03020201065010
Reference - 03020201070060
NCDWQ Subbasm
Site -03 -04 -08
Reference -03 -04 -02
NCDWQ Classification for Project
WS -IV NSW CA Stream Index # 27 -13-(0 1))
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed9
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a
303d listed segment9
No
Reasons for 303d listin g or stressor
Not Applicable
% of project easement fenced
100 percent
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina Appendices

APPENDIX C
VEGETATION ASSESSMENT DATA
Table 5 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
CVS Summary Data Tables
Table 6 Vegetation Metadata Table
Table 7 Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wale County North Carolina Appendices

Table 5 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 439)
Vegetation Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold Mete
Tract Mean
1
Yes
93%
2
Yes
3
Yes
4
Yes
5
Yes
6
Yes
7
Yes
8
Yes
9
Yes
10
Yes
I 1
Yes
12
Yes
13
Yes
14
No*
15
Yes
*This plot was one stem shy of meeting success criteria when counting planted stems alone, however,
when including naturally recruited stems of box elder (Acer negundo) and green ash (Frazinus
pennsylvanica) this plot was well -above success criteria
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (201 1)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run Restoration Site
Year 5 (2011) Annual Monitoring
Vegetation Plot Photos (taken June 14, 2011)
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run Restoration Site
Year 5 (2011) Annual Monitoring
Vegetation Plot Photos (taken June 14, 2011), continued
;a
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 6 Vegetation Metadata Table
Hold Run Rectnrntinn Site (F.F.P Prowet Numher 4391
Report Prepared By
Corn Faquin
Date Prepared
6/17/201114 07
database name
Axiom EEP 2011 B mdb
database location
C \Axiom \Business \CVS
computer name
CORRI PC
file size
40574976
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT ---- - - - - --
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data
Prol, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year This excludes live stakes
Prod, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year This includes live stakes, all planted stems,
and all natural /volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc )
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each
plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY--------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- -- ---
Project Code
BR
project Name
Bold Run
Description
Bold Run Stream and Buffer Mitigation Site
River Basin
Neuse
length(ft)
stream -to -edge width (ft)
area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
15
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County North Carolina Appendices

Table 7. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
EEP Project Code 439. Project Name: Bold Run Creek (G)
*Bolded hardwood tree species are counted toward riparian butter success criteria.
Color for Density Pnol-S = Planted exclusing livestakes
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
P -all = All planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
Total includes natural recruit stems
Current Plot Data (MYS 2011)
E439 -01 -0001
E439 -01 -0002
E439 -01 -0003
E439 -01 -0004
E439 -01 -0005
E439 -01 -0006
E439 -01 -0007
E439 -01 -0008
E439 -01 -0009
E439 -01 -0010
E439 -01 -0011
E439 -01 -0012
E439 -01 -0013
E439 -01 -0014
E439 -01 -0015
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
PnoLS
P -all IT
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -a=
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
cer negundo
boxelder
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
12
2
2
1
1
10
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
2
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub Tree
1
29
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Shrub Tree
1
1
2
2
21
1
21
3
3
3
1
1
1
Cornusamomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
21
2
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
4
8
8
8
3
3
3
10
10
10
6
6
6
2
8
81
68
1
1
1
15
9
9
15
1
5
3
uglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
3
3
3
uniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
3
2
2
4
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
Pinus
pine
Tree
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
5
2
1
1
2
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
24
1
1
3
4
4
4
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Shrub Tree
1
Quercus
oak
Shrub Tree
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
6
6
6
5
5
5
3
3
3
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
2
2
2
6
6
6
3
3
3
7
7
7
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
3
3
3
8
8
8
2
2
2
5
5
5
Rhus copallinum
flameleaf sumac
Shrub Tree
Salix
willow
Shrub Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
1
1
5
5
5
5
1
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub Tree
6
6
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub Tree
3
3
3
Ulmus
elm
Tree
1
1
3
2
2
2
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
5
5
7
13
13
13
16
16
16
7
7
7
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
7
7
7
5
5
5
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
Unknown
unknown
Stem count
19
27
36
19
20
25
16
21
78
31
36
47
33
33
43
20
20
23
10
12
74
8
8
8
14
14
26
12
12
15
12
12
29
21
21
30
9
9
12
7
7
21
9
9
12
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Totals
Species count
Stems per ACRE
6 9 11
51 61 8
51 61 9
7 8 11
61 6 8
5 5 7
2 31 4
3 3 3
4 4 5
4 4 6
3 3 5
5 5 7
3 3 5
4 4 5
21 21 3
768:9 1093 1457
1618.91 809.4 1012
647.51 849.81 3157
1255 14571 1902
' 13351 13351 1740
809.4
404.71485.61 2995
323.7 323.7 323.7
_566.6 566.6 1052
.485.6 485.6 607
485.6 485.6 1174
9.8 849.8 1214
,364,2 364.2 485.6
283.3 283.3 849.8
364.2 364.2 485.6
Stem count
size (ares)
19 26 30
19 20 24
16 21 49
28 33 42
33 33 42
20 20 23
10 10 72
8 8 8
14 14 26
121 1 14
12 12 27
211
9 91 12
71 71 21
91 91 12
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Riparian Buffer Success
Criteria
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
p
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
6 8 9
S 6 7
5 6 8
6 7 9
6 6 7
5 5 7
2 2 3
3 3 3
4 4 5
4 4 5
3 3 4
5 5 7
3 3 5
4 4 5
2 2 3
1052 1214
809.4 971.2
_4-7 849.8 1983
1333 1335 1700
1335 1335 1700
4' 809.4 930.8
' X0,4.7 404.7 2914
323.7 323.7 323.7
.- ,6 566.6 1052
M -'�. 485.6 566.6
485.6 485.6 1093
;"iEII8 849.8 1214
.364.2 364.2 485.6
2833 283.3 849.8
°B%,2 364.21 485.6
*Bolded hardwood tree species are counted toward riparian butter success criteria.
Color for Density Pnol-S = Planted exclusing livestakes
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
P -all = All planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
Total includes natural recruit stems

Table 7. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species (continued)
EEP Project Code 439. Project Name: Bold Run Creek (G)
'Bolded hardwood tree species are counted toward riparian butter success criteria.
Color for Density PnoLS = Planted exclusing livestakes
Exceeds requirements by 101/
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
P -all = All planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
Total includes natural recruit stems
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY5 (2011)
MY4 (2010)
MY3 (2009)
MY2 (2008)
MY1 (2007)
MYO (2007)
PnoLS
P -all IT
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all IT
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
cer negundo
boxelder
Tree
2
21
30
1
1
53
1
1
1
3
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
2
5
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub Tree
1
30
2
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
7
7
7
5
S
6
3
3
3
3
3
7
3
3
3
7
7
7
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Shrub Tree
6
6
8
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
3
3
1
31
3
1
3
3
1
5
5
2
S
5
2
61
6
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
491
49
141
46
46
133
45
45
45
45
45
56
33
33
33
34
341
34
uglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
31
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
uniperusvirginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
I
1
1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
11
13
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
9
9
13
8
8
11
8
8
8
8
8
10
5
5
5
Pinus
pine
Tree
I
I
1 9
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
11
12
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
19
19
41
16
16
46
16
16
16
16
16
30
18
18
18
191
19
19
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Shrub Tree
1
1
2
1
Quercus
oak
Shrub Tree
2
2
2
7
71
7
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
14
14
14
14
14
14
17
17
17
18
18
18
21
21
21
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
14
14
14
14
14
14
13
13
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
1
1
1
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
25
25
25
26
26
26
25
25
25
25
25
25
22
22
22
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
29
29
29
30
30
30
28
28
28
28
28
28
33
33
33
1
1
1
Rhus copallinum
flameleaf sumac
Shrub Tree
2
Salix
willow
Shrub Tree
8
8
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
11
12
11
11
12
12
9
9
7
7
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub Tree
7
7
8
8
7
7
8
8
7
7
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
Ulmus
elm
Tree
3
3
5
2
2
88
1
1
4
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
41
41
43
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
16
16
26
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Unknown
unknown
4
4
4
105
112
112
Totals
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
240
261
479
173
195
493
168
190
190
169
191
242
164
182
182
1761
1981
198
15
15
15
15
15
15
0.37
0.37
0.37
0.37
0.37
0.37
151 18 23
141 171 26
141 171 17
141 17 22
131 16 16
81 101 10
647.51 704,153021 1292
466.7 526.11 1330
;453.21 512.61 12.6'_455.9
515.3 652
442.51 4911 491
A94:$ 534.2 534.2
Riparian Buffer Success
Criteria
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
2371 2551 432
1721 1911 472
1671 1861 186
1681 1851 226
1581 1721 172
69 77 r 77
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
14
16
191
131 151
20
13
15
15
13 15
18
11
13
13
6
7
7
, 6191
6881
1165
5151
1273
�? _
5021
502[,,4531
4991
610
�4. Z$
4641
464
1861
208
208
'Bolded hardwood tree species are counted toward riparian butter success criteria.
Color for Density PnoLS = Planted exclusing livestakes
Exceeds requirements by 101/
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
P -all = All planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
Total includes natural recruit stems

APPENDIX D
STREAM ASSESSMENT DATA
Fixed - Station Photos
Table 8. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events
Cross - section Plots and Tables
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Pebble Count Plots
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run Restoration Site
Fixed- Station Photographs
taken June 21, 2011
fth Rd N
fth Rd N
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run Restoration Site
Fixed - Station Photographs
taken June 2010 (continued)
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run Restoration Site
Fixed - Station Photographs
taken June 21, 2011 (continued)
Rd@ Rd 9N
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 8. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Proiect Number 439)
Feature Category
Metric (per As -built and reference baselines
(# Stable) Number
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
per As -built
Total Number /
feet in unstable
state
% Perform.
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform. Mean
or Total
A. Riffles
1. Present?
21
21
N/A
100%
100%
2. Armor stable e.. no displacement)?
21
21
N/A
100%
3. Facet grade appears stable?
21
21
N/A
100%
4. Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
21
21
N/A
100%
5. Length appropriate?
21
21
N/A
100%
B. Pools
1. Present? e.. no severe a ation
15
15
N/A
100%
95.6%
2. Sufficient) deep Dmax ool:Mean Bkf> 2.2?
13
15
N/A
86.7%
3. Length appropriate?
15
15
N/A
100%
C. Thalweg
1. Upstream of meander bend centering?
14
14
N/A
100%
100%
2. Downstream of meander centering?
14
14
N/A
100%
D. Meanders
1. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled erosion?
14
14
N/A
100%
100'%
2. Of those eroding, # w/ concomitant point bar formation?
0
0
N/A
3. Apparent Re within spec?
14
14
N/A
100%
4. Sufficient flood lain access and relief?
14
14
N/A
100%
E. Bed General
1.General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
N/A
0
100%
99.5%
2. Channel bed degradation - areas of increasing down cutting or
head cutting?
N/A
N/A
1/20
99%
F. Bank
1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank
N/A
N/A
1/30
98%
98%
G. Vanes
1. Free of back or arm scour?
8
8
N/A
100%
100%
2. Height appropriate?
8
8
N/A
100%
3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate?
8
8
N/A
100%
4. Free of pi ing or other structural failures?
8
8
N/A
100%
H. Wads /
Boulders
1. Free of scour?
6
6
N/A
100%
100%
2. Footing stable?
6
6
N/A
100%
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events
Bold Run Restoration Site (EEP Proiect Number 439)
Date of Data
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo (if
Collection
available
November 19, 2007
Between 8/31/2007
Crest Gauge
and 11/19/2007
Total of 3.48 inches* of rain reported to fall over 2 days
October 8, 2008
August 28, 2008
(August 27 — 28, 2008) as well as crest gauge readings at the
Site
February 9, 2009
Between 10/8/2008
Crest Gauge
- --
and 2/9/2009
1.43 inches of rain fall between June 4 -5, 2009, followed by
Between June 15-
0.5 inches of rain fall between June 9 -10, 2009, followed by
Event
June 19, 2009
17, 2009
an additional 2.24 inches of rain fall between June 14 -17,
Photos 1-2
2009* as well as crest gauge readings at the Site
(see below)
March 16, 2010
November 11, 2009
3.44 inches of rain fall between November 10 -12, 2009*
--
Visual observations of overbank event including wrack lines
and sediment deposition resulting from a 1.36 inch* rainfall
Event
February 17, 2010
February 5, 2010
event on February 5, 2010 that occurred after numerous
Photo 3
rainfall events, within the 3 weeks prior, that totaled 3.52
(see below)
inches.
Visual observations of overbank event including wrack lines
June 21, 2011
June 10, 2011
and sediment deposition resulting from a 1.74 inch* rainfall
--
event on June 10, 2011
* Reported at KNCWAKEFI Weather Station on Welcome Drive in Wake Forest.
Bankfull Event Photos 1 -2 showing
evidence of overbank through wrack
lines on banks and vegetation matted
from overland flow within the
floodplain.
Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

Bold Run (final) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2011)
EEP Project Number 439 August 2011
Wake County, North Carolina Appendices

River Basin:
Neuse
Watershed:
Bold Run, MY -05
7�S ID
SS - I, Riffle, 14 +25
Drainage Area s mi):
1.6
Ratio:
1.0
Date:
.2/9/2011
Field Crew:
Dean, Perk inson
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY D ;1 "1:1
0.00
280.09
Bankfull Elevation:
- 278.4
13.58
280.42
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
32.3
17.10
280.08
Bankfull Width:
20.1
23.59
278.52
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
281.6
32.86
278.77
Flood Prone Width:
>80
35.11
278.35
Max Depth at Bankfull:
3.2
36.52
277.59
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
37.45
277.13
W / D Ratio:
12.5
38.01
276.23
Entrenchment Ratio:
>4
38.61
275.52
Bank Height
38.94
275.26
39.67
275.15
E4
41.03
275.48
42.57
275.89
43.84
276.08
Neuse River Basin, Bold Run, W-05, XS - 1, Riffle, 14 +25
45.28
276.00
46.26
276.38
282
48.19
276.97
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49.47
277.40
53.06
278.40
57.07
278.41
280
64.19
278.60
68.74
279.87
5 ----------- - - -
- - -- --------- - - - - --
- - -- - - -- Bankfull
74.63
279.58
0 278
83.23
280.11
- - -- Flood Prone Area
-+- As -Built 3/6/07
W
t MY -019/7/07
276
_
�- MY -02 8/15/08
My -03 7/14/09
274
-MY-46/21/10
0 10
20 30 40 50 60
MY -5 2/9/11
Station (feet)
Ratio:
1.0

River Basin:
Neuse
Watershed:
Bold Run, MY -05
XS 1D
XS - 2, Pool, 17 +25
Drainage Area (sq mi):
1.6
Date:
2/9/2011
Field Crew:
Dean, Perkinson
Station
Elevation__;;
4.18
274.20
-4.08
278.47
4.08
278.47
9.14
276.73
16.86
276.78
18.77
276.48
20.12
275.55
22.49
274.73
22.65
274.60
23.04
274.22
23.42
273.92
23.76
273.79
24.40
273.55
25.37
273.37
26.24
273.51
27.69
274.16
29.31
274.20
30.95
274.72
32.53
275.27
33.84
276.05
34.95
276.22
35.58
276.34
39.18
276.70
44.91
276.80
48.62
277.38
53.73
278.84
61.88
278.82
SUMMARV DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
276.4
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
29.7
Bankfull Width:
18.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
Max Depth at Bankfull:
3.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
L6
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
280
278
d
276
R
L4
274
272
0 10
Stream Type E4
Neuse River Basin, Bold Run, MY -05, XS - 2, Pool, 17 +25
20 30
Station (feet)
- -- Bankfull
-- Flood Prone Area
T As -Built 3/6/07
--0-- MY -0 19/7/07
- 6 MY -02 8/15/08
MY -03 7/14/09
40 MY-46/21/10
--MY-052/9/11

River Basin:
Elevation
Neuse
276.61
10.60
Watershed:
Area s mi :
Bold Run, MY -05
Date:
2/9801 I
XS ID
Dean, Perkinson
XS - 3, Riffle, 19 +20
274.69
27.59
Drainage
29.10
273.77
30.74
272.81
32.78
272.82
34.08
272.47
35.19
271.74
36.00
271.59
37.61
271.39
38.54
271.47
39.38
271.56
40.00
271.95
40.27
272.11
41.18
272.48
42.08
272.96
43.07
273.69
44.12
274.30
45.48
274.47
51.78
274.63
57.49
275.06
61.44
276.44
63.62
276.51
68.68
276.62
74.63
276.74
Stream Type E4
Neuse River Basin, Bold Run, MY-05, XS - 3, Riffle, 19 +20
279
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
277
d
- - -- Bankfull
c
° 275
- -- -Flood Prone Area
o------------ -
- - - -- -- ------- - - - - -- -
-_-
-� As -Built 3/6/07
273
t MY -019/7/07
t MY -02 8/15/08
My -03 7/14/09
271
0 10
20 30 40 50
6 MY- 46/21/10
Station (feet)
MY -05 2/9/11
Station
Elevation
0.00
276.61
10.60
276.72
Area s mi :
1.6
Date:
2/9801 I
Field Crew:
Dean, Perkinson
Station
Elevation
0.00
276.61
10.60
276.72
13.05
276.32
15.49
275.26
17.93
274.86
23.63
274.69
27.59
274.69
29.10
273.77
30.74
272.81
32.78
272.82
34.08
272.47
35.19
271.74
36.00
271.59
37.61
271.39
38.54
271.47
39.38
271.56
40.00
271.95
40.27
272.11
41.18
272.48
42.08
272.96
43.07
273.69
44.12
274.30
45.48
274.47
51.78
274.63
57.49
275.06
61.44
276.44
63.62
276.51
68.68
276.62
74.63
276.74
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
274.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:.
28.5
Bankfull Width:
19.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation-
278.0
Flood Prone Width:
>74
Max Depth at Bankfullt''
3.3
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
W / D Ratio:
13.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
>3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

River Basin:
Neuse
Watershed:
Bold Run, MY -05
XS ID
XS -4, Riffle, 20 +95
Drainage Area (sq mi :
1.6
Date:
2/9/2011
Field Crew:
Dean, Perkinson
Station
Elevation
-1.3
275.4
9.6
275.5
14.6
274.1
18.4
273.8
23.8
274.1
24.7
273.9
26.2
273.0
28.4
271.9
29.8
270.8
30.9
270.7
33.7
270.9
35.0
270.9
35.9
270.9
36.6
271.8
38.4
272.6
40.9
273.7
44.4
273.9
52.3
273.9
57.9
275.6
73.0
276.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation: " 0' "' "
273.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area
Bankfull Width:
30.6
16.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation-, E,
276.7
Flood Prone Width:
>70
Max Depth at Bankfull:
3.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.9
W / D Ratio:
8.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio: --
>4
1.0
278
Stream Type I E4
Neuse River Basin, Bold Run, MY-05, XS - 4, Riffle, 20 +95
276
d
c
274
o__ ___ _____ ______
272
270
0 10
20 30 40
Station (feet)
50
- - -- Bankfull
- -- - Flood Prone Area
As -Built 3/7/07
+ MY-0 l 9/7/07
MY -02 8/15/08
MY -03 7/14/09
-MY-46/21/10
MY -05 2/9/ t l

River Basin:
Elevation
Neuse
274.4
3.1 2
Watershed:
s mi):
Bold Run, MY -05
Date:
2/9/2011
XS ID
Dean, Perkinson
\S - 5, Pool, 24 +15
269.5
33.0 2
Drainage Area
34.5 2
269.1
35.4 2
268.2
38.8 2
268.2
k
Stream Type E4
Neuse River Basin, Bold Run, MY-05, XS - 5, Pool, 24 +15
276
274
d
272
Ar
c--------- ��____
__�----------- ---- ----�������
Bankfull
m270
- -- -Flood Prone Area
- As -Built 3/7/07
�- MY-0 19/11/07
268
0 MY -02 8/15/08
MY -03 7/14/09
266
MY-4 6/21/10
0 10
20 30 40 50
60 MY -05 2/9/11
Station (feet)
Station E
Elevation
-1.7 2
274.4
3.1 2
274.4
s mi):
1.6
Date:
2/9/2011
Field Crew:
Dean, Perkinson
Station E
Elevation
-1.7 2
274.4
3.1 2
274.4
12.0 2
271.6
18.0 2
271.4
23.3 2
269.8
29.4 2
269.5
33.0 2
269.4
34.5 2
269.1
35.4 2
268.2
38.8 2
268.2
SlT1��LUtI' DATA
Bankfull Elevation: 271.3
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area: 80.9
Bankfull Width: 33.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation: -
Flood Prone Width: -
Max Depth at Bankfull: 4.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull: 2.4
W / D Ratio: -
Entrenchment Ratio: -
Bank eight Ratio: -

282
281
280
279
278
w
s~
C 277
W
276
275
274
273
272
1000
Longitudinal Profile
Bold Run Creek
EEP Project Number 439 MY -05
Stations 10 +00 - 18 +00
1100
1200
1300
1400
STATION (ft)
1500
1600
• As -Built 3/7/07 MY -01 9/7/07 —M MY -02 8/15/08 My -03 7/14/09 — MY -04 6/21/10 MY -05 3/22/11 Water Surface
M Ford Crossing - Cross Vane
1700
1800

276
275
274
273
272
w
C
271
W
270
269
268
267
Longitudinal Profile
Bold Run Creek
EEP Project Number 439 MY-05
Stations 18 +00 - 26 +30
.�
so Or
1 - -
a .y
IL
Y
266
1800
1900 2000 2100 2200 2300
STATION (ft)
2400
---� - -- As -Built 3/7/07 MY -01 9/7/07 MY -02 8/15/08 — MY -03 7/14/09 s_ MY -04 6/21/10 MY -05 3/22/11 Water Surface
Cross Vane Constructed Riffle Enhancement
2500
2600

Wei hted Pebble Count
Percent Riffle:
Percent Pool:
100
Percent Run:
Percent Glide:
Pebble Count
Material
Size Range mm
Total #
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
#
# #
#
# #
# #
#
#
# #
# #
# #
#
--
silt/clay
0 0.062
0.0
--
very fine sand
fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.062 0.13
0.0
Note:
--
0.13 0.25
0.0
Bold Run 2011 - XS 1
0.25 0.5
0.0
Pebble Count, -
0.5 1
0.0
1 2
0.0
100%
90%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
verV coarse qravel
2 4
0.0
4 6
0.0
6 8
0.0
80%
70%
8 11
7.7
11 16
0.0
16 22
7.7
60%
m 50%
22 32
3.8
32 45
7.7
45 64
3.8
40%
ii 30%
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64 90
30.8
90 128
26.9
c
128 180
11.5
°i 20%
a 10%
180 256
0.0
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
very lar a boulde
256 362
0.0
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) - m-CumulativePercent • Percentltem -a- Riffle -Pool -Run -Glide
362 512
0.0
512 1024
0.0
1024 2048
0.0
2048 4096
0.0
bedrock
1 0.0
Size percent less than (mm)
Percent by substrate type
IF True
Weighted Count:
Total Particle Count:
�52
D16
D35
D50
D84
D95
4�P-IiZT
sand
ravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
23.359
67.07
79.2
121
155
0%
31%
69%
0%
1 0%

Weighted Pebble Count
Percent Riffle:
Percent Pool:
Percent Run:
Percent Glide:
Pebble Count
PLLI00
Material
Size Ran e mm
Total #
#
#
# #
#
# #
# #
#
#
# #
#
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
#
#
# #
# #
#
#
--
silt/clay
0 0.062
11.9
--
very fine sand
fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.062 0.13
0.0
Note:
--
0.13 0.25
3.4
Bold Run 2011 - XS 2
0.25 0.5
0.0
Pebble Count, -
100%
I
90%
0.5 1
0.0
1 2
0.0
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2 4
0.0
4 6
0.0
6 8
0.0
80%
70%
8 11
5.1
11 16
0.0
16 22
10.2
60%
50%
22 32
27.1
32 45
8.5
-FE
45 64
16.9
m 40%
ii 30%
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64 90
10.2
90 128
1.7
c
128 180
5.1
20%
a 10%
180 256
0.0
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
very large boulder
256 362
0.0
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) -0-Cumulative Percent • Percent Item -Riffle -Pool --Run -Glide
362 512
0.0
512 1024
0.0
1024 2048
0.0
2048 4096
0.0
bedrock
0.0
Size percent less than mm
Percent by substrate type
True
Weighted Count:
Total Particle Count:
100
D16
D35
D50
D84
D95
silt/cla
sand
ravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
59
8.383
23.41
28.8
66
129
12%
3%
68%
17%
0% 1
0%

Wei hted Pebble Count
Percent Riffle:
Percent Pool:
100
Percent Run:
Percent Glide:
Pebble Count
Material
Size Range mm
Total #
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
# 4
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
--
silt/clay
0 0.062
0.0
--
very fine sand
fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.062 0.13
0.0
Note:
--
0.13 0.25
0.0
Bold Run 2011 - XS 3
0.25 0.5
0.0
Pebble Count, -
100%
90%
0.5 1
6.0
1 2
0.0
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse qravel
2 4
0.0
4 6
0.0
6 8
0.0
80%
70%
8 11
4.0
11 16
0.0
16 22
16.0
60%
m 50%
22 32
10.0
32 45
8.0
F-,---
45 64
10.0
�3 40%
ii 30%
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very lar a cobble
64 90
26.0
90 128
16.0
c
128 180
4.0
v 20%
a 10%
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) --a-Cumulative Percent ♦ Percent Item -Riffle Pool -}- Run -• -Glide
-
180 256
0.0
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
very lar a boulder
256 362
0.0
362 512
0.0
512 1024
0.0
1024 2048
0.0
2048 4096
0.0
bedrock
0.0
Size percent less than mm
Percent by substrate type
True
Weighted Count:
Total Particle Count:
100
D16
D35
D50
D84
495
Emuclaysand
ravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
50
18.029
30.82
55.6
98
125
0%
6%
48%
46%
0%
0%

Weighted Pebble Count
Percent Riffle:
Percent Pool:
100
Percent Run:
Percent Glide:
Pebble Count
Material
Size Range mm
Total #
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
#
#
# #
#
# #
##
# #
# #
# #
# 4
# #
#
#
# #
# #
# #
#
#
Note:
---
silt/clay
0 0.062
0.0
- --
very fine sand
fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.062 0.13
0.0
- --
0.13 0.25
2.0
Bold Run 2011 - XS 4
0.25 0.5
0.0
Pebble Count, -
100%
90% -
0.5 1
4.0
1 2
0.0
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2 4
0.0
4 6
0.0
6 8
0.0
80%
70%
8 11
6.0
11 16
0.0
16 22
0.0
60%
m 50%
22 32
20.0
32 45
8.0
F
45 64
22.0
�B 40%
30%
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very lar a cobble
64 90
20.0
90 128
12.0
c
128 180
4.0
20%
a 10%
M"_640­92!
180 256
2.0
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
very large boulder
256 362
0.0
0% 040 4 � - ff 0 F '0 6
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) - Cumulative Percent • Percent Item -a -Riffle -Pool ---Run -Glide
-
362 512
0.0
512 1024
0.0
1024 2048
0.0
2048 4096
0.0
bedrock
0.0
Size percent less than mm
Percent by substrate type
True
Weighted Count:
Total Particle Count:
100
D16 I
D35
D50
D84
D95
silt/cla
sand
ravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
50
23.712
36.36
52.8
95
139
0%
6%
56%
38%
0% 1
0%

Weighted Pebble Count
Percent Riffle:
Percent Pool:
[__
Percent Run:
Percent Glide:
Pebble Count
100
Material
Size Ran a mm
Total #
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
#
# #
# #
#
# #
#
# #
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
-
silt/clay
0 0.062
18.0
--
very fine sand
fine sand
medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
0.062 0.13
10.0
--
Note: Bold
0.13 0.25
24.0
Run 2011 - XS 5
0.25 0.5
4.0
Pebble Count, -
0.5 1
12.0
1 2
0.0
100%
90%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2 4
0.0
4 6
0.0
or
6 8
0.0
80%
70%
8 11
0.0
11 16
0.0
16 22
10.0
60%
50%
22 32
10.0
32 45
6.0
45 64
6.0
40%
ii 30%
-
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very larcie cobble
64 90
0.0
90 128
0.0
128 180
0.0
20%
a 10%
4
`
180 256
0.0
small boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
very lar a boulder
256 362
0.0
j
362 512
0.0
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm) - *-Cumulative Percent • Percent Item -Riffle -Pod -Run -Glide
512 1024
0.0
1024 2048
0.0
2048 4096
0.0
bedrock
0.0
Size percent less than mm
Percent by substrate type
True
Weighted Count:
Total Particle Count:
100
D16
D35
D50
D84
D95
Lsilt/clay
sand
gravel
cobble
boulder
bedrock
50
#N /A
0.15
0.2
28
48
18%
50%
32%
0%
0%
0%