20070913 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20070522

Stream Restoration Plan for 601 North
(UT to Wicker Branch)
PAYMENT
Union County, North Carolina RECEIVED
Project ID No. D 06054-A
Prepared for:
Y
i ~ .
i ~..: ~~.4.~r.i
NCDENR-Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Submitted: Apri127, 2007
Submitted by:
©Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2007
., ., r
~r ,.

~T 'o~
~~
Prepared By:
~~~ K~nley-Hom
~ _- and A;~saciat~s, Inc.
Submitted By:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Environmental Banc & Exchange
3001 Weston Parkway 10055 Red Run Blvd., Suite 130
Cary, NC 27513 Owings Mills, MD 211117
Phone Number:
[phone]
Phone Number: [phone]
Fax Number:
[phone]
Project Manager: Daren Pait, P.E
Project Manager: Norton Webster, PWS
Phone Number:
[phone]
Phone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]

~ Executive Summary
Site Description
The 601 North site, here after referred to as the "site", is located off of highway 601 approximately
seven miles south of Monroe North Carolina in Union County. The project is located in the USGS
• Hydrologic Unit Code 03040105070010 and all of the project streams are located in the Yadkin
River Basin and the 03-07-14 NCDWQ sub-basin.
•
In response to RFP 16-D06054 the 601 North Site was proposed by Environmental Banc and
Exchange (EBX) and accepted by the North Carolina Division of Natural Resources to provide
'~ stream mitigation in the Yadkin River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03040105).
The site contains one Unnamed Tributary to Wicker Branch. The Unnamed Tributary (UT) flows
north to south and enters Wickers Branch at the property line. Wickers Branch is listed as NCDWQ
• Water Supply (WS-V) waters. The UT has a drainage area of 0.30 square miles at the downstream
• property boundary. The project site is currently maintained as an active agricultural field. The
streams appear to have been historically straightened and have gone through periods of having the
riparian buffer cleared.
Reference Location
One reference reach was located outside of the project watershed. The reference reach is within the
same hydrophysiographic region as the project reaches. The reference reach has a drainage area of
0.18 square miles and located in an isolated forested area upstream of a culvert grade control under
Roscoe-Howey Road. The reach exhibited stable pattern, profile, and bankfull dimension and will
be used to generate dimensionless ratios for design comparison.
Restoration Approach
The objective of this restoration approach is to plan, design, and construct a dynamically stable
stream/riparian floodplain to provide an ecological improvement for the entire site and watershed.
The pattern, profile, and dimension of the channel will be adjusted to approximately match Regional
Curve values and to mimic reference reach conditions. Structures such as rock cross vanes, a-vanes,
rock vanes, log sills, log vanes, and root wads will be used to provide grade control, added habitat,
and/or bedform diversity. It is proposed that the UT will be relocated to a more natural position in
the center of both the valley and the historic floodplain of the stream. Adding pattern to the stream
would result in additional length and proper pool-to-pool spacing. In some areas the existing
channel bed elevation will be maintained and an inner berm and floodplain bench will be excavated
to add flood relief and to reduce shear stress on the banks. The bed elevation throughout the
remaining areas will be raised to allow access to the historic floodplain. Proper pool-to-pool spacing
and the use of appropriate structures are critical for providing sufficient energy dissipation
throughout the stream.
Table 1: Project Restoration Summary
Restoration Type Existing Linear Footage Designed Linear Footage or Acreage
or Acreage
Stream Restoration 2,445 3,090

Contents
1.0 Project Site Identification and Location ............................................................................... 7
1.1 Directions to Project Site .................................................................................................... .. 7
1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWQ River Basin Designations ............................. .. 7
1.3 Project Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................... .. 7
2.0 Watershed Characterization ................................................................................................ .. 7
2.1 Drainage Area ..................................................................................................................... .. 7
2.2 Surface Water Classification /Water Quality ..................................................................... .. 7
2.3 Physiography, Geography, and Soils .................................................................................. .. 8
2.4 Land Use and Development Trends .................................................................................... .. 8
2.4.1 Historical Land Use .................................................................................................... .. 8
2.4.2 Development Trends ................................................................................................... .. 8
2.5 Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................. .. 9
2.6 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................. .. 9
2.7 Potential Constraints ........................................................................................................... .. 9
2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundary ............................................................................. .. 9
2.7.2 Site Access .................................................................................................................. .. 9
2.7.3 Utilities ........................................................................................................................ 10
2.7.4 FEMA /Hydrologic Trespass ..................................................................................... 10
3.0 Project Site Streams .............................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Channel Classification ........................................................................................................ 10
3.2 Channel Discharge .............................................................................................................. 10
3.3 Channel Morphology .......................................................................................................... 11
3.4 Channel Stability Assessment ............................................................................................. 11
3.5 Bankfull Verification .......................................................................................................... 11
3.6 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................... 11
4.0 Reference Streams ................................................................................................................ 12
4.1 Watershed Characterization ................................................................................................ 12
4.2 Channel Classification ........................................................................................................ 12
4.3 Discharge ............................................................................................................................ 12
4.4 Channel Morphology .......................................................................................................... 12
4.5 Channel Stability Assessment ............................................................................................. 12
4.6 Bankfull Verification .......................................................................................................... 13
4.7 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................... 13
5.0 Project Site Restoration Plan ............................................................................................... 13
5.1 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives ........................................................................... 13
5.1.1 Designed Channel Classification ................................................................................ 15
5.1.2 Target Buffer Communities ....................................................................................... 15
5.2 Sediment Transport Analysis .............................................................................................. 15
5.2.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 15
5.2.2 Calculations and Discussion ....................................................................................... 16
5.3 HEC-RAS Analysis ............................................................................................................ 16
5.3.1 No-Rise, LOMR, CLOMR ......................................................................................... 16
5.3.2 Hydrologic Trespass ................................................................................................... 16
5.4 Stormwater Best Management Practices ............................................................................ 17

9.0 Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Project Site Vicinity Map
Project Site Location
Project Site Watershed Map
Project Site NRCS Soil Survey Map
Project Site Hydrologic Features Map with Gauge Locations
Reference Site Vicinity Map
Reference Site Watershed Map
Reference Site NRCS Soil Survey Map (1994)
Project Site FEMA Firm Map
Reference Site Vegetative Communities Map
10.0 Appendices
Appendix 1 Project Site Photographs
Appendix 2 Project Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
Appendix 3 Categorical Exclusion Report
Appendix 4 Rainfall Information
Appendix 5 HEC-RAS Analysis
Appendix 6 Soil Nutrient Testing Report
Attachment
Restoration Plan Design Sheets

Project Site Identification and Location
1.1 Directions to Project Site
The 601 North project area is located seven miles south of Monroe, North Carolina in Union County.
From Raleigh take US 1 South and bear right onto US 74 West. Continue on US 74 West, turn left
onto Highway 601 South. for approximately 7 miles and turn right onto McManus Circle. See
Figure 1 for the project site vicinity map.
1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWQ River Basin Designations
The project is located in the USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03040105070010 and all of the project
streams are located in the Yadkin River Basin and the 03-07-14 NCDWQ sub-basin.
1.3 i Project Vicinity Map
Figure 1 shows the project site vicinity map.
2.0 Watershed Characterization
Table 2 provides hydrological and surface water classification information for the major project
• reaches. See Figure 3 for the project site watershed map.
2.1 Drainage Area
The site contains an Unnamed Tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch. The upper section of the UT has
a drainage area of 0.23 square miles and the lower section of the UT has a drainage area of 0.30
square miles.
To}.lo 7. llrn.n o A roo nn.l C4raom ('laccifiratinn

Reach Drainage Area
l Surface Water Stream Order
mi Classification
UT UPPER 0.23 WS-V 1
UT LOWER 0.30 WS-V 1
2.2 Surface Water Classification /Water Quality
The onsite tributary is not classified under the NCDWQ water bodies report. Wicker Branch has a
,NCDWQ stream index number 13-17-40-4, and is described as "From source to Lanes Creek".
Wicker Branch is listed as NCDWQ Water Supply V (WS-V) waters, which are waters that are
:generally upstream and drain to Class WS-1V waters or waters used by industry to supply their
employees with drinking water or as waters formerly used as water supply.
7

2.3 Physiography, Geography, and Soils
The project watershed lies within the Carolina Slate Belt Ecoregion, part of the Piedmont
physiographic providence. Valley slopes between 0.0082 and 0.0097 typify the topography of the
project watershed. The elevation within the project area ranges form 588 to 609 feet above sea level.
The geology of the site cosists of Metamudstone and Meta-Argillite which is thin to thick bedded;
bedding plane and axial-planar cleavage common; interbedded with metasandstone,
metaconglomerate, and metavolcanic rock and is considered a Cid formation. Cid channery silt
loam, Goldston-Badin complex, Misenheimer-Cid complex soils cover the floodplain of upper and
lower UT as shown in Figure 4.
2.4 Land Use and Development Trends
2.4.1 Historical Land Use
Historically, cultivated farmland and forests have dominated the landscape. Based on a review of
aerial photography (2004) (Figure 4), forest and cultivated land cover over 99.5 % of the watershed
Wetlands cover the remaining watershed area. Table 3 shows the distribution of land cover within
the watershed.
Table 3: Existing Land Cover of the WaterchPrl
Land Cover Acreage Percentage of Total
Coverage
Upland Forest 36 18.5
Herbaceous Planted/Cultivated 157 81.0
Wetlands 1 0.5
Wetlands compose approximately 0.5 % of the watershed.
2.4.2 Development Trends
Based on an analysis of aerial photographs there has been no increase in impervious surface in the
project watershed between 1998 and 2004. The landowner expects to continue to cultivate the land
adjacent to the project site. It is anticipated that there will be little to no increase in impervious
surface in the project watershed.
Zoning
The project area is zoned as RA-40. The RA-40 zoning district is low density residential that allows
most types of residential housing and agricultural uses. It is not anticipated that there be a
significant increase in urbanization in the project watershed because of this zoning type.
Major Transportation Projects
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has listed several projects in there Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) that are located within the Monroe, NC vicinity. Several of these
projects are listed below.
• R-2616 - US 601 widen to four lanes
• R-2559 -Monroe Bypass four lanes new location
• U-4024 - US 601 to US 74 multilanes
8

These TIP projects will not directly affect any construction activities associated with this project.
The current highway 601 right-of--way is approximately 70-feet from the easement boundary and it is
not expected that the widening of highway 601 will cause any conflicts. These projects are
anticipated to encourage some growth; however, it is expected most of the development will be
outside of the project watershed.
2.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database dated March 2, 2006, there are
three federally listed endangered species. The vascular plants Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii)
and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthusschweinitzii) along with a freshwater mussel, the Carolina
heel splitter (Lasmigona decorata) are listed as occurring in Union County. The entire 601 North site
has been under intensive agricultural use for an extended period of time. The frequent disturbance of
the proposed site along the proposed restoration corridor makes it unlikely that any of the listed plant
species occur in this area. The channel is also highly disturbed and impacted by sediment. The
present channel condition makes it unlikely that the heel splitter occurs in this system. Additional
investigations will beconducted for these species to determine if suitable habitat exists. A Section 7
ESA clearance will be obtained from the USFWS prior to restoration activities.
A search of the US Fish and Wildlife Service website (http://www.fws.gov/endangered/) and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program website (http://207.4.179.38/nhp/) in August 2006
identified the Carolina heel splitter (Lasmigona decorata) as an endangered species residing within
Union County.
2.6 Cultural Resources
A review of properties to be determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places at the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was conducted for the project area and the surrounding
area. According to the most recent (2002) NCCGIA database, there are no National Register
properties within a 1-mile radius of the project area. In addition, the SHPO Archaeological Database
was reviewed, and no significant archaeological sites were identified within a 1-mile radius.
2.7 Potential Constraints
• 2.7.1 Property Ownership and Boundary
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX) has entered into an Agreement for Purchase of
• Easement with the landowner for the Site. The conservation easement exists entirely on a parcel
owned by Franklin W. Howey and the conservation easement area has been secured by
Environmental Banc and Exchange. The conservation easement boundary is shown on the designed
channel alignment.
~ 2.7.2 Site Access
The Site will be accessed for construction off of Highway 601 and McManus Circle. It is not
anticipated that there will be any site access conflicts.
r
9

2.7.3 Utilities
The certified survey map, Environmental Data Resources report, and visual. field inspections
indicated that there were no known utilities on site.
2.7.4 FEMA /Hydrologic Trespass
The project reach is not a designated flood zone under the Federal Emergency Management
Association (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) program according to map number
3717900200 C effective July 5, 1994. The project is anticipated to lower flood stage elevations due
to the construction of a floodplain bench, and debris removal.
3.0 Project Site Streams
Kimley-Horn performed a geomorphic survey (cross sections, longitudinal survey, and pattern) and
sampled stream materials (classification and entrainment pebble counts, bar samples, sub-pavement
and pavement samples) on several reaches representative of the geomorphic settings within the
project area. Table 4 below summarizes the channel classifications of the surveyed reaches within
the project area and Restoration Table IV (Section 8) provides detailed morphological data.
3.1 Channel Classification
The UT is classified as a Rosgen stream type B4 channel. The reach has entrenchment ratios of 1.7
to 2.9, width-to-depth ratios of 7.5 to 11.0, bank height ratios of 1.2 to 2.6, and slopes of 0.0095 to
0.0107. The stream morphology is included in Restoration Table IV.
Table 4: Summary of CtrPam ('laccifiratinn
Assmt. Drainage
Z Entrenchment A W Width/Depth K Sloe
p Stream
Reach Area (mi
) Ratio bkt bkf Ratio Type
1Jpper
UT
0.23
2.9
1.0
3.3
11.0
1.1
0.0095
B4
Lower
UT 0.30 1.7 2.9 4.5 7.5 1.0 0.0107 B4
3.2 Channel Discharge
The peak flows for the 2-, 10-, 25-, and 100-year storms were modeled for the given drainage areas
These flows were calculated using the North Carolina rural flood-frequency equations for the Blue
Ridge-Piedmont Region. The peak flows calculated are summarized in Table 5.
Table 5: PYnIPI`t Cite CtrPame Paalr 7llicrh.~rnnc
Assessment Area Bankfull
Discharge 2yr Q 10yr Q 25yr Q 100yr Q
Reach (ac.)
(cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs)
Upper UT 147.2 7.3 48.1 126.0 184.0 297.0
Lower UT 192.0 23.4 58.0 151.0 219.0 351.0
~,ai~uia~cu using 1v1aIlIling S equailon (n=U.U~~S)
10

3.3 Channel Morphology
Restoration Table IV shows a complete channel morphology data including channel, pattern,
dimension, and profile for all restoration and project reaches.
~ 3.4 Channel Stability Assessment
• Restoration Plan Design Sheets provide an illustration existing stream conditions. Appendix 1
• displays photos of existing conditions.
• The restoration reach lies within an area that historically has been used for agricultural purposes.
• The UT has historically been channelized and relocated to the toe of the valley. Most of the UT has
• a no riparian buffer.
• The agricultural practice of the historical floodplain has caused the soils to become compacted and
• has decreased the infiltration rate. As a result the surface mimics the characteristics of a semi-
• impervious area, increasing the quantity and rate at which storm event hydrology reaches these
streams. The restoration reaches have downcut and incised until it encountered bedrock outcrops
• which act as grade control. The stream is currently attempting to widen which is accelerating the
• erosion of the banks.
• Bank height ratios (low bank height divided by the maximum bankfull depth) were determined for
• the surveyed reaches. In the methodology used for this report (Rosgen, 2001), bank height ratios
• between 1.1 and 1.3 are regarded as "moderately unstable," ratios between 1.3 and 1.5 as "unstable,"
"
"
and bank height ratios greater than 1.5 are
highly unstable.
• Table 6: Restoration Reach Characteristics
A
t B
k Ve etative Buffer Ad
t Di
t
b
/
ssm
. HA jacen s
ur
ance

Reach Right Bank Left Bank Land Use Relocation
Ratio
Upper
UT 1.2 Field Field Active Agriculture Channelization
Lower
UT 2 6 Field Field Active Agriculture Channelization

• 3.5 Bankfull Verification
• Determination of the bankfull elevation is vital to generating meaningful geomorphic values. Field

• indicators for bankfull were strong for the reference reaches; however, due to down cutting and bed
and bank instability, the restoration candidates had weaker bankfull indicators. To verify bankfull
• elevations, the bankfull area values for the project reaches and reference reaches were checked
• against the North Carolina Piedmont Rural regional curves (Harman, Jennings et al. 1999). The
• results indicate a general agreement between the three sets (site, references, and regional curve) thus
providing a measure of validation.
•
• 3.6 Vegetation
• Two major areas of land cover were observed within the project area: piedmont alluvial forest
• (Schafale and Weakley 1990) and open fields.
•
•
• 11
•

The piedmont alluvial forest community is situated along the higher floodplain predominantly in the
upper sections. The alluvial forest are commonly dominated by river birch (Betzzla nigra), sycamore
(Platanzzs occidentalis), black willow (Salix nigra), box elder (Ater negundo), black walnut (Juglans
nigra), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Ater rubrum), muscle wood (Carpinus
caroliniana), and tag alder (Alms serrulata).
The fields were dominated with fescue (Festuccz spp.) and corn. There was little woody vegetation
growing in these areas.
4.0 Reference Streams
4.1 Watershed Characterization
One reference reach was located outside of the project watershed. Figure 6 shows the location of the
reference reach. The reference reach is within the same hydrophysiographic region as the project
reaches. The off-site reference reach has a drainage area of 0.18 square miles
4.2 Channel Classification
The reference reach classifies as a Rosgen stream type E channel. The reach has an entrenchment
ratio of 17.9, a width to depth ratio of 6.0, bank height ratio of 1.0-1.1, and a slope of 0.0127. The
reference stream morphology is included in Restoration Table IV.
4.3 Discharge
The peak flows for the 2-, 10-, 25-, and 100-year storms were modeled for the given drainage areas.
These flows were calculated using the North Carolina rural flood-frequency equations for the Blue
Ridge-Piedmont Region. The peak flows calculated are summarized in Table 7.
Table 7: Reference Stream Peak Discharges
Reference
Reach Area
(ac.) Bankfull
his cfs rge 2yr Q
(cfs) 10yr Q
(cfs) 25yr Q
(cfs) 100yr ~
(cfs)
UT 115 30.9 40.5 107 157 255
4.4 Channel Morphology
Restoration Table IV shows a complete channel morphology data including channel, pattern,
dimension, and profile for all restoration and project reaches.
4.5 Channel Stability Assessment
KHA staff determined that the reference stream exhibits stable dimension, pattern, and profile
because it is located within a forested area upstream from a culvert grade control at Roscoe-Howey
Road. The channel also has been isolated from adjacent land uses with a stable vegetative buffer.
12

•
•
•
•
•
•
4.6 Bankfull Verification
Determination of the bankfull elevation is vital to generating meaningful geomorphic values. Field
indicators for bankfull were strong for the reference reaches; however, due to down cutting and bed
and bank instability, the restoration candidates had weaker bankfull indicators. To verify bankfull
elevations, the bankfull area values for the project reaches and reference reaches were checked
against the North Carolina Piedmont Rural regional curves (Harman, Jennings et al. 1999). The
results indicate a general agreement between the three sets (site, references, and regional curve) thus
providing a measure of validation. No discernible bankfull indicators exist in the project reach.
These dimensions represent a stable inner bench that was consistently visible in the field and thus
incorporated into the typical cross sections. Designed bankfull dimensions rely more heavily on the
reference and regional curve data.
4.7 Vegetation
The Restoration Plan Design Sheets will use the vegetation communities associated with and
surrounding the reference reach as reference communities for riparian restoration. Two distinct
communities lie within riparian area of the reference reach: piedmont alluvial forest and piedmont
bottomland forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). These landscapes match landscapes within the
project area. The piedmont alluvial forest landscape is flat, somewhat frequently flooded. The
piedmont bottomland forest landscape is flat, frequently flooded, and the water table remains close
to the surface.
5.0 Project Site Restoration Plan
5.1 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives
The goal of this project is to restore the site back to a naturally functioning stream system designed
to address and correct the impairment issues typically associated with highly disturbed systems. The
project will provide ecological functional lift to the existing system by restoring the stream and
riparian habitat to a stream type and vegetative community appropriate for the given valley and
watershed conditions. Benefits will include improved water quality by reducing sediment load
through stabilization and by reducing nutrient and other pollutant input by the addition of forested
riparian buffers planted with native species. Additionally, the forested buffers and reconnection with
the historic flood plain will improve channel hydraulics and system capacity. Improvements to the
ecosystem include the addition of in-stream habitat by the use of in-stream structures and bank
revetments such as root wads. By providing an appropriate mix of native forest vegetation to create
an appropriate canopy and understory, the soil structure will improve, a leaf litter source will be
established to support aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, and shading and cooling will be provided
to improve water quality. This will provide functional uplift for the watershed as a whole.
13

Stream Restoration Approach
A natural channel design technique, using priority I and II methodologies was used to adjust the
channel dimension, pattern, and profile to a stable configuration. The configuration was based on
reference reach morphology, values from regional curves, regime equations, experience from other
restoration projects, and the existing channel morphology. These reference values are presented in
Restoration Table IV. The stream restoration either restored the streams in place or created a new
channel. The base flow elevation will remain relatively in place and lower, more active flood prone
areas will be created along with an inner berm bench to help alleviate bank stress during
intermediate storm events.
Channel restoration will be based on Rosgen "C" type stream modified from Rosgen "E" type
reference streams. Alluvial streams in the Piedmont of North Carolina tend to be Rosgen "E" type
channels or relatively narrow and deep. Such geometry typically forms because the existing, mature
vegetation root system holds the bank soil in place causing the stream to develop a relatively narrow
and deep cross section. Typically when an alluvial stream is relocated or restored in an open field in
the Piedmont, it cannot be constructed as an "E" channel because there is no existing, mature
vegetation root system to hold the banks in place. As such, it is better to construct a "C" type channel
cross section with flatter banks to reduce the possibility of bank erosion. However, it is anticipated
that as mature vegetation is established on the stream banks that the root system will cause the
stream to develop a deeper, narrower bankfull channel (or an "E" type channel). As such, the
relocated channel maybe constructed with a "C" type channel cross section, but will quickly develop
into an "E" type channel as mature vegetation is established.
Dimension
The riffle channels cross sectional areas were calculated from the hydraulic geometry curves derived
from the reference reaches and regional curves. The riffle cross sections were shaped to have a mean
depth and width capable of transporting existing and predicted future sediment loads for the
designed channel slope. A bankfull bench was added to to create access to a lower flood prone area.
The pool cross sections were shaped based on riffle to pool cross section relationships found in the
appropriate reference reach. The reference dimensionless ratios are included in the morphological
table (Restoration Table IV) and typical cross sections are shown in the attached Restoration Plan
Design Sheets.
Pattern
The channel planform was dictated by reference ratios for meander wavelength and radius of
curvature derived from the reference reaches and typical Rosgen reference reach values for C type
channels. The belt widths were based on reference ratios but were limited in some areas by the
topography of the valley. The proposed planform sinuosity allowed pool to pool spacing and riffle
locations to match reference conditions. The proposed sinuosity provided the appropriate slope to
transport the material coming into the reach. The planform values and ratios are provided in the
morphological table in Restoration Table IV and the Restoration Plan Design Sheets provide the
designed channel alignment.
Bedform
The design channel Bedform predominantly consists of a riffle -pool sequence with runs and glides
between them. The design depths and pool to pool spacing of the features were based on reference
14

reach values and typical Rosgen reference reach values for C type channels (Restoration Table IV).
The pools were located in the apex of meander bends with riffles located between the pools in the
tangent portions of the channel. The pools will be over-dug to allow for some sedimentation during
construction activities. The profile section of the Restoration Plan Design Sheet shows the
designed channel bedform.
Structures
In-stream structures were placed in the design channel to provide grade control and maintain overall
design slope. In-stream structures also were used to protect stream banks and increase aquatic habitat
diversity. The types of structures incorporated into the restoration project include rock cross vanes,
A-vanes, rock vanes, root wads, log sills, and log vanes. Root wads were used only for the purpose
of providing habitat.
Beaver Management
It is anticipated there will be no need for a beaver management plan.
Riparian Buffer Restoration Approach
Reestablishing the riparian buffer will restore habitat connectivity throughout the conservation
easement. Prior to planting, the soils will be treated as described in section 5.5 to facilitate plant
establishment. New plants will be installed as directed in section 5.6.
5.1.1 Designed Channel Classification
The restoration reaches are designed as Rosgen CS-~ES channels.
5.1.2 Target Buffer Communities
The vegetation communities for the reference reaches were similar to the on-site piedmont alluvial
forest and bottomland communities (described in Section 4.7). See Figure 10 for the Reference Site
Vegetative Communities Map.
5.2 Sediment Transport Analysis
5.2.1 Methodology
Sediment transport was calculated using shear stress equations to verify that the designed channel
would be able to transport at bankfull its bedload without aggrading or degrading. The Shields curve
was used for initiation of particle movement to estimate the range of particles transported for a given
shear stress.
Two physical characteristics of the channel design that affect the shear stress on the channel bed are
the slope of the channel and hydraulic radius.
i = ~yRs
Where: i= shear stress (lb/ft2)
y =specific gravity of water (62.41b/ft3)
R =hydraulic radius (ft)
15

s =water surface slope (ft/ft)
The hydraulic radius equals the cross sectional area divided by the wetted perimeter.
R= A
P
Where: R =hydraulic radius
A =cross-sectional area (ft~)
P =wetted perimeter (ft)
5.2.2 Calculations and Discussion
The restoration reaches were designed with a mean depth and slope sufficient to transport a range of
particles. Table 9 provides the results of the sediment transport calculations using the shear stress
equation and Shields curve. The channel is designed to eliminate bank erosion and to flush the sands
and transport the characteristic sediments. The characteristic sediments were determined from
analyzing bed materials in comparative streams having less impacted watersheds.
Table 8: Summary of Shear Stress Calculations
Proposed Proposed Shear Particle
Restoration Reach Slope Hydraulic Stress Transport
Radius Size
(mm)
(ft/ft) (ft) (Ib/ft2)
Upper UT 0.0020 - 0.0048 0.8 0.10 0.24 6 - 15
Lower UT 0.0057 - 0.0092 0.7 0.25 - 0.40 13 - 22
5.3 HEC-RAS Analysis
Bankfull, 2-, 10-, and 100-year peak discharge flows were analyzed for both existing and proposed
conditions. The HEC-RAS model (v.3.1.3) verified a net reduction in water surface elevation,
channel velocity, and total velocity. There was a minor increase in shear stress which was necessary
in order to flush the fines and transport the desired bed material. The addition of two 15" CMP
culverts helped improve overall conveyance of the crossing.
5.3.1 No-Rise, LOMR, CLOMR
The project streams are not mapped under the FEMA National Flood Insurance Program; therefore,
approval is not required by FEMA or the State of North Carolina.
5.3.2 Hydrologic Trespass
The project streams were designed to eliminate any hydrologic trespass issues. A stabilized pattern,
profile, and dimension combined with the inner berm and bankfull benches should create a net
decrease in flood stage thus reducing any chance of hydrologic trespass. After cross section 1600
there is an increase in water surface elevation for the 100-year event. This increase in water surface
only extends the flood boundary approximately 10-feet beyond the existing limits; thus not creating
a significant risk to the adjacent fields.
16

• 5.4 Stormwater Best Management Practices
~
5.4.1 Site-Specific Stormwater Concerns
• The project site is situated in a predominately rural setting. It is anticipated that the re-established
• riparian buffer will be sufficient in filtering and treating any stormwater runoff from the adjacent
agricultural fields.
5.5 Soil Restoration
Soils within the riparian restoration areas will be treated to facilitate the growth and development of
plantings. The soils will be ripped prior to planting to break up compacted soils and create a
favorable environment for new plantings. Plant nutrients and soil amendments will be applied to the
soils as prescribed by the soils test report performed by the North Carolina Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services Agronomic Division for sample sites located throughout the
project area (Appendix 6).
5.6 Natural Plant Community Restoration
The goal of the riparian restoration is to provide long-term improvements to ecological functions of
the existing forest community. The Restoration Plan Design Sheet has been developed to provide
these functional uplifts through the re-establishment of target natural communities. The target
natural communities have been determined based on comparison of existing site conditions with
established type communities with verification of appropriate species from proximate reference
natural communities. Based on the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's Nature Community
Classification, the site's riparian area most closely correlates to Piedmont Bottomland Forests within
the lower floodplains and Piedmont Alluvial Forest in the remaining riparian areas. (Schafale and
Weakley 1990).
5.6.1 Reforestation Scheme
The goal of the planting scheme seeks to establish a riparian community consistent with the
reference community using an approach that accelerates the successional process leading to a mature
riparian community. The planting plan will use reference plant communities discussed in the
previous paragraph as a base to design a planting scheme and develop a vegetation list.
Re-colonization of cleared riparian habitats characteristically begins with an invasion of pioneer
species that creates an environment (e.g. shading) suitable for species more typical of a mature
community. To initialize the proposed riparian community, the restoration area will be planted with
a mix of pioneer and climax species that have been selected and arranged to meet the following
objectives:
Establish mix of shade intolerant canopy and shade tolerant understory species
^ Provide vegetative source of dominant species
^ Establish local seed sources for those species less likely to migrate into the restoration area
17

^ Provide stability to disturbed or high stress areas
The design of a planting plan involves several components. The planting zones have been developed
considering site hydrology, soils, and disturbance regimes and are referenced to natural
communities. Each zone has a unique environment that dictates species selection and community
structure. The planting list is developed for each zone to match the vegetation in the reference
community and meet the objectives given above. The planting list also reflects which species are
readily available and have a reasonable expectation of survival. For a given zone and species, a plant
source and planting type (e.g. containerized or bare root) is recommended. A planting schedule is
developed so that site preparation and plant installation occur at the optimal time and season. After
installation, the planting should be verified. The maintenance plan is developed to promote long-
term success of the planting. These planting plan components are described below.
5.6.2 Planting Zones
The planting plan includes 5 zones of distinct vegetative composition and structure.
^ Zone 1 -Stream Channel
^ Zone 2 -Stream Bench
^ Zone 3 -Riparian
^ Zone 4 -Bottomland
^ Zone 5 -Transitional
Zone 1 -Stream Channel
The stream channel zone includes the stream channel from base flow to bankfull. The zone features
the steepest slopes of the zones and highest saturation levels. This environment dictates the planting
of fast-growing, obligate pioneer species to provide stability to areas at or below bankfull.
Zone 2 -Stream Bench
The stream bank zone includes the area from the top of bank outward away from the stream 10 feet.
It is an area exposed to regular stream flows and frequent soil deposition. The most stressed areas are
located on the outside bends of meanders. The benches will be planted with fast-growing, deep-
rooted species that will provide biostabilization and shading to the stream
Zone 3 -Riparian
The riparian zone includes the area beyond zone 2 to the edge of the floodplain where the hydrology
supports piedmont alluvial hardwood forest vegetation. The area is flat, somewhat frequently
flooded. The composition of the vegetation includes a mix of canopy and understory trees.
Zone 4 -Bottomland
The Bottomland zone includes the area beyond zone 2 to the edge of the floodplain where the
hydrology supports Bottomland hardwood forest vegetation. The area is flat, frequently flooded, and
the water table remains close to the surface. Zone 4 remains flooded or saturated for longer periods
than Zone 3. The composition of the vegetation includes a mix of canopy and understory trees.
18

Zone 5 -Transitional
The transitional zone includes an approximately 10-foot buffer between zone 3 or 4 and an adjacent
open area such as a field outside of the conservation easement. The planting list consists of a subset
• of species consisting of smaller species that tolerate full sun and will eliminate an abrupt boundary
between the open field and zone 3 or 4.
~ 5.6.3 Plant List
The plant list is based on the target community, reference community, and recommendations from
the North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute (Ha112001) and the North Carolina Ecosystem
• Enhancement Program (Smith 2004). The selection of species also depends on availability from
• local nursery sources.
~ 5.6.4 Plant Sources
The planting plan preferentially selects local genetic stock and utilizes three sources of plants. Two
sources-nursery stock and on-site transplants-will be tied directly to the initial planting and will
. be utilized in numbers to support permit guidelines. The remaining source-recruitment-has been
• factored into the selection of species in the plant list. The plant list includes a significant portion of
species not likely to establish from natural propagation.

• Nursery Stock
The planting plan may utilize any of the following nursery stock forms of woody species: bare roots,
• containerized seedlings, and ball and burlap. Additionally, the planting plan also may use sod or
seeds from commercial sources. The planting plan prescribes that nursery stock are grown under
environmental conditions similar to the target environment.
The planting list includes alternates in case specific species ofpre-ordered plants are not available or
acceptable for installation.
~
On-Site Transplants
• Several favorable species grow within the existing site. In the course of constructing a new channel
alignment, some individual plants may need to be removed. The individuals of a target species that
are of an appropriate size and age maybe transplanted into the restoration area.

• Recruitment
• It is expected that the restoration sites will be populated with species from adjacent communities.
. The restoration sites will be maintained to keep unwanted species at less than 10% of the total
population.

~ 5.6.5 Plant Care and Installation
~ The plantings will be cared for and installed based on guidelines provided in the included planting
• notes. When planted properly, bare root seedlings are the most cost-effective and successful plant
material. Containerized plantings, live stakes, and other plant materials will be used based on the
needs of the planting zone (e.g. frequent disturbance, immediate shading, and others). Larger
~ unprotected trees will be guarded using tree shelters that should protect against herbivory and inhibit
• site occupation by beavers.

19

5.6.6 Schedule
The planting plan will be scheduled around stream construction activities and growing season.
Special attention will be paid to stabilizing disturbed areas that include newly-constructed channels
and temporary construction easements. The final vegetation planting will occur after proper site
preparation (described below) during the appropriate season.
Plantings maybe staggered based on surrounding activities. Live stake planting on stream banks
(zone 1) will follow closely after channel construction to provide immediate stabilization. On-site
transplants will be planted immediately after removal from their existing habitat. Planting of zones
2-4 will occur from late winter to early spring after construction to minimize or eliminate threats
from the construction; exotic vegetation treatment; unpredictable weather; and beaver activity.
5.6.7 Stabilization
Immediately after construction the stream banks and all disturbed areas will be seeded with
permanent and temporary seed mixes. If within the appropriate season, permanent seeding will be
completed in conjunction with construction with temporary seeding applied per Land Quality
Section requirements. Within the stream channel (Zone 1), pioneer species that provide immediate
bank stabilization will be planted. Live stakes and bare roots will be planted around structure
installations and the outside of meander bends to provide an area of high density root mass. Coir
fiber matting and live stakes will be used along the entire reach of the restored channels to provide
stabilization until vegetation can be established.
5.6.8 Site Preparation
Prior to planting the riparian buffer, efforts will be made to eradicate fescue and invasive plants such
as multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Chinese privet (Lingustrum sineses), and Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica). These efforts should include herbicide use during the spring and afollow-up
spraying in early fall to eliminate any fescue that was not killed in the spring. A permanent seed mix
can be used after application of the pre-emergent. Woody planting can follow during the dormant
season.
5.6.9 Planting Review
After the final planting is complete, the planting supervisor will verify that the site was planted
properly through inspection of stem counts and condition. The planting contractor will be
responsible for replacing damaged plantings.
5.6.10 Monitoring and Maintenance
Monitoring will verify that the restoration area is meeting restoration goals. Damaged plantings will
be removed and replanting will occur if the planting survival fails to meet restoration goals. If
monitoring indicates that an area is trending towards greater than 10% coverage by nuisance
vegetation, that area will be treated to remove the nuisance vegetation.
20

~ 6.0 Performance Criteria
•
~ 6.1 Stream Success Criteria
•
• The stream geometry will be considered successful if the cross-section geometry, profile, and
sinuosity are stable or reach a dynamic equilibrium. It is expected that there will be minimal changes
in the designed cross sections, profile, and/or substrate composition. Changes that may occur during
the monitoring period will be evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a more
• unstable condition (e.g. down cutting, erosion, etc.) or are minor changes that represent an increase
• in stability (e.g. settling, vegetative changes, coarsening of bed material, etc.).
• An initial, though not exclusive, indicator of success will be adherence to design or reference ratios
of stream geometry found in the morphological table (Restoration Table I~ or in comparable and
• stable reference systems. The channel may not adhere to design or reference ratios of stream
geometry, but can be considered stable if the following key indicators are present:
^ Stream Type: Maintenance of the design stream type or progression or conversion to stable
stream type such as B, C, or E will indicate stability
• Bank Height Ratio: Bank height ratio between 1.0 and 1.1 will indicate flood flows have access
to the active floodplain and that higher flows do not apply excessive stresses to stream banks

Determination of true bankfull may be difficult until the stream has had adequate flooding events to
• create strong bankfull indicators.
The nature of the watershed presents challenges to stream restoration. The contributing watersheds
lie within a rapidly developing region. The urbanizing watershed's runoff character will continue to
change as the nature of the land cover shifts to less permeable surfaces. The hydrograph will shift
such that bankfull flooding events will become more frequent and peak discharges will be higher.
The cross sections have been designed with bankfull benches to account for some shifting in
bankfull discharges.
~ Upstream construction activities driven by land development likely will lead to episodic sediment
pulses sent downstream through the stream network. Additionally, erosion of upstream unstable
stream banks will persistently contribute sediment to the project reaches. Excess sediment will either
• be routed though the project area or deposited in target areas such as point bars and the floodplain.
Minor sedimentation of pools and glides may occur. The pools are designed to be over dug to
account for some sedimentation of pools and glides.
If a large storm event occurs before the woody vegetation has established, isolated bank erosion may
occur in sections where the flood prone area has been restricted due to topography andJor utility
• easements. Areas of bank erosion will be repaired as necessary.
It is normal for streams located in the Carolina Slate Belt Ecoregion to flow underground during dry
• periods, particularly in areas where the stream bed is in contact with bedrock. This is true even with
• very large permanent streams. As such, even though a stream maybe considered to be perennial for
mitigation purposes, it may not have flowing water present above ground during dry periods. It is
anticipated that portions of the restored stream channel will be in contact with bed rock and may not
~ flow during dry periods.

21

6.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
The success of riparian and wetland vegetation planting will be gauged by stem counts of planted
species. Stem counts of over 320 trees per acres after 3 years, and 260 trees per acre after 5 year will
be considered successful. Photos taken at established photo points should indicate maturation of
riparian vegetation community.
6.3 Schedule/Reporting
The monitoring plan to evaluate the success of the stream restoration project is based on guidance
provided by The Stream Mitigation Guidelines disseminated by the United States Corps of
Engineers -Wilmington District (McLendon, Fox et al. 2003) and recommendation from the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. The collection and summarization of monitoring data will be
conducted in accordance with the most current version of the EEP documents entitled "Content,
Format, and Data Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports"
Upon completion of the restoration project, an as-built survey will be conducted that documents the
following conditions:
^ Geomorphology (dimension, pattern, and profile)
^ Channel materials
^ Channel stability and in-stream structure functionality
^ Wetland hydrology
^ Vegetation (stream and wetland)
The survey of channel dimension will consist of permanent cross sections placed at approximately
two cross sections (one riffle and one pool) per unique stream segment. The cross sections will
represent approximately 50% riffles and 50% pools. Annual photographs showing both banks and
upstream and downstream views will betaken from permanent, mapped photo points. The survey of
the longitudinal profile will represent distinct areas of restoration and will cover a cumulative total
of 3,000 linear feet of channel. Newly-constructed meanders will be surveyed to provide pattern
measurements. Channel material measurements will be collected by using pebble counts for at least
six of the permanent cross sections.
The entire restored length of stream will be investigated for channel stability and in-stream structure
functionality. Any evidence of channel instability will be identified, mapped, and photographed. All
structures will be inventoried for functionality and photographed.
Successful restoration of the vegetation on a stream mitigation site is dependent upon hydrologic
restoration, active planting of preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native
plant community. In order to determine if the criteria are achieved, vegetation-monitoring quadrants
will be installed across the restoration site, as directed by NCEEP monitoring guidance. The number
of quadrants required will be based on the species/area curve method, as described in NCEEP
monitoring guidance documents, with a minimum of at least three quadrants. The size of individual
quadrants vegetation-monitoring plots will be installed on approximately 1.0 percent of the
restoration site. The individual monitoring plots will be 0.01 hectare in size. Vegetation monitoring
will occur in spring after leaf-out has occurred. Individual quadrant data will be provided and will
include diameter, height, density, and coverage quantities. Relative values will be calculated and
22

importance values will be determined. Individual seedlings will be marked such that they can be
found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from the difference between the
previous year's living planted seedlings and the current year's living planted seedlings.
At the end of the first growing season, species composition, density, and survival will be evaluated.
For each subsequent year, until the final success criteria are achieved, the restored site will be
evaluated between July and November. Permanent photo points will be set up for each quadrant.
The monitoring will occur annually for five years. The monitoring period should include two
separate years with bankfull events. Bankfull events will be verified using an installed crest gauge
that will be inspected during each monitoring visit. If a bankfull event has not been documented by
the end of the second year of monitoring, a mandatory quarterly check will be required. If there are
not two bankfull events, the monitoring period maybe extended at the discretion of the Corps of
Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Project Manager and the 401-Wetlands Unit. Monitoring
reports will be submitted during every year for years 1-5.
23

7.0 References
Hall, Karen (2001). Recommended Native Plant Species for Stream Restoration in North Carolina.
Raleigh, NC, North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute NCSU.
Harman, William A., Gregory D. Jennings, et al. (1999). Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry
Relationships for North Carolina Streams. Wildland Hydrology Symposium, Bozeman, MT,
AWRA.
McLendon, Scott, Becky Fox, et al. (2003). Stream Mitigation Guidelines. United States Army
Corps of Engineers -Wilmington District, United States Environmental Protection Agency, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and North Carolina Department of Natrual Resources -
Division of Water Quality.
Rosgen, David L. (2001). A Stream Channel Stability Assessment Methodology. Seventh Federal
Intera ency Sedimentation Conference. Reno, NV. w: 18-26.
Schafale, Michael P. and Alan D. Weakley (1990). Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina, Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Smith, Cherri L. (2004). Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration. Raleigh, NC, North Carolina
Department of Environmental and Natural Resources -Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
United States Geological Survey (2003). The National Flood-Frequency Program.
24

8.0 Restoration Tables

••i~•••••••••••••••••••••••••!•••••••••••i•
Table is Proiect Restoration Structure and Ohiectives
Assessment Reach' Station Mitigation Priority Existing Designed i

(Design Reach)
Range
Type Approach Linear Linear Comments s
Ras en Foota a Foota e
~,

~~ ipper UT
loo+oo -
108+59.26

Restoration

1, 11

CIO

b~~~

A combination of PI and PII with
109+01- channel relocation.
Lower UT 130+86.82 Restoration I, II 1,835 2,194
Tahle ii: Drainage Area and Stream Classification
Drainage Area Surface Water
Reach l Stream Order
mi Classification
o_l~"l lC~ 4~'rr ~4S.P. 1':~I1C°~; g~,~~+ ~I~_~4i
O
O
W
Table III: Land Use of Watershed

C
O
f6
O
d' ~
Q C
(~
U _~
O ~
~ L
0 Q
x Z
O o
J
L
R
F
~ i i i O
M O
N ~ O ~
M ~
O M
M ^
O ~ O
M ~ O i
I i ~
O O N
O _ M N ~ 0 f~
I N O
N
H
A M f ~ ~ M O N M N n (p
O
N
01
~
M a0 a0 (O O O O
~
N=
~
M
~
~
~
~
N
N N f~ O O
~ O
~
W O
W O
M O
N O
~ O
M N
N O
O M
O A
O O
N O
O ~
O O
N m
N N
n M ~ O ~ O
t

~
~
o

O

W
0
0
o A
c
o

' O. o
C d U M f0 M O i O N A M W O ~ O O O O n 10 M O
Ol 3
y J '
O O N N O
M IM O h N ~ M I O
C O
C O N ~ I ~ ~
O ~
0
ai ~
ui

~
~
ai
O

I C
ci
O~

C
ui
C
C
ui
O
C

I C
ai
O

I C
ci
O

I C
ci
O

I C
5i
O

I C
ci
O
C

I C
ui
Q

I G
ai
OI

C
ci
O

I C
ci

C
ci

C
ai
OI
ui
C

C
ui
O

I G
ui
O

~ C
ci
O

I G
ai
p

l C
ui
O~.

C
ui
OI

C
ui
O

I C
ci
p~ C
ai
OI
hi
C

C
ui
d
~ N
a d
~ f0
a d
~ f0
a' d
~ lp d
a~
m d
~ f0
~ d
~ (0
~ d
~ (
p m
~f f
0
R N
~ N
K d
~ N
K d
~ N
a m
~ N
m d
~ (
9
a d
~ N
~ d
~ N
a' d
~ N
a' d
~ N
~ d
~ f6
m N
~ N
~ d~
~~ W
~ N
a d
~ l0
~ d
~ f0
a' d
~ W
a' d
~ lC6
m d
~ 'N
~ d
~ N
~ d
~ ICO d
~~ N
~ d !0
~a d
~ lC0
a
y
d
G R
E> I ' ~?

~ O
~ o
M o
fV M
O In
M r~
I o
1~
a
d v
~
o
m
In
o
`?
v
Iq
1` ~ O W sF M i N I i ~ I M I ~ I

y ~

^

~ O

S O
d d U M i N O t0 10 N 10 M p
7~ W O I W fV I I O I I j
U ~ N I(
m
C C
O
~
~` C

d 07

m C pI

~ C p~

~ C

i° N C

`°
m G)
~
m
c
m N
m
m
e
d N

~
c
m G)
e
`° C)
m
e
`° G7
m
e
~° N
Q,
c
q N
Q,
c
i° 4i
~
c
~ N
m
c N
m
c N
o,
c
d N
~
c N
c d
c N
m G)
e m
G
e N
m
e
w N
~
c N
m
e d
o~
c N
m
e N
~
c N
o
c N
we N
o Cl
ca,
c N
m
~
K d
~
~ d
~
~ '
°
~ °
'
~ ~
~
~
~
~
K
~ i
m a
~ ~ m
K i
a
f m
K a
i
~ m
~ i
a
~ m
~ i
a
~ m
~ i
a
~ m
~ d
~ m
R d
~ m
~ i
a
~ m
~ d
~ m
~ d
~ m
K d
~ an
~ d e
O
~.~ d
~ m
~ i
a
~ cGa
~ d
~ ~
~ m
~ m
K d
~ m
~ m
~ m
~ d
~ m
~ d
~ m a~i
~ f m
K adi m
~ ~ a`°i
~ m
K

n M

' W
N V'
ep
I

'
O O

B
O M
O M I V
O N

~

i
M
n
~ O
O
O
W ~
~ ,.~ 0
V' t0
O I W
~ ~ A
N O
o O f0 (O
N h
A I~ Q Q Q Q Q Q ~ O O O M O n ~ W W O N;

OI F 0
+0

M
N

0
e

N

~
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
O
O
O
f0

.-
O
C

m
O

~

~
n
49
N „
~ N

~
N y
•x 3 m
~ M
p
N
f~
I ~
O ~
o ~
O M
O O N O
a0 O)
O
W J N O O ~

t o
C
m
p~
c
C
a
pl
c
C
d
~
c
C
m
d C
c A
pl
c
c
A
~
c
C
m
~
c.
C
to
d E
c ~a
~
c
C
va
pl
c
C
m
S
c
C
d
pI
c
C
A
d
c
C
d
~
c
C
~
m
c
S
d
d
c
C
A
d
c
C
a
d
c
C
a
d
c
C
A
d
c
d
m c

m
d
cl

A
d
c

m
d
°I

A
d
c

m
d
~

A
d
c

A
d
c

m
d
c A
d
c
d
m

a
d

d
~
f0
~
d
~
N
a
d
~
c0
m
d
~
Ip d
~~
(0
m
d
~
d
a
d
~
N
~
d
~
lp d
~~
l0
m
d
~
c0
~
d
~
f0
~
d
~
f0
a
d
~
d
~
d
~
f0
a
d
~
f0
a
d
~
Ip
~
d
~
Ip
~
d
~
f0
a
d
~
l0
~
d
~
Ip
~
d
g`a°
d
~
{p
m
d
~
fp.
~
d
~ c
W
~
d
~
!0
~
d
f c
Ip
~
d
~
f0
m
d
~
fC
~
d
~
f0 d
~~
f0
a c
d f0
~~
d
~ c
f0
~
N ^ ~ O ~ tD 0 N ~ ~ N O O M V' N ~ O °

N j
O
O 0
e} O
O
O
~7
M LL~

~
cO

~

~ ~
~
~
o (
n O O N N ~ W
v +
~~
O
~ W
O
~ 01
f~ f0
N ~
N N cO O

~ O
~ O
O N
rn h
O ~
M o
M o
~ O
t0 v
N o
O ~
O m
O O
fV
O N
O N
N 0)
N ~ f ~ n N M O
0
~
r
^ C O O C O
.
-
~
~- N O c
~ d U ~ N pj O ~ O M 0 N O M 01 O O O O t0 n N O O
0
•y O
d ~ ~ M M N A N N ~ M O
O O
O O N fV N ~ I(j
O O

c
A
d U7
O~
C
C
~M1
d N
OI
C Gi
C OI
N C
d u
c
A
d i
C
G d N
OI
C
c
A Gi
OI
C
c
10 N
pl
C'
c
A N
G
C R N
O~
C
c
R N
OI
C
C
~0 N
OI
C
c
d Gi
OI
C
c
A GI
OI
C
c
A N
OI
C
C
N. Oi
OI
C
c
N N
OI
C
c
W Gi
O~
C
c
A N

C
c
~7 N

C
c
A N
O~
C ~ N
C OI
7 C
c
A Gi
OI
C
C
~3 N
OI
G
c
A Gi
OI
C
S
~0 d
pl
C
c
A Gi
m
C N
C OI
R Gi
c OI
A
c
W N
p~ c
N Gi
OI d
c
W N
c
N

~
fO
a'

~
lO
~
fO
~R
f
~K
O d
~
f0
K
d
~
f0
~
d
~
f0
~
d f
~K
0 d
~
l0
~
d
~t
d
a'
d
~
Ip
a'
d
~
d
a
d
~
Ip
K
d
~
Ip
a
d
~
l0
a
d
~
Ip
a
d
~
~p
a
d
~
(p
a
d
~
{p
m
d
~
Ip
a~
d (p
~
d
~
d
~
d
~
{p
~
d
~
d
~
d
~
q{
a'
d
~
(p
a~ C
d ~p
m~ C
d (p
~
d I
fa C
p d
~ C
Ip
~~
d Ip
m G
d Ip
~m
d

as
C?
> ~

~ I ~ O

M I O

N i M

O I[9

o7 n O

n
m w
G M rn n rn rn o' ~ ~'' m

1 a
i
~
o
c
o
I~
ri o
M I I
~i
~
o
+pi
I ~
I o

y w

~ c

~ c o
I N I ~
7~ W O O) fV i p I j i m I I
U ~ ~
A
C ~
C
a,
m
a'
'
C ai
OI
N
C
N ci
OI
N d ui
C O~
C n
C
N N i
C
d ai
O~
N
C
N ui
OI
N
C
d ai
OI
N c
C
d i
C
N ti

~
C
d ui
O~
C
d ui
OI
C
C
d ui
O~
C ci
O~
C ui
OI
C
C ui
OI
C ui
OI
C
C ui
O~
C ui

C
C ci
C ni
OI C
C ci
O~
C ui
O~
C ci
OI
C ui
OI
C ei
pl
C ci
OI ' ni
C ui
C O~ c
C O i
I C ui
OI C ui ui
C
a d t
0 N N f
0 N d N d f
0 d N d f
6 d N d f
0 d N d 9 d
l N N N d fG0 N N N N d N~ ~ d N d N N N d N W N
O O O

O

M

M

M

O

~

O

~

0

~

~

N

0
~

)

Q

Q

Q

Q
I

Q

Q

O

M
O

'

~[)
O

V
O

O
O
O

O O
O M

T

O M
7

O

N

N

N

N
i
(O
C=~ O N Z Z Z Z Z Z C O O O fh fM fV (V n N
.N ~ ~
~ m M
N C! O O O
~ O aD M
X G
W
~ ~ O O
O O C N I I
O

C
d
d

~

C
d
OI C
~
W
d
=p
~
d
C
d~

C
d
d
OI
N

C
d
d
OI
C

C
d
d
OI
G
d
C
d N

C
d
d
O~
C

C
N
d
O~

C
d
d
O~
C

C
d
d
OI

C
d
O~

C
d
d
OI

C
d
O~

C
d
O~

C
d
OI

C
d

C

C
d

C
d
OI C
d

~

C
d
OI

C
d
O~

C
d
OI

C
d
~

C
d
OI C
d
OI C
d
OI
d
C O

~ C
d
O~ C
d
C
d

a' d
~ C
a' ~ 7
a'
~ a
' ~
a'
r2 f
0
a'
~C f
0
a'
~ a
' ~ f
0
a'
~ N
a'
~ f
0
~
~ d
a' d
r! N
a'
~ N
a' d
rd N
a' d
~ l0
a' d
~ N
a' d
'L f
0
a' d
~ N
a' N
~ N d
a' ri
S d
rG N
K m
~ N
a' W
~ N
a' N
r! W
~ d
~ fC0 N
a' S N d
' a' ~ fC0
a' d N
S' a d
' ~ fp d
S ~ IGO d
a' ~ fC0
a'

~

O ,
A

N O
O

r 1
M

00
M

~
M

f~

7 N

~

~
N ~
n
~

~
n O
N

r t0
~

.p M
O

O
~ O
~
H

O r,
N

M A
N

O O
M

~
N

~

'

N

n
O ~
O
0

0 O
f0

0
O ~
O
0

^ M
O

7 47
N

r N
N
M

N
I
N

Ill

~ O
M
~O N
to
K 3
H ~ Ui
~ N N M
~ O O (V O (V (V 00 M V
O

V H

W
W

O

O

"

M

O

~

00

~

V O

I O O et

d' C N

O

O

M

O

n
d d O N A M ~ N N ~`') O
O O
O O N N I W
N Pj
Z

G)
C O
d C N
C OI C
A C A d
OI
C N
C
N C
C
N d
OI
C
C
IM1 d
OI
c d
C p~
d C d
G
10 C
C
W d
O~
C
C
A d
OI
C
C
R d
p~
C
C
A d
O~
C
A N
OI
C
10 d
OI
G
A N
OI
C
A d
OI
C
~7 N
O~
C
~ N
C d
C N
OI C d
OI
C d
OI
C N
OI
C d
OI
C d
~
C dj
OI C d
O~ C C>
OI E
C O )
I C d
OI C C)
C d

~ ~
~
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ C
~
~ C
~
~ C
~
~ C
~
~ C
~
~ C
~ 7
~ C
~ ~7
~ C
~ 17
~ C 17
LY ~ C
~ ~7
~ C
~ d
~ C
~ ~7
~ C
~ W
~ C
~ A
~ C W
~ ~ C ~7
~ ~ C
~ A C
~ ~ d
~ C 17
~ ~ C d
~ ~ C
~

L

X
O

L

-.
~

f0

s L

~
J

>
Q

>

>

.-.
y

U
d

Y
W ~
o .~ ~ Q ~ r
-. ~ ~ ~ d d o 0 0 0 22
4 .~
~ ~

J p
O
U
O
d
w c
O
O ~
J
N
U o
~
;
u
O
d
d
L
L
$ O
~ C
p a
a
Q y > L a ~ ~ E
v d Y O .
d .
~ ~ ~7 ~ d O
O L
l0
y
d (6 L C ~ d E_ '
0 'O y .p L_ L ~ E (n ~ ~ ~
U ..
.
Q
>
~ Q
d ;O
'S d .L..
~ x d
Y O
oY d
~ N
o x
f6
~ a
~O S
r O
IL
" d
E
a d
-' d
~ .~
3 U 'O
~ ~
-
~ a
~ y C
~ d
o ~
in Q
vi ~

a N
~
d O
o
a ~
g O
a O
o
a ~
L O
o
a 'O

~ O
o N
a a O
o
_
E ~ m ,°_'
,
E -
~
~ --O,o .o -Q
,,~~ -
. -
~ ~ ~ o o 3 L

d

~ d
-O
O ~
y
O ~

3 y
~O a
'
y
E N d o
II U
O v o
O v E ~
O
O v~O
O - d a
O

~ a
d o '
~ c`
y n
`° 3 c n v
'° d
' ~
~ c y
m c
m ~
Z c
m x
U,° C~
co 9 x o
~ '~ 3
O ~
a ~ ~
- m
:
~ ~
d
v o
m ~
m ~
m
~3' o
m m
y ^_
3 cco
d ~ ~
c m m
m ~ ~
> ~ d
~
~ . o
~ n
0 o
~ . °
m a
c ~ n
'~ d ~
m n o
d ~~ c _
o
~ o
.m s
g o
m m

in
o
m
mv
S
m¢
m
m
m
~
~
v
3
¢
w
~
~
m
m
a a
a o
m
~ ~
rn ~
> a
¢ ~
~
m
in 0
a
~
~
~o
a o
o a ?~ m
a m
m o
a
a m
m a
a o
..
N M V 10 fO 1~ M 01 O N M 7 ~O t0 f~ a0 O O
N
N N
N M
N ~
N Y1
N t0
N f~
N ap
N W
N O
M
M N
M M
M
c
m
r
C
d
N
d
C
.=C
v
c
m
d
L_
C
a
C
W
C
U
N
3
L
C
d
L ~
C_ ~
d Z
~ U
N ~
oa m a
M N y
O ~ d ~
~ N D. C
II ~ d N
C G y U
d y C C
C-p N d
~ O '~
C N `1
y E
L O DL-~
~ N C
O
O N ~ >
II ~ t y
C L ~ L
d .O. N d
~ 'O O
m a ~ E
3 m .o >.
O U N
_ O.
O
M y Y O
O L C ~N
O ~ ~ G
w d
a 'x E
d
d L O
E d ~m c
C C U (p
mL c~
U ~
~ - c
o-
W ~ Y O1
y N C y
d
CI y ~ Q
C ~ ~ y
c
dv~'`o
~~m d~
'O U d
d d y y
O y
0
N ? U
•••••••••••i•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Table V: Designed Venetative Communities (Rv 7,nnel
Woody Vegetation Planting

~ Scientific Name Zone 1:
Stream Bank -
Channel Zone 2: Stream
Bench -Top Zone 3:
Riparian Zone 4:
Transition
Cano
Acer barbatum x
Acer saccharinum x
Betula ni ra x x x
Ca a cordiformis x x x
Ca a ovata x x x
Celtis laevi afa x x x
Dios ros vir iniana x x x
Fraxinus americana x
Fraxinus enns Ivanica x x x
Ju lans ni ra x
Ma nolia acuminafa x
N ssa s Ivatica x x x
Po ulus deltoides x
Prunus serotina x x x
Quercus falcata x
Quercus michauxii x x x
Quercus ni ra x x x
Quercus a oda x
Quercus hellos x x x
Quercus rubra x
Quercus shumardii x x
Salix ni ra x
Tilia americana var. hetero h lla x
Ulmus alata x
Ulmus americana x

x ewlsslos ezlyaoy;ueX
x x x x wn;e;uap wnwngln
x x wnsogw oo wrnulooen
x eagna snwln
x x euo;oul; soool w S
x uoapuapooelew el~eMa;S
x e!lo~l~; eal U elS
x slsuapeueo snongweS
x ea /u xlleS
x euelulloaeo xgeS
x wnsoosln uoapuapopou~/
x saplouaw loua uoapuapopoyy
x wnwlxew uoapuapopoy~/
x euelu- aln a ;sp
x eagna snaow
x x euelul aln ellou ew
x ele;a u; ellou eW
x x euu;sn 11 eluo ~
x ulozuaq eaapul~
x esowaoea aou;oona~
x suell~xe aoy;oana~
x eolu- a-n ea;l
x x x e;ell/o~~ran xall
x x x eoe o xall
x enploap xall
x x euelul aln sllaweweH
x snueouawe snw uon3
x eueouawe snl o~
x x wnwowe snuao~
x slsuapeueo sloaa~
x x x euelulloaeo snul ae~
x snpuol~ sny;ueo lei
x eueouawe e aeogle~
x x x egolu; eulwlsy
x x eyo~l;ngae e-uoa y
x x e;elnaaas snul y
x x eo/;enl s snlnosa y
Aao~s.~apur~
uo[~[sue.zy
:}~ auoZ u~r.c~ ~
:£auoZ oy - gauag
ui~a.~;s :Z auoZ tauueq~ - ~ueg
uiua.t;s :i auoZ GLUE ~I I u0ia
ICI -~•~ S
LIi~IIEjd UoI;E~a aA pooh
~au~L nU~ sai;iunwwuJ ani;e;aaaA pau~[saQ :•;uoa A aiq~y

9.0 Figures

Figure 1 Project Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Site Location
Figure 3 Project Site Watershed Map
Figure 4 Project Site NRCS Soil Survey Map (1994)
Figure 5 Project Site Hydrologic Features Map with Gauge
Locations
Figure 6 Reference Site Vicinity Map
Figure 7 Reference Site Watershed Map
Figure 8 Reference Site NRCS Soil Survey Map (1994)
Figure 9 Project Site FEMA Firm Map
Figure 10 Reference Site Vegetative Communities Map

Fieure 1 Project Site Vicinity Ma
r~ STA L ~IyfON R
R ~F~CLI N~ ~N ~~ M
_ - - , 1 t 3.. soy %r',,. ,., _~~; M
f,.
-~~ i., ~ ~ ~ 52 ~'r~
-. -r` s
~ ~
/ ~
f ~ o,
3 ~ , ~"...
Off ~ '
. e ~ ~~ -
. , --
., '
_ ~ o so Ioo o to ao
Miles ~ ~ ~. _. .,-..~
Y.,..~,... ._... _ _......... -.._.....-.
Monroe ~ a ~ ~ n~
I a~v
207 ~ \ /~a o` ~ °' ~ ~a
y r• ~ ~-
1 2236
~a as ~ F o° o-
i eaoty~ ~J ,~
Ear•I-Griffin-F2d ~cm lac, ~ Z
w
a / ~ ~ ~3
r ~0
.A ~~ °"
°' d y ~ 'A
W:dliams'`R ~ ,o
Tom' ~; °'~~ ~a ~ ~`~s
2216 ~, d. ~,,. `Di
a ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~h'f4 ~~°~
ms R~
G ~-°e-- ~^ °' 'A
~,}~AA~a ~ o~~~ o fo,~ p. A
Gra~\ie' ~ f oa N '~J 'S'a ~
m O,
a' ~ ~~~~ o/ ~ Project Area Edwards'Rd
a
o. ~ PGO °-'' a
Try-Medlin-Rd a ~ \ ~~, `~
~ N Q: ~
a ___.`.~ a ~- Y --.c
~, o
~~~`5
n _ -^ m 3 .
`v~\ ' L
1988 m
/y ' / <.'
N 01 ~
o ~-
4
o. `•
Jug-gro j
a ome_Rtl ~
G! ~ j~, e
Nargeete-
a
~c t3
C
207 Q~ "~,
.aoK~au/Ra`d o... ~ os 1 L ~
~t ,~ ~ Ra
m ~,
Title Project Site Vicinity Map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina
r
ECOSyS~I Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009

FiQUre 2 Project Site Location

Fieure 3 Proiect Site Watershed Ma
NEw NEav' %d' ~ ~I 1 ~-~ti ~i` t '°• ~a
PAS PASOUOTANK ~ ~ ~ w S y ~ A (,[ ~\
YAD YAOKIN OHO ~ ~ ~~~ ~ j ~ J
OHO CHOWAN I ~ ~ 2IU ~\
ROA ROANOKE I, PPS ff((~~'' S~.~ -`-~ ~\ )
TAR TAR-PAMLICO ~~\ TAR ~~ .~ ~ ~J !t ~~ `/`` ," ,~
NEU NEUSE ~: FRB ` OTB ~'^`y'~ .J ~`
WAT NJATAUGA , `~ NEU y - ~..~_,~„p~ `I
CPF CAPE FEAR HNJ ~~.LTN BRD ~ CPF ~'" ~~~; / ~,~ ~ ~ )/,
FRB FRENCH BROAU \ '' /
LTN LITTLE TENNESSEE WOK ~ ~~J ~+~/'~ `~~'~ I ~~ 1 /r i
BRD 8ROA0 LSR f { ."+' f~~```''ppyyyy ~~j~ \ l } j
NIW HIWASSEE . ~G1ie + i \ ` } ` ~ l~ J
LBR LUMBER JJ 1 ~ ~ •` 't._ ,,.~
SAV SAVANNAH
WOK WHITE OAK
~~,%`~;
~;:~ t ~TotaliDrainage Area j0 30``mi2~:
t
S -..~
t
~~~.._,
y L..! ~ r,
`,; ~,,
5, "gig
~_,~ ~ `>
~ ~a
Y~'f ~..
~,
01
' Legend
__~
u ~i 2..~U ,ii? ~ ___j Project Area
A ~ ~ ~ ~__ ~ Project Watershed
Feet
__
Title Project Site Watershed Map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
_ Project Union County, North Carolina
~'' •
LCOSYStelll Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009

Figure 4 Project Site NRCS Soil Survev Mao (1994

~ rrolect one nyarotogrca~ reatures wrap wnn ~.auge t,ocauons
~~
~:,_ Y:
v w
~, ~~. ~ , ~,~ a ,, t;
~~'~~ ~` t `~ ~.t'.. .
j ~ ~ ?,
+~ ~
9~
t
x
i~~L,
~,~.,~ ~ C ~? 9 t; n
t ~ a r`: ~. + t. .
`:~em,aFr~ - ~ t ~'c
L $ ~ ~ ~X„ r
~. z "~~ ~, y .~+
} ,,
*~ yy .-`
3+ fix, t o~ ,'~` k ' _
r t y ~4
Legend
~~_ j ProjectArea
Approximate Easement Boundary
~ Existing Stream
Title Project Site Hydrological Features Map with Gauge Locations
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration
_
~~ Project Union County, North Carolina
L,COSy51"Clll Date Project Number
. 4/26/07 012620009
Prepared By

>H'igure 6 Reference Site Vicinity Ma
.... _ - . _ Y• . _ - ~ _.-
~ :"ss ~ti~
~ 4 -
___. __ z
} a...... _ / -
':
-Sq ' t~ `. ~~ 7 ~+ 24
. ~r
` ~~~ ,~- CHA ~OTTE ~~ ~°, S
~" ~ t ~ -
;,
'~a ~ . _; i _~fj ~ ' ~ ~..
,.
' k
„ ,~
• ~ff '- , 521 ~ ~~ ~:, i ~ ' ~ t
f
±~,y 1 S~ 52 =
~. rr
1 - _T ~ s ' ~~.1
~~~ 0 ~ 50 ~ _t.~~ ,~ ~ ~:~ ®~,1tJCA 0 t0 20 ,;
Miles ~i ,' ~.- Miles
_,.. ,_
84 2909 ~ ,
sanford.~n Ftd
2889 0 ~ ~K~~S• ~Monro
adev+~'~ ~ ~/~a
e v
2890 eat ~~N ~0~9~ ~~ ~`~a a a
B. ~ooa ~ Ga ~ ~o0 00
o F~ o ~a
4 a Wi ~ S~
rJr iieughbyRa ~ 84 z °~
oa ~ ~ Si
m~
O f
~p°~eo`n j
//y ~ m Deertrack-L•n
/ sec ~~ i
/~-a `°
r~
Sh~','o / , New°~~Rd
~;Q 2822 a ~
a
Fa d ~~
l`~`" ~o,e~ Qa~~i Ss
\\ ` 1` sN^~ ~- ~@ m
1 y~oe ` `~ Q~~ \ ` N 6 Boa O
o ~G
~~ m 3co t
~ ,l " ° ~ ~a a/~
o\~~G ° m J~o
sF` `° v Ur
GcoS 'oi O ~ ~ .ter
rnd ~ ~c
s~ Go
--f fir.
1
/J
\ v 75 ,~ay'~
Sadler-- d. % S~ d~a+
6n / ~ ~ a~~~a ~ Jpa~~s D\ ~ f`/?i
~,~ McNeelYRd wee ~ ~ ~ R-a ~ster-Rd ° \'
aJ Spring~ie~w-Dr cza~ t
/ ca
a/~oF
~ FZ~ a
Gco ~~ ~«9'N°PeRd
0' . 0.5 1
0
~ Y E
Title Reference Site Vicinity Map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina '~~
r'
I,COS~'SLeIII Date Project Number ~~
4/26/07 012620009

Fieure 7 Reference Site Watershed Ma
NEW NEIV ~ // / ~ 'L ~~,x (~
PAS PASOUOTANK 1 P ~/ yyy
YAD YADKIN if ' l ~ ~ ~ ` w~ j ~,
CNO GHONAN ,!S' ~ f 1
ROA RO. NCY,E ~ w~'~` ~ r2n
TAR TAR-PA F..ILICO CHO ~. ~' ~ yxj^-J"''}~
NEU NEUSE ~ L ,P ~ --/v j x µ~
WAT dJATAUGA A. ~ R~ PAS /~ ~ / J ,~
CPF CAPE SEAR +'~}\ ' ~ TPR _' p / t ~~
FRB ERENGN BROAD _ FRB CTB • /~.\~ / ° '~l .f / S ~ ; ~`
Cie CATAWBA 5 ~ ') // ` r_~ 4Z
LTN LITTLE TENNESSEE LTN~ ~BRD r/ NEU I.Y4 ;) / \~, /,"l. J.
BRD BROAD HNJ A~ OPF ///„1 ~^I~e r ~7y J+
HIW HIWASSEE ~ l~ J ~~ ~n "I S
LBR LUMBER WOK / d 111
SAV SAVANNAH ` `y'~ \~ ~ ~
WOK WHITE OAK lBR .Yk i l~','°~~Jt~ +~ ~'' {. ; ~ \ ~i-_`
~Total~Dramage'Area 10'18 miZ`
~~.
1 ~
~\
1
I '
75 Legend
'~a i ~~b0 -x(10 I _ !Reference Reach Watershed
A ~ j j ~ Reference Reach Stream
Feet
Title Reference Site Watershed Map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina ~
r~
I!,COSyStelll Date Project Number ~~~
4/26/07 012620009

Figure 8 Reference Site NRCS Soil Survev Ma
Soil ISO Series Description
BdB2 I Badin channery silty clay loam 2-8% slopes, eroded
BdC2 113adin channery silty clay loam 8-15% slopes, eroded
CmB I Cid channery silt loam 1-5%slopes
GaB2 I Gaston clay loam, 2-8% slopes, eroded
TaB lTatum qraveliv silt loam 2-8%slopes
TaB2 Tatum ravel] sil cla loam 2-8%slo s eroded
� r
z ��2
5
i;
t
t
I �
o�
,
e
r'
a.
f
j
Legend
N
0500 1,000 ;,il., — —• ' I ,.� ' � �_.__-� Reference Reach Watershed
9
Feet Soils
° `�'
Title Reference Site NRCS Soil Survey map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina
Fk0Systell1 Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009

Figure 10 Reference Site Vegetative Communities Ma
~~ z, ~ ~ ;~
j ., ~i °~ ~
~. `"
~~ ~ ' x. ` ~ ~ f~«~ r `tit
~' ~~~
,.
~. _
.. ~..
d
v.. t
.: ~„ ~ r G'
4.
' 4
~ ' ~ ~
"f ~ y
F ti ~ {~ ~-.
s ~,:.
~I 5 !~
.+ ~ ~~,
~il ~,
~ ff ~: ~~
~- ~.:
~~~ ~ ~ '~
~, ~ . •,
°a, .
~ ~
.~ _
-~ ~:
{ b„
~~ ~ .._ .-~~"ar ~~ ~..~ sat ~, ~ d `~3°~G''Fi.-^.~ ~. 'R
'p.' i ~ k~ ~. ~ ~, ~ ~ '` ? ~v~ ;;fi ~
~~ Rs , a~ ~ ;'~ ,~~+' ~,:,: ~,,,~ ~ x$ ~.. X34' a `~-~ '~y4 ix s~ 5, ~' -"1
~' .+x ". °~.w~ ~~a'~Jr° kuq°~ ~" e' r ~~ 5 8 wY b.'4 ~. `Ft~(k~~
¢' .+
~ ~,~+ ~
i .sf' -.*, 4 ~, ~- ~ ~
F4 Sr'xi ~~~~.~a c~,a`:~ -*%'ri .~''~'e* r { ri.'~ F ~ ~e 'Y~ ''~ C4 ~ ~k ~,.
~~~,,' ~ ~c > ,~, a ~_,'"`.~ss' ~' ~ it
~.r~
:~ $ Wit' ~.~ ~,,.v ~s~ ~,.. ~+ .g- 3~ s ~ t "'~~ ~ ~` n `' -
"t s ~ ,,,.,r w ~# ~-." r~. 1 "-'_ w.,r v'-~'p~M" 4 ,~ i !4 y, {~'r~ p, a^,'., ~lssr ~fi ~~ ,
x ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~"~ Legend
~ +~
~ f,,~ `~ ~"r ~ ° " 1 ~,,~~ ~,~ .~ • ~ ~~`~~ '~` -~~~ Reference Stream
~~r'
i ~ ~ ~ `•: ~. ~, ~ ~ Alluvial Forest
~., . ,~ ~ .~..~._..,.~.,a.~m.. ~ r ~~, r ~ aT '' ~ ~:
/~ Feet ~`~'°` ~ ~, '~ "~~ '~' ,.~=,~~`~` ~ ;h'"~ .; ~~ '~" Piedmont Bottomland Forest
~' 3~'f~ } .ids' ~' P ~~' t.
r ~ . 'F
~e n ~
Title Reference Site Vegetative Communities Map
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina EN 7~~
~' r
hcOS~StClll Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009

Fiuore 9 Project Site FFMA FIRM Man

ZONE A , ___-- ~

~\\ ~;'
I
\
~~~ /
f'r
~
/%~~ APPROXIMATE SCALE
2000 0 2000 FEET
.~_' ~
~
\
,
\
\
O
~
\~
..
/ ~ ,
~ race ~ ~d /~:
..._
\
... ...~'p ® p1TI0pAl F1000 IMSYRANCE Pp11pp0
c eY
f IIf111
I`d4 FLOOD INSURANCE AATE MAP
~ ~ ' ~ ~
o ::'-. UNION COUNTY,

Q ~ \ NORTH CAROLINA AND
INCORPORATED AREAS
~,( ~ PANEu 200
O
F
200
J ~
o
a
,
/j ~ \Q .mows EPl~ ~ L
(( ~91~JZONE A j„
1118 ~ '..._, v..:;, ~~
al QII
Iii \ \\-_=
\ ~-"' ~
\ MAP NUMBER
3717900200 C
\
~
7 EFFECTIVE DATE
\
\ ~~~ ~// \ "~~ \ JULY 5.1994
\ /(~ ~ ~..
// ~
~ Federal E~Deryenry 7Maupemmt Agency
%
: ~?;::;, __e d
II
I~
II rnl. Is inoe~eaDl~ m ~ a e Dornon dm. aepw rmereoeea nooa meD. rc
g MITOn-uiw. ml. m.p aoe. na re°xE cnaege.
a amenbnxns whlcn may rca~e Eeen maEe suGequeM to the tlale on the
title dock
Forme late.[
rotlud Inbrmrtlan aEOUt N
ti
l FI
A I
.
ona
a
pD
neurarce
D
Program none map. prceck me FEMA FIOaE MaD Store of wmv. m.p.fema.gov

Title Project Site FEMA FIRM Map -Panel Number 3717900200 C effective July 5, 2000
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By

r~ Project Union County, North Carolina
~GOS~?StClri Date Project Number
'itl
~`dl t<tt pCtllC
, 4/26/07 01 2620009

10.0 Appendices

s
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
w
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appendix 1
Project Site Photographs

Phntn PaQP 1
~~`.. ,v
;.~ +. t; ,
fry:--
k
K',
tzE \ A
4 ~` ±'1
'y '
°~°-
y. :e is ;p.
~4~"
~ ~
_
~
R.
J t
~
'r ~' ~ ~ ~ } k 'r
.
~ W
k
y
y~.k~ ~
~ a '
3' ~~ r~
~ ~~gv)t4~~
..
y~ zy p
.
~
'ry~~,f Y'°q X43
Photograph 1: Upstream Reach of the UT to Wicker Branch looking upstream
P'eX g .::
y pt q y'
~~''yy ~ LR K ~¢~ ~ r+~ ebb. • ~ ~ +~C~ ¢'
Sw`a ~~, ,k t yA -.~~~ ~~. ~ ~ f^
~ a
~
~ ~
~
a
~
, > ~t tx ~ ~ =r ^
~ r .~
~' ~yc ~ is ~7 ~,~k' ~
r s, ~ ~~, ,~~+~ ~
~'~~~'~'`' ~ry^^'~'r ' S. ~4 v ~ t ~ y~ ~'
.s ffics ~ ,, ,.p~
'
a {
f d h
~~ ~~~ ~~ w~ ~t x#r~~ `•_ ~ ~
d 4 ~~ `'~ J

E ~,g y '! r~ t a7
.
.r r
f y ~ ~ ~ 4 l~-t'r I~
~ ( ~ y ~~~ ~ s,:'j
9
A ~ ~~
l '~"~~ q3''Y'~ - {~~ ~ l
Photograph 2: Upstream Reach of the UT to Wicker Branch looking upstream
Title Appendix 1. Project Site Photographs
Prepared For
601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By

r~ Project
Union County, North Carolina .

~~COSySt0111 Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009

Photo Paee 2
' I'i
a k }~:

I_ ~ •. ~I i

`/
f
Photograph 3: Middle of UT to Wicker Branch looking upstream
__
~a ~~ ., a ~''3ti.
~ }' ~~+
i
t - ~~ x a~v~~f~~~~~~~ ~+'f ~

~i° f a~a~ .
A '} gar ~, ~

~
y
>'~~
~.
~:
4~
-
4
~
d' ~ , , ~~ u
"~
~• ` `` ~ ~
,
~;
al
'
v
E ~~
„,,_ ~,
~`

~, 1p
'~-- , +e~d17~
3~
'~
~
~ ~~ .i

r ~~
~ ~~
~
~
~
_
~~
r p r~+~,, ,yg ~
~

~ ~ e1 qp ~ ~ •a5
~ _~ .,~ a ~!~ r'~,~y"~ ~~ tee. yrA
~'
~
'•~ kr '~ x'31 ~ ',
S
"
`
~ / ~ *
? is t
w ~
-
'
~,.

Photograph 4: 42-inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Title Appendix 1. Project Site Photographs
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project

c~ Union County, North Carolina ~
ECOS~'St0111 Date Project Number

4/26/07
012620009 ~~

Photo Page 3
~~k'
I', ~ ~'° ~. ~'~'4 ~
a Y t 'ry'! ''~ p 2
~:~ ~ i ~~~ $~i F ~~ ~~
~ (~ ~~
". ~ t 3e~ a ~ ~~Cn-~ ~ ~/,~,
` ~ t t ~e~ ~ ~ i' ~~~' dQ ~ 1" ;~ ~, ~'"~ V
b
3~ e~ ; ~
'~, QV' (fin ~ ~ {~, i - ~` '~' P +k n ~ s
,~ ~~ h ~ tt ; cx
~g 7l un L { ~ t ~, , t ~ ~- ~ - Jr
~, 4 ~~
r, Y~
Photograph 5: Middle of UT to Wicker Branch looking upstream
~~~~fi
~n~ ~. ...s a+ .;. ~ 4 ~G3., ~-,~ "ham' ..»w~+
°*,r ,~ £ °` r k~
u .~u {;
r~
5 "~ ~~ x•
B~` ~>~~ ~;. ~;
gt~a ~, i~;..=
y~t4*, i ,..,,~
~~y ~.~-
Photograph 6: Lower UT to Wicker Branch looking upstream
Title Appendix 1. Project Site Photographs
Prepared For 601 North Stream Restoration Prepared By
Project Union County, North Carolina ~
c~
~C05~S~t~111 Date Project Number
4/26/07 012620009 ~~

Appendix 2
Project Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms

?'os
~~
North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 3/5/2006 Project: EBX Latitude: 34.897944
Evaluator: Todd st.John, Site: 601 North Lon Itude: -80.469578
g
Norton Webster
Total Points: 40.5
Stream is at least intermittent County: Union County, NC Other Wingate, NC
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if ? 30
A. Geomor holo Subtotal = 19 Absent.:. . .Weak Moderate Stron Score
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3 3
2. Sinuosit 0 1 2 3 1-
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3 2.,
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sortin 0 1 2 3 :_ 3; _'
5. Active/relicfloodplain 0 1 2 3 °'3,;_
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3 2 ::,
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3 ` 0 ''''
8. Recent alluvial de osits 0 1 2 3 2`. "':
9a. Natural levees 0 1 2 3 `. 0
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3 ~~-~:.~1 ~ . ~-
11. Grade Control 0 0.5 1 1.5 '~ "0.5~
12. Natural valle or draina a wa 0 0.5 1 1.5 ''+,1.5"'
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS ma or other documented evidence. No = 0 Yes - 3 ~ ,0; "
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual
B. H drolo Subtotal = 9.5
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel --dry or growing season
0
1
2
3
2~'.
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0 1.5:
17. Sediment on lants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 1:5-'`
18. Or anic debris lines or files (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 ~~ ."
19. H dric soils (redoximorphic features) resent? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 1.5
C. Biolo Subtotal = 12
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0 3
21b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0 3
22. Cra fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3 :0.
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 0
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5 0
26. Macrobenthos note diversit and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5 1
27. Filamentous al ae; peri h ton 0 1 2 3 2
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5 0
29b. Wetland lants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; sav = 2.0; otner = 0 1.5
"Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:

•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

•
•
~ A endix 3
pp
~
~
Categorical Exclusion Report
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

,~
• ^ ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
• ~ and Associates, Inc.
. September 29, 2006
Mr. Donnie Brew
• Environmental Protection Specialist
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
• Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
. Re: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site
• Full Delivery Project
Union County, North Carolina
• Dear Mr.Brew:
• This letter serves to re-transmit a Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem
• Enhancement Program Projects to your agency for 601 North Property Stream
Restoration Full Delivery Project for your review and approval. Per your request,
r• additional documentation including correspondence to and from resource
• agencies, a completed NRCS AD-1006 form, Environmental Data Resource
maps, and a biological assessment of affect for federally listed endangered
species have been attached.
• The 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site is located 7 miles south of
Monroe, Union County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The 601 North Property site
• contains an unnamed tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch. This highly unstable
• stream has been impacted by excessive sedimentation, intensive agricultural
activity, the elimination of a riparian buffer, and the straightening of portions of
t• the channel. The UT is fed by a linear wetland feature beginning upstream at the
• outfall of a farm pond.
The purpose of this project is to restore the site back to a naturally functioning
stream system. The channel will be restored along its entire length to Wicker
• Branch. The upper portion of the stream will be slightly relocated and
appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based on reference
data gathered from local, similar stream systems. The lower reach will be
reestablished by creating a channel with a proper cross-section and slope using
• the same reference data as described above. As a result of the restoration
activities, total stream length within the restoration area will be increased from
approximately 2,396 linear feet to 3,000 linear feet. Approximately 7.5 acres of
• bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation
TEL [phone]
• FAX [phone]
^
P.o. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068

^ ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
easement. Invasive plant species will be removed and all restored areas will be
planted with native vegetation to provide biological diversity. Stream banks will
be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-root plantings, and bio-engineering. In
stream structures (rock-vanes, constructed riffles, and log vanes) will be used to
maintain grade, protect banks, and enhance bed form diversity.
I appreciate your assistance with this matter. If you have any questions regarding
this application, please do not hesitate to call me at 919.653.5843.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, iNC.
Laura ang
ironmental Scientist

Version 1.4, 8/18/05
~.ale~ericai r,xciuslon rorm ror ecosystem ~nnancement rrogram rro~ects
..
Project Name: 601 North Property -Stream Restoration Full Delivery Project
County Name: Union County
EEP Number: D06054-A
Project Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Project Contact Name: Norton Webster
Project Contact Address: 2530 Meridian Parkway, Suite 200, Durham, NC 27713
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
EEP Project Manager: Guy Pearce
. - ~-
The 601 North stream restoration site is located 7 miles south of Monroe in Union County, North Carolina (Figure 1)
The 601 North site contains an unnamed tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch. This highly unstable stream has been
impacted by excessive sedimentation, intensive agricultural activity, the elimination of a riparian buffer, and the
straightening of portions of the channel. The UT is fed by a linear wetland feature beginning upstream at the outfall
of a farm pond.
This project involves the restoration of the stream channel along its entire length to Wicker Branch. The upper
portion of the stream will be slightly relocated and appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based
on reference data gathered from local, similar stream systems. The lower reach will be reestablished by creating a
channel with a proper cross-section and slope using the same reference data as described above. As a result of
the restoration activities, total stream length within the restoration area will be increased from approximately 2,396
linear feet to 3, 000 linear feet. Approximately 7.5 acres of bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a
permanent conservation easement. Invasive plant species will be removed and all restored areas will be planted
with native vegetation to provide biological diversity. Stream banks will be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-
root plantings, and bio-engineering. In stream structures (rock-vanes, constructed riffles, and log vanes) will be
used to maintain grade, protect banks, and enhance bed form diversity.
The purpose of this project is to restore fhe site back to a naturally functioning stream system. Benefits will include
improved water quality by reducing sediment load through stabilization and by reducing nutrient input by the
addition of forested riparian buffers. Ultimately, the restoration is being conducted to provide compensatory stream
and wetland mitigation credits for the NCEEP in lieu mitigation fee program. It is anticipated that the project will
provide functional uplift for the watershed as a whole.
• - •
Reviewed By:
Date EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
fHWq
^Check this box if there are outstand'mg issues
Final Approval By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA

Version 1.4, 8/18/05

-. ~ ..
Coastal'Zone Management Act (CZMA)
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? ^Yes
®No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of Environmental ^Yes
Concern (AEC)? ^No
®N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management ^Yes
Program? ^No
®N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CE RCLA)
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ®Yes
^No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been ^Yes
designated as commercial or industrial? ®No
^N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ^Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ®No
^N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous waste ^Yes
sites within or adjacent to the project area? ^No
®N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous waste ^Yes
sites within the project area? ^No
®N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106).
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic ^Yes
Places in the project area? ®No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act)
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ®Yes
^No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? ®Yes
^No
^ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? ^Yes
®No
^ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed: ®Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and ^No
* what the fair market value is believed to be? ^N/A

vo,...;,,„ ~ n oii omc
.,
• . ~ •

l~ •
American Indian Reiigious Freedom Act (A1RFA1
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of Cherokee ^Yes
Indians? ®No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Places? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Antiquities Act (AA)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands? ^Yes
®No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects of ^Yes
antiquity? ^No
®N/A
3. Willa permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? ^Yes
®No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
.Endangered Species Act (ESA)
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat listed for ®Yes
the county? ^No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? ®Yes
^No
^ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical Habitat? ^Yes
®No
^ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the species and/or "likely to adversely modify" ^Yes
Designated Critical Habitat? ^No
®N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? ^Yes
^No
®N/A

VP.rclnn 1 4 R/1 R/(15
6. Has the USFWS/NOAH-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory" by the ^Yes
EBCI? ®No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed project? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Acf (fPPA}
1. Will real estate be acquired? ®Yes
^No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally important ®Yes
farmland? ^No
^ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? ®Yes
^No
^N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act:(FWCA)
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any water body? ®Yes
^No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? ®Yes
^No
^N/A
Land and Water'Cortservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public, outdoor ^Yes
recreation? ®No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Manadement Act (EssentiaFFish Ha bitat)
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? ^Yes
®No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the project on ^Yes
EFH? ^No
®N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAH-Fisheries occurred? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the META? ^Yes
®No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? ^Yes
^No
®N/A
Wilderness Act __
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area? ^Yes
®No

Version 1.4, 8/18/05
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining federal agency? ^Yes
^No
®N/A

Title Site Location
Prepared For:
Project 601 North Site
Union County, North Carolina
~~~ Date Project Number Figure
9/27/06 012620009 1
T:\pn\012620009 601 North Restoration\Categorical Exclusion\Figures\601 North Figures.doc Prepared by Tommy Cousins [~/, ;',~'*~s ~,i,~

b _
.,; ~j~ }~ ~ ~, ~ ,~ ~ i ~..~ ,r
1 ~~ ;
~ ~ ~ - 1 J
i v
a' ~, ., ~
~.
1 9 ,. i
\} ltd! bya ~ ~~ ~~ ~. t ~ vS ~ S \ .I'`~
a
~~
._
,. _
1
`~ i
e ~ ~.,~~ .
~ [[ .. `
~1 ~ v ~ .~
\~~
~~>nl_ t
-, Le end -ti. , _- _ ;.
l ~ ~ ~
f- E~ +
Approximate Easement Boundary ~ ` 1 ~ ~ ~.,~ ` ' C~'~ ~ \~ ~ (1` ~ E `~,4 , fi'
, \ r. ,
~`: Property Boundary - . ~ ~"~ ' Sm;r
f ~ ` ~~'
Title Topographic Map (USGS Quad Wingate, 1988)
Prepared For:
Project 601 North Site
® Union County, North Carolina
~~ Date Project Number Figure
9/27/06 012620009 2
i
• T:\pn\012620009 60l North Restoration\Categorical Exclusion\Figurzs\601 North Figures.doc Preparzd by Tommy Cousurs
~,~
~ aren~:w,ix.

- ~~. -~ --
7
. _ r -~ ~ -ream Restoration r~°
Property Boundary ` :i
~.,~~,.,,.~,.,...m '~. _ ~ ., ~`, .. ~ ~~~ ~011~1
~'`~ ~ t. .~~ ~'` _ ~£_ ~. {~ ;_ ~r~ 'h. ~ is ~R
j ~, ~ ~}~ s~' .1 fist , ~ '~_
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti
~-
r ~; ~ w ti -~ ~~~ ~ ~;
~ ~ 3
-`t.il .f a ':?'` 5.., W ? ~~ ,~` L O
Title Farmland Conversion Map
Prepazed For:
~l~la7 Project 601 North Site
Union County, North Carolina
~~ Date Project Number Figure
9/27/06 012620009 3
T:\pn\012620009 601 North Restoration\Categoricaf Exclusion\Figures\601 North Figures.doc Prepared by Tommy Cousins ~~~® ~~ ~

~ ~,~ a~~
5~' ~ ~ z.

,- ~ ~~ - ..a _.
~ - ~ .. ~?;
Photograph 1. Upper reach of UT
~, _ __.._
_~ ~," ~ __
Photograph 2. Jurisdictional wetland area upstream of UT
Title ~ Site Photographs
Prepared For:
® Project 601 North Site
Union County, North Carolina
Date Project Number Page
9/27/06 012620009 1
T:\pn\012620W9 60l North Restoration\Categorical Exclusion\Photos\60l_North_Photos.doc Prepared by Laura Lang ~~~ ~ im

~' '~'g j ~..,
ew ~ ' ~ `~ ~ 'tk' i Its > ~ ~~ ~` ~ ~~~ <-`
~ ~ kt'~ .Pr k.~ :. r~v3
~.~ ~ ~;~~ d rS ~y: i~~ i ~..'~,~
i`i~4 1~ T ~ . ~' `}„ '
6
€
r
t
i
r ~
Jsr +.1+
{
: I
w '. 1 ~ L ~ ~~~ s'•~ 3..
\."~~.~ j ~•"'3sf ~ P ~ ~. t' ~~
r
~} _di V~,~y ~ YK.,, vb~y ~y~y,4E'
.'8 '
f ~ 3 _ ~""r 5 a,f7 ~ # `
j ~~ , ~ r~l'A' d' ..~., a~ `'`' '
TiY .
'~Y`
+~~ P
ri
Y ~
~ ~1hfi
P
~~
~~
,6
~
~ ~y
-
ie
t
:'`~
I L. ~ ~f Z ~y''W
~~ #~ ~
R rµ R ~"} '~ 7 ~ ~ _ a .° y, ~z tit. ~ ~ .-` A
~ 1~ i t F ~ y t` {5=

fF'
I
f '~ t~
~
~
-
'
~^_
~.ri= ye,,,~ ~y
l :~y~y
#
`
'
~.,y 'a-+~Y'
,
r ~z.~~ ~z ~~ _
~'t ~ ~ ~~ ~
'c '
~` s~,m
Photograph 3. Upper section of channel

'
'
..~
~
sY
~ ~u.:.ti
v3~a -
Y
t
~~' '
',tom .. i+ ~~.
t
Photograph 4. UT to Wicker Branch
Title Site Photographs
Prepared For:
® Project 601 North Site
Union County, North Carolina

~~ Date Project Number Page
9/27/06 012620009 ~
T:\pn\012620009 60l Nonh Restoration\Categorical Exclusion\Photos\601_Nonh_Photos.doc Prepared by Laum Lang ~~~ w~n~r,iK

Memorandum

To: Donnie Brew
~ Federal Highway Administration

• From: Laura Lang
i Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
~ Date: October 30, 2006

Subject: Threatened and Endangered Species
601 North Property Stream Restoration Site
Union County, NC

• This memo is intended to document the absence/presence of threatened and endangered
• species or suitable habitat at the 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site.
~ The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (updated April 27, 2006) lists
three federally endangered species for Union County, NC: the Carolina heelsplitter
• (Lasmigona decorata), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), and Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii). Review of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of
documented occurrences did not reveal the presence of any of these species within aone-
mile radius of the proposed mitigation site.
• Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmi~ona decorata)
The Carolina heelsplitter is a medium-sized mussel with an ovate, trapezoidal shaped,
greenish-brown to dark brown shell. This species has been reduced to six known
• populations, two of which occur in Union County. The Carolina heelsplitter has been
• found in a variety of substrates including mud, muddy sand, or muddy gravel along
stable, well-shaded stream banks. The decline of the Carolina heelsplitter has been
~ attributed to a variety of factors including siltation and channelization due to agricultural
~ and forestry practices, road construction, impoundments and streambank scouring caused
• by storm water runoff.
The highly unstable stream proposed for restoration has been channelized for agricultural
~ purposes. The channel is incised and unstable with actively eroding beds and banks and
S has been impacted by excessive sedimentation. Much of the area around the stream is
• open, active agricultural field, void of any native vegetation and shade. Suitable habitat
for the Carolina heelsplitter does not occur at this site.
~ No occurrences of the Carolina heelsplitter have been documented in the NHP database
• within aone-mile radius of the proposed mitigation site and presence of this species has
not been observed by KHA or EBX biologists.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT.

Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxir1
Michaux's sumac is a rhizomatous, densely hairy, deciduous shrub, usually 1 to 3 feet
high. Small, greenish-yellow to white flowers usually occur from June to July. The fruit,
a small, red drupe, is produced through the months of August to October. Michaux's
sumac grows in sandy or rocky open woods and survives best in areas where some form
of disturbance, such as fire, has provided an open area. Thirty one of the thirty six known
extant populations exist in North Carolina, twelve of which occur on highway rights-of-
way, roadsides, or on the edges of artificially maintained clearings.
The entire 601 North property site has been under active, intensive agricultural use for an
extended period of time. The site consists almost entirely of open field with only a few
small pockets of wooded areas remaining. Site soils are predominantly moderately deep
and moderately to excessively drained silt loam to silty clay loam. The frequent
disturbances associated with the cultivation of crops across the site make this site
unfavorable for Michaux's sumac. Suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac does not occur
at this site.
No occurrences of Michaux's sumac have been documented in the NHP database within
a one-mile radius of the proposed mitigation site and presence of this species has not
been observed by KHA or EBX biologists.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT.
Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schwein'tzii1
Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial herb, usually 3 to 6 feet tall with yellow flowers
which occur in late August to October. Schweinitz's sunflower is found in relatively open
habitats such as roadsides, maintained rights-of--way, early successional fields, and
woodland openings. Generally, Schweinitz's sunflower occurs on shallow, poor, clayey
and/or rocky soils.
Marginal habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower exists along the agricultural field edges at
the 601 North property. Site soils are moderately deep and moderately to excessively
drained silt loam to silty clay loam. The site is almost entirely cleared for crop
cultivation.
No occurrences of Schweinitz's sunflower have been documented in the NHP database
within aone-mile radius of the proposed mitigation site and presence of this species has
not been observed by KHA or EBX biologists during site investigations or plant surveys
conducted in October 2006, while Schweinitz's sunflower is in bloom.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT.
2

n
u
• ~ U.S. Department of Agriculture
~ FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
•
• PART 1(To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 8124/06
• Name Of Project 601 North Property Stream Restoration Federal Agency Involved FHWA
Proposed Land Use County And State
• Stream Restoration Easement Union County, North Carolina
• PART°tt (To'f3e~bm~fofocfbylVf?~S) -~'~~~ `~`''~'~' ~ eg~iest~' tv"ed.~yNR S -
~ _ ~i ,r ~ G
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Does the bite contain prime, unique, statewide or local;importarit farm and? Yes No
(lf no;~he ~f~PA doosnot apply - do not coniplef© additional parts ofthis form). ~ ^ Acres Imga ~' ~~

i
a ~
~u _: _
MajorCrop(sJ
~~~~~~~ f armable Lan~di Go J nsdidion ~ ~~~~
Acre's:. ~
~ ,~~~
% ~7`'.O ~
Amount Of ~ ~ ~~
Acres' ~ ~~~~~~~ <
N 3me ~Of~nd Ev /uat~on yst ~ Used ~
- , kf tz v~t_. w~. ~~_~Sis ~.p ~ ,'.~ _
_
Na~my~e~=0~f~ocal~'Stfy'~Y sessrl]QritSystem
.a~_ .IYFS~.rtf~~' - ~.~SS~ Date"hand E
XW v {'~+ ~R~e "; ~1~5
,t
a
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Akemative Site Ratin
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 7;4
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
..
P~~ZT9 ~(~o e coniplefed~by NRCS) Land Evalua~fd7~k n!'~foation ~''
- ~ f ~.,r }
~
`

;
Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland T ~ - _
--T~_
~ Total Acres StaterrideAnd~Local~lrriportanf'~Farlnfa4d~~ , ~

P rcenta e OfFannland In Count -0r Local Govt.=Unlf -~ ~ ~ e C no VeFted ° ~
g_ _ Y_
~j~

~ QO Z _

~

~ v ~
Y r ~; ~ w
~~`
~L~. ~ ~
,.ti ~ ,p~n,a,~}~ge, D7FatJ~itl„a[1d;ln Govt Junsdictiort ~~tj~~a~e~lY'~-1i e

:: - •:
~'~A~TtV`~ le`~~~d, by~W ACS) Land Evd uatl "~C,J~ ,

,
'z~. ,z,...l (~ ~hra~~To 8,.,c~Con,
- . ..s~ o Wu .~
.
~ive V_ clue

~~
~ ~°

<rrlts L+!/, ,

}
~ t'

.~ ,.~. _

.~' r..

&
~
~~ ~
~y
t ~.

~ ~~
,<
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(6) Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use t5
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use ~
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government. p
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area Je'
6. Distance To Urban Support Services ~
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average ~
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland ~
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services ~
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 0 S/ 0 0 0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 g 7 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
site assessment) 160 0 8 0 0 0
TOTAL POINTS (Total ofabove 2lines) 260 0 '~D 0 0 0
/~
Site Selected: f-~ ~
Date Of Selection 2a ~~~
lJ~ Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes ~ No
• Reason For Selection:
• ~i.~ >~ v~ ~ eke b~;c~cuse ~-t~ v~a.s
•
• .~-~.e. 6ri a~ei 1 ~,I~~ s i~-e .
•
•
• (See Instructions on reverse side) Forrn AD-1006 (10-83)
This farm was electronically produced 6y National Production Services Staff
•
•
l

~ ^ Kimley-Horn
~ antl Associates, Inc.
August 24, 2006
Mr. Mark Ferguson
NRCS Soil Conservationist
3230-B Presson Road
Monroe, NC 28112
Re: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site,
Monroe, Union County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Ferguson:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) is writing this letter on behalf of our
client, NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), to request input from your
agency regarding a proposed stream restoration site located 7 miles south of
Monroe, Union County, NC and potential effects it may have on farmland
resources. We have completed sections I and III of Form AD-1006. A location
map and site overview map are also included.
I appreciate your help with this matter. Please either mail or fax [phone])
your reply to my attention. If you have any questions regarding this request,
please feel free to call me at 919.653.5843.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Laura Lang
Environmental Scientist
^
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
^
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068

• - - DECEIVED
~~~~
~ „~' "~ AUG 0 7 2006
~ ~ - #~imle~-Horn 8t Assoc.
• '~ ~~„~` Civil Department
~ North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
. State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Office of Archives and History
• Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Division of Historical Resources
~~ Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary David Brook, Director
August 2,-2006
• Laura Lang
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
• Re: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site, Union County, ER 06-1948
Dear Ms. Lang:
• Thank you for your letter of July 20, 2006, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic resources that would be
. affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the undertaking as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
• Part 800.
Thank you fox your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
• communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
~ ~~y~_
etex Sandbeck
i
•
•
•
•
•
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
• ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (919)7331763/733-8653
RESTORATION Sl y N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
. SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mad Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715801
•

•
•
~ Kimley-Horn
~ ~
~
and Associates, Inc.
•
•
•
•
July 20, 2006 ~ •
P.o. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina •
27636-3068
Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley
•
Environmental Review Coordinator •
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
515 Blount Street •
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
•
Re: 601 North Properly Stream Restoration Site •
Full Delivery Project •
Union County, North Carolina
•

Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earley:
•
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is writing this letter on behalf of our client, •
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC, to request a no effect determination
from your agency regarding a proposed stream and wetland mitigation project. •
•
The 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site is located 7 miles south of •
Monroe, Union County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The 601 North Property site
contains an unnamed tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch.- This highly unstable •
stream has been impacted by excessive sedimentation, intensive agricultural •
activity, the elimination of a riparian buffer, and the straightening of portions of
the channel. The UT is fed by a linear wetland feature beginning upstream at the •
outfall of a farm pond. •
•
The purpose of this project is to restore the site back to a naturally functioning
stream system. The channel will be restored along its entire length to Wicker •
Branch. The upper portion of the stream will be slightly relocated and •
appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based on reference •
data gathered from local, similar stream systems. The lower reach will be
reestablished by creating a channel with a proper cross-section and slope using •
the same reference data as described above. As a result of the restoration •
activities, total stream length within the restoration area will be increased from
approximately 2,396 linear feet to 3,000 linear feet. Approximately 7.5 acres of •
bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation •
easement. Invasive plant species will be removed and all restored areas will be •
planted with native vegetation to provide biological diversity. Stream banks will
be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-root plantings, and bio-engineering. In •
•
•
•
^
TEL [phone] •
FAX [phone] •
•

~ Kimley-Horn
~ antl Associates, Inc.
stream structures (rock-vanes, constructed riffles, and log vanes) will be used to
maintain grade, protect banks, and enhance bed form diversity.
I appreciate your help with this matter. Please either mail or fax [phone])
your reply to my attention. If you have any questions regarding this request,
please call me at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
aura ang
Environmental Scientist

!~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Kichard l3. Hamilton, Executive Director
8 September 2006
Ms. Laura Lang
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Ine_
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
Subject: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site, Union County, North Carolina.
Dear Ms. Lang:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
document. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and North Carolina General Statutes
(G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
Kimley~Horn and Associates proposes to restore, using natural channel design, the entire length
of an unnamed tributary to Wicker Branch in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin. Approximately 7.5 acres
of bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation easement. Invasive
plant species will be removed and restored areas will be planted with native vegetation. Stream banks
will be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-root plantings, and bio-engineering. In-stream structures
such as rock-vanes will be used to maintain grade, protect banks and enhance bed form diversity.
There are records for the federal species of concern and state endangered Carolina creekshell
(Yillosa vaughaniana), Savannah lilliput (Toxolasma pullis) and Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masont~ in
Lanes Creek downstream of the project site.
Stream and wetland restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat.
Provided measures are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from construction restoration
activities, we do not anticipate the project to result in signifteant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you require further assistance, please
contact our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
~~lA.-u'`~j
Shari L. B a (`~
ry nt
Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: (919} 707-0220 Fax: [phone]
z•d SZ9G-6i~b-9EE ~.ueR~g -1•S dE0=E0 90 80 deS

~ ^ ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
• antl Associates, Inc.

August 14, 2006

Ms. Shannon Deaton
• NCWRC Division of Inland Fisheries
• 1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1721

• Re: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site
Full Delivery Project
Union County, North Carolina

Dear Ms. Deaton:

• Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is writing this letter on behalf of our client,
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC, to request a no effect determination
from your agency regarding a proposed stream and wetland mitigation project.
•
The 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site is located 7 miles south of
M
onroe, Union County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The 601 North Property site
• contains an unnamed tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch. This highly unstable
• stream has been impacted by excessive sedimentation, intensive agricultural
activity, the elimination of a riparian buffer, and the straightening of portions of
the channel. The UT is fed by a linear wetland feature beginning upstream at the
• outfall of a farm pond.

The purpose of this project is to restore the site back to a naturally functioning
stream system. The channel will be restored along its entire length to Wicker
• Branch. The upper portion of the stream will be slightly relocated and
appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based on reference
data gathered from local, similar stream systems. The lower reach will be
reestablished by creating a channel with a proper cross-section and slope using
• the same reference data as described above. As a result of the restoration
activities, total stream length within the restoration area will be increased from
approximately 2,396 linear feet to 3,000 linear feet. Approximately 7.5 acres of
• bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation
easement. Invasive plant species will be removed and all restored- areas will be
planted with native vegetation to provide biological diversity. Stream banks will
• be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-root plantings, and bio-engineering. In
• stream structures (rock-vanes, constructed riffles, and log vanes) will be used to
maintain grade, protect banks, and enhance bed form diversity.

TEL [phone]
• FAX [phone]

^
P.o. Boz 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
2763s-3os6

^~^ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
We would appreciate a reply from you as soon as possible. Please either mail or
fax [phone]) your reply to my attention. If you have any questions
regarding this request, please call me at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
aura Lang
Environmental Scientist

~'
,~
•
•

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
August 22, 2006
Ms. Laura Lang
Environmental Scientist
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3068
Dear Ms. Lang:
Subject: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site, South of the Town of Monroe, Union
County, North Carolina
In your letter dated July 20, 2006, you requested our comments on the subject project. (Please
note that your letter was sent to our Raleigh Field Office. In the future you would receive
our responses in a more timely fashion if requests were sent to the appropriate office. To
assist you with this, enclosed is a list of North Carolina's counties showing which ones are
handled by our respective offices in. North Carolina.) We have reviewed the information you
presented and are providing the following comments in accordance with the provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description. According to the information provided, your client (Environmental Banc
and Exchange, LLC) is proposing to conduct a complete stream restoration protect on an
unnamed tributary to Wicker Branch. The purpose of the project is to restore the site back to a
naturally functioning stream system. The upper portion of the stream will be relocated, and-the
appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based on reference data gathered
from similar local stream systems. The lower reach will be reestablished by creating a channel
with a proper cross-section and slope using the same reference data as previously described.
Invasive plant species will be removed, and all restored areas will be replanted with native
riparian vegetation: Stream banks will be stabilized using erosion-control matting, bare-root
plantings, and bioengineering. As a result of the stream restoration activities, total stream length
within the area will be increased from about 2,396 linear feet (lfj to about 3,000 lf, and about
7.50 acres of bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation
easement.

Federally Listed Species. Based on the project location and pictures obtained from the Union
County GIS web site, there appears to be suitable habitat for the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schtiveinitzii). Your letter did not indicate whether surveys
have been conducted for this or other raze plant species within the project impact area. Unless an
area has been specifically surveyed for this listed species, a survey should be conducted to ensure
that it is not inadvertently lost. Though we agree that Schweinitz's sunflower is not likely to
occur in the disturbed agricultural fields or along the stream, we do believe potential suitable
habitat exists along the edges of the fields and riparian buffer. These areas may not be included
in the project plans, but they should be surveyed before any equipment/eonstruction staging or
invasive plant eradication activities take place. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in relatively open
habitats-road, power line, and other maintained rights-of--way; early successional fields; forest
ecotonal margins; forest clearings; etc. The species thrives in full sun but also grows in the light
shade of open stands ofoak-pine-hickory. Schweinitz's sunflower generally occurs on soils
characterized as moist to dryish~ clays, clay-loams, or sandy-clay loams that often have high
gravel content. The- species is known from a variety of soil types, including Iredell (Fine,
Montmorillonitic, Thermic Typic Hapluduff), Enon (Fine, Mixed, Thermic Ultic Hapludalf), and
Cecil (Clayey, Kaolinitic, Thermic Typic Hapludult). Schweinitz's sunflower is difficult to
identify at any time, but even more so outside the flowering season of late August to October, so
we recommend that surveys for this species be conducted during this period.
In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal agency or its
designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any such activities
or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. If it is
determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as
endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
We recommend that you contact Ms. Linda Pearsall,. Director of the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program, for further information about North Carolina's rare species and/or unique and
rare habitat types located in the subject project areas. Her mailing address is Natural Heritage
Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601.
Project Recommendations.-Your letter did not mention the width of the riparian buffers that
will be preserved restored along the stream and protected within the conservation easement. We
recommend that riparian buffers (a minimum of 100 feet wide along perennial streams and
50 feet wide along intermittent streams) be created and/or maintained along all aquatic areas.
Riparian buffers .provide travel corridors and habitat for wildlife displaced by development. In
addition, riparian buffers protect water quality by stabilizing stream banks, filtering storm-water
runoff, and providing habitat for aquatic and fisheries resources.
We are pleased with this proposed restoration effort. However, at this stage and without more
specifics about restoration plans, reference reaches, and stream design, it is difficult for us to
fully assess and comment on the proposed project. We request the opportunity to be involved
throughout the restoration process, review all future design plans, and make recommendations
about the entire restoration design as more information becomes available. We are available to
-assist with the selection of reference sites for the stream and riparian restoration designs and

subsequent monitoring. As a measure of restoration success, we recommend sampling fish,
benthic macroinvertebrates, and water quality before and after project completion.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments early in your planning efforts. Please
keep us informed of the progress of this project. If we can be of further assistance or if you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bryan Tompkins of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 240. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-06-382.
Si rely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure

~ Kimley-Horn
~ antl Associates, Inc.
July 20, 2006
Mr. Dale Suiter
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Re: 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site
Full Delivery Project
Union County, North Carolina
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is writing this letter on behalf of our client,
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC, to request a no effect determination
from your agency regarding a proposed stream and wetland mitigation project.
The 601 North Property Stream Restoration Site is located 7 miles south of
Monroe, Union County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The 601 North Property site
contains an unnamed tributary (UT) to Wicker Branch. This highly unstable
stream has been impacted by excessive sedimentation, intensive agricultural
activity, the elimination of a riparian buffer, and the straightening of portions of
the channel. The UT is fed by a linear wetl~d feature beginning upstream at the
outfall of a farm pond.
The purpose of this project is to restore the site back to a naturally functioning
stream system. The channel will be restored along its entire length to Wicker
Branch. The upper portion of the stream will be slightly relocated and.
appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile will be restored based on reference
data gathered from local, similar stream systems. The lower reach will be
reestablished by creating a channel with a proper cross-section and slope using
the same reference data as described above. As a result of the restoration
activities, total stream length within the restoration area will be increased from
approximately 2,396 linear feet to 3,000 linear feet. Approximately 7.5 acres of
bottomland and riparian buffer will be protected with a permanent conservation
easement. Invasive plant species will be removed and all restored areas will be
planted with native vegetation to provide biological diversity. Stream banks will
be stabilized using erosion matting, bare-root plantings, and bio-engineering. In
stream structures (rock-vanes, constructed riffles, and log vanes) will be used to
maintain grade, protect banks, and enhance bed form diversity.
^
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
^
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, Norfh Carolina
27636-3068

^ ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, there are three endangered
species and no threatened species potentially occurring in Union County. The
endangered species are: the Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata},
Michaux's sumac (Rhos michauxii), and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii). Review of the Natural Heritage Program database of documented
occurrences did not reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned species
within aone-mile radius of the proposed mitigation site. The entire 601 North
Property site has been under intensive agricultural use for an extended period of
time. The frequent disturbance along the proposed restoration corridor makes it
unlikely that any of the listed plant species occur in this area. The degraded
condition of the channel makes it unlikely that the heelsplitter occurs in this
stream system.
Specifically, we would like information that the area described above
• is not located in an officially designated wildlife refuge
• will not affect listed threatened or endangered species or designated
critical habitats; or will not jeopardize the continued existence of any
proposed endangered or threatened species or likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitats, as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973.
We would appreciate a reply from you as soon as possible. Please either mail or
fax [phone]) your reply to my attention. If you have any questions
regarding this request, please call me at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ura Lang
Environmental Scientist

R® Environmental
Data Resources Inc
The EDR Radius Map
with GeoCheck®
601 North
McManus Circle
Monroe, NC 28112
Inquiry Number: 1736016.2s
August 15, 2006
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Management Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06461
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com
o.~

•
•
i
•
a
•
•
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Executive Summary------------------------------------------------------- ES1
Overview Map----------------------------------------------------------- 2
Detail Map-------------------------------------------------------------- 3
Map Findings Summary---------------------------------------------------- 4
Map Findings------------------------------------------------------------ 6
Orphan Summary--------------------------------------------------------- 11
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum__________________________________________ A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary___________________________________________. A-2
Physical Setting Source Map________________________________________________ A_7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings________________________________________ A-8
Physical SettingSotarceRecordsSearched____________________________________. A-16
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer -Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from
Other Sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FRNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report °AS IS°. Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase 1
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2006 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanbom Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the roe of their res ective owners.
TC1736016.2s Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-OS) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
MCMANUS CIRCLE
MONROE, NC 28112
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranver,
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
34.898400 - 34° 53' 54.2"
80.469800 - 80° 28' 11.3"
~e Mercator: Zone 17
548442.7
3861707.0
615 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 34080-H4 WINGATE, NC
Most Recent Revision: 2002
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL__________________ ________ National Priority List
Proposed NPL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Proposed National Priority List Sites
Delisted NPL________ _______. National Priority List Deletions
NPL RECOVERY_____ ________ Federal Supertund Liens
CERCLIS_____________ _______. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System
CERC-NFRAP________ _______. CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
CORRACTS__________ ________Gorrective Action Report
RCRA-TSDF_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA-LQC~__________ _______ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
TC7736016.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

•
•
•
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RCRA-SOG__________________ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
ERNS_____________________ ___ Emergency Response Notification System
HMIRS____________________ ___ Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
US ENG CONTROLS_____ ___. Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL______ ___Sltes with Institutional Controls
DOD______________________ ___. Department of Defense Sites
FUDS_____________________ ___ Formerly Used Defense Sites
US BROWNFIELDS_______ ___ AListing of Brownfields Sites
CONSENT________________ ___ Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD______________________ ___. Records Of Decision
UMTRA___________________ ___ Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
ODI__________________________ Open Dump Inventory
TRIS______________________ ___ Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA_____________________ ___ Toxic Substances Control Act
FTTS______________________ ___ FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, &
Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
SSTS______________________ __.Sectlon 7 Tracking Systems
ICIS_______________________ ___ Integrated Compliance Information System
PADS_____________________ ___ PCB Activity Database System
MLTS________________________ Material Licensing Tracking System
MINES_______________________ Mines Master Index File
FINDS_____________________ __. Facility Index SysteMFacility Registry System
RAATS____________________ ___RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
SHWS_____________________ ___ Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
NC HSDS____________________ Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
SWF/LF___________________ ___ List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI________________________ __.Old Landfill Inventory
LUST TRUST________________. State Trust Fund Database
UST_______________________ ___fetroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST_______________________ ___RST Database
INST CONTROL__________ __. No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
VCP_______________________ ___Besponsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
DRYCLEANERS___________ __ Drycleaning Sites
BROWNFIELDS___________ ___Brownfields Projects Inventory
NPDES____________________ __. NPDES Facility Location Listing
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV_____________lndian Reservations
INDIAN LUST________________ Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
INDIAN UST_________________.Onderground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants___ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified.
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on
a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been
differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed
data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC1736016.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
IMD: Incident Management Database.
A review of the IMD list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2006 has revealed that there are 2 IMD
sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist /Dir Map ID Page
NCDOT SITE #8/ ROBERT MILLS 4426 PAGELAND HWY 1/4 - 1/2ENE 1 6
SEGREST (DAVID) PROPERTY 4506 PAGELAND HWY 1/4 - i/2E 2 8
LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environment, &
Natural Resources' Incidents by Address.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/02/2006 has revealed that there are 2
LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist /Dir Map ID Page
NCDOT SITE #8/ROBERT MILLS 4426 PAGELAND HWY 1/4 - 1/2ENE 1 6
Incident Phase: Closed Out
SEGREST (DAVID) PROPERTY 4506 PAGELAND HWY 1/4 - 1/2E 2 8
TC1736016.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:
Site Name Database(s)
SCOVILL INC/SECURITY PRODUCTS SHWS
STALLINGS SALVAGE SHWS
UNION COUNTY DRUM SHWS
STALLINGS SALVAGE CERCLIS, FINDS
GRIFFIN FARMS CDLF SWF/LF
SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW LUST, IMD
GREY'S GROCERY LUST, IMD
BOREN BRICK CO. LUST, IMD
MONROE MALL LUST, IMD
YALE NORTON LUST, IMD
BOREN BRICK - 5000 H.O. LUST, IMD
BOREN BRICK-MONROE LUST, IMD
NCDOT SITE #5/DAVID WILSON PRO LUST, IMD
ROY WALTERS PROPERTYMCDOT#10 LUST, IMD
ZIPP (CYNTHIA) PROPERTY LUST, IMD
LAKE LEE GROCERY-NCDOT LUST, IMD
BARRY HELMS RESIDENCE LUST, IMD
NEWELL HELMS RESIDENCE LUST, IMD
PENEGAR PROPERTY LUST, IMD
CHARLOTTE PLASTICS - MONROE LUST, IMD
BANTAM MART LUST, IMD
PRUITT, JOHNNY/NCDOT SITE #15 LUST, IMD
MONROE OIL PROPERTY LUST, IMD
COOK'S GROCERY LUST TRUST
CROWN NC - 632 LUST TRUST
BANTAM MART (FORMER) LUST TRUST
HWY 200 NORTH ERNS
CITY OF MONROE ASPHALT PLANT ( IMD
TC1736016.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

OVERVIEW MAP -1736016.2s

* Target Property
~ Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
• Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
1 Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Landfill Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
o va to ~ wue. •
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance •
Oil & Gas pipelines
Disposal Sites
•
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands •

This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.

SITE NAME: 601 North CLIENT: IGmley-Horn & Associates, Inc.
ADDRESS: McManus Circle CONTACT: Laura Lang
Monroe NC 28112 INQUIRY#: 173601ti.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.8984 / 80.4698 DATE: August 15, 2006
Copyright m 2006 EDR, Inc. ®2006 Tele Atlas Rel. 07Y1005.

•

I•
~I~
DETAIL MAP -17360y 6.2s
• ~ Target Property
• ~ Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the targe# property
• • Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
1 Manufactured Gas Plants
r Sensitive Receptors
• National Priority List Sites
• ~ Landfill Sites
• ~~ Dept. Defense Sites

SITE NAME: 601 North CLIENT: fGmley-Horn & Associates, Inc.
ADDRESS: McManus Circle CONTACT: Laura Lang
Monroe NC 28112 INQUIRY #: 1736016.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.8984 / 80.4698 DATE: August 15, 2006
• Copyright ®2006 EDR, Inc. m 2006 Tele Atlas Rel. 07/2005.
0 1/76 1/8 1/4 Mlles
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
Oil & Gas pipelines Disposal Sites
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NPL RECOVERY TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC-NFRAP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RCRA TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
RCRA Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRA Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US INST CONTROL 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FUDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UMTRA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
ICIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
State Haz. Waste 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NC HSDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
IMD 0.500 0 0 2 NR NR 2
State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
OLI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 0 2 NR NR 2
LUST TRUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
AST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
INST CONTROL 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
NPDES TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TC1736016.2s Page 4

•
•
•
•
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Database
TRIBAL RECORDS
Search
Target Distance Total
Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 -1 > 1 Plotted
INDIAN RESERV
INDIAN LUST
INDIAN UST
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
1.000
0.500
0.250
Manufactured Gas Plants 1.000
NOTES:
TP =Target Property
NR =Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
TC1736016.2s Page 5

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
1 NCDOT SITE #8/ROBERT MILLS LUST S106681828
ENE 4426 PAGELAND HWY IMD N/A
1/4-1/2 MONROE, NC 28110
1539 ft.
Relative: LUST:
Higher Facility ID: Not reported
Incident Number: 15872 UST Number: MO-4785
Actual: Lat/Long: 34 54 6.66 80 39 50.4 Lat/Long Decimal: 34.901867 80.664
649 ft. Testlat: Not reported
Regional Officer Project Mgr: FTF
Region: Mooresville
Company: Not reported
Contact Person: ROBERT MILLS
Telephone: Not reported
RP Address: Not reported
RP City,St,Zip: MONROE, NC 28110
RP County: UN
Comm /Non-comm UST Site: Commercial
Risk Classification: H
Risk Class Based On Review: L
Corrective Action Plan Type: Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup Achievedsoil to GW levels
Tank Regulated Status: R
Contamination Type: SL
Source Type: Leak-underground Product Type: Petroleum
Date Reported: 6/1/1992 Date Occur: 1/15/1992
NOV Issue Date: Not reported NORR Issue Date: Not reported
Site Priority: 20/B Phase Of LSA Req:Not reported
Site Risk Reason: Not reported Land Use: Residential
Closure Request: Not reported # Of Supply Wells: 0
Close Out: 8/19/2005
MTBE: Not reported MTBE1: Unknown
Flag: No FIag1: No
Release Code: 0 LUR Filed: Not reported
GPS Confirmed: 3 Cleanup: 1/15/1992
Current Status: File Located i n House RBCA GW: G1
PETOPT: 3 RPL: No
CD Num: 0 Reel Num: 0
RPOW: No RPOP: No
Error Flag: 0
Error Code: Not reported Error Type: Not reported
Submitted: 7/16/1996 Valid: No
Description: MINOR SOIL CONTAMINATION CONFIRMED FROM UST LEAK.
Ownership: Private
Operation Type: Not Reported Facility Type: 3
Location: Facility Site Priority: Not reported
Priority Update: Not reported PIRF/Min Soil: Min_Soil
Wells Affected: Not reported Wells Affected #: 0
Samples Taken: Not reported Samples Include: Not reported
5 Min Quad: 61 Vd 7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
Comments: Site Visit on 3.23.05 found 3 K diesel or kero tank with 8 inches product (217
gal) and 4K gas tank with 44 inches producUwater mixture (2941 gal). Since PSA
showed only 2 inches in 1992 tanks must be taking on water. WSW for five
residences is located <50 feet from these tanks. Tanks removed 6/13-14/05 with
worst case soils of 65 ppm by 3550. 100 tons of soil removed during
overexcavation from pump island, product lines &kero UST pit. Confirmation
samples BDL. NFA 8.19.05.
Last Modified: 8/19/2005
TC1736016.2s Page 6

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
NCDOT SITE #8/ROBERT MILLS (Continued) S106681828
Incident Phase: Closed Out
NOV Issued: Not reported
NORR Issued: Not reported
45 Day Report: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
SOC Sighned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
RS Designation: Not reported
Closure Request Date: Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported
IMD:
Facility ID: 15872
Region: MOR
Date Occurred: 1/15/1992
Submit Date: 7/16/1996
GW Contam: No
Soil Contam: Yes
Incident Desc: MINOR SOIL CONTAMINATION CONFIRMED FROM UST LEAK.
Operator: ROBERT MILLS
Contact Phone: Not reported
Owner Company: Not reported
Operator Address:Not reported
Operator City: MONROE
Oper City,St,Zip: MONROE, NC 28110
Ownership: Private
Operation: Not Reported
Material: GASOLINE
Qty Lost 1: Not reported
Qty Recovered 1: Not reported
Material: KEROSENE
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: Gasoline/diesel
Location: Facility
Setting: Rural
Risk Site: H
Site Priority: Not reported
Priority Code: Not reported
Priority Update: Not reported
Dem Contact: FTF
Wells Affected: Not reported
Num Affected: 0
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled By: Not reported
Samples Include: Not reported
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: Not reported
Latitude: 34.90166666
Longitude: -80.66388888
Latitude Number: 345406
Longitude Numbe r: 803950
Latitude Decimal: 34.9016666666667
Longitude Decimal: 80.6638888888889
TC1736016.2s Page 7

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
NCDOT SITE #8/ ROBERT MILLS (Continued) S106681828
GPS: GPS
Agency: DWM
Facility ID: 15872
Last Modified: 8/19/2005
Incident Phase: Closed Out
NOV Issued: Not reported
NORR Issued: Not reported
45 Day Report: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
SOC Sighned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
RS Designation: Not reported
Closure Request Date: "Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported
2 SEGREST (DAVID) PROPERTY LUST S106896107
East 4506 PAGELAND HWY IMD N/A
1/4-1 /2 MONROE, NC 28112
1662 ft.
Relative: LUST:
Higher Facility ID: Not reported
Incident Number: 27856 UST Number: MO-7171
Actual: Lat/Long: Not reported Lat/Long Decimal: 0 0
633 ft. Testlat: Not reported
Regional Officer Project Mgr: EGL
Region: Mooresville
Company: Not reported
Contact Person: DAVID SEGREST
Telephone: Not reported
RP Address: P O BOX 30563
RP City,St,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28230
RP County: Not reported
Comm /Non-comm UST Site: Commercial
Risk Classification: U
Risk Class Based On Review: H
Corrective Action Plan Type: Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup AchievediVot reported
Tank Regulated Status: R
Contamination Type: GW
Source Type: Leak-underground Product Type: Petroleum
Date Reported: 3/7/2005 Date Occur: Not reported
NOV Issue Date: Not reported NORR Issue Date: Not reported
Site Priority: Not reported Phase Of LSA Req:1
Site Risk Reason: Not reported Land Use: Not reported
Closure Request: Not reported # Of Supply Well s: 0
Close Out: Not reported
MTBE: No MTBE1: Unknown
Flag: No FIag1: No
Release Code: 0 LUR Filed: Not reported
GPS Confirmed: 7 Cleanup: Not reported
Current Status: File Located i n House RBCA GW: Not reported
PETOPT: 3 RPL: Yes
CD Num: 0 Reel Num: 0
RPOW: No RPOP: No
Error Flag: 0
TC1736016.2s Page 8

Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
MAP FINDINGS
SEGREST (DAVID) PROPERTY (Continued)
Error Code:
Submitted:
Description:
Ownership:
Operation Type:
Location:
Priority Update:
Wells Affected:
Samples Taken:
5 Min Quad:
Comments:
N Error Type: Not reported
317/2005 Valid: Yes
Soil contamination to 1700 ppm by 5030 and 700 ppm by 3550.On site WSW
contained 20 ppb 1,2-DCA & 120 IPE.
Unknown
S106896107
Not reported Facility Type: 3
Facility Site Priority: Not reported
Not reported PIRF/Min Soil: Not reported
Yes Wells Affected #: Not reported
Yes Samples Include: Not reported
Not reported 7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
Last Modified:
Incident Phase:
NOV Issued:
NORR Issued:
45 Day Report:
Public Meeting Held:
Corrective Action Planned:
SOC Sighned:
Reclassification Report:
RS Designation:
Closure Request Date:
Close-out Report:
HIGH RISK EGL 3/22/2005 No remaining USTs, no area residents who remember a
station there, property configuration and patterns of soil contamination
strongly suggest a former service station. HIGH RISK (EGL 3.22.05). Unable to
locate apparent RP Warren Rogers.
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
IMD:
Facility ID: 27856
Region: Not reported
Date Occurred: Not reported
Submit Date: 3/7/2005
GW Contam: Yes
Soi- Contam: No
Incident Desc: Soil contamination to 1700 ppm by 5030 and 700 ppm by 3550.On site WSW
contained 20 ppb 1,2-DCA & 120 IPE.
Operator: DAVID SEGREST
Contact Phone: Not reported
Owner Company: Not reported
Operator Address:P O BOX 30563
Operator City: CHARLOTTE
Oper City,St,Zip: CHARLOTTE, NC 28230
Ownership: Unknown
Operation: Not reported
Material: Not reported
Qty Lost 1: Not reported
Qty Recovered 1: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: Gasoline/diesel
Location: Facility
Setting: .Not reported
Risk Site: Unknown
Site Priority: Not reported
Priority Code: Not reported
Priority Update: Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
TC1736016.2s Page 9

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
SEGREST (DAVID) PROPERTY (Continued)
Dem Contact: EGL
Wells Affected: Yes
Num Affected: Not reported
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled By: Y
Samples Include: Not reported
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: Not reported
Latitude: Not reported
Longitude: Not reported
Latitude Number: Not reported
Longitude Number: Not reported
Latitude Decimal: Not reported
Longitude Decimal: ,Not reported
GPS: UNK
Agency: DWM
Facility ID: Not reported
Last Modified: Not reported
Incident Phase: Not reported
NOV Issued: Not reported
NORR Issued: Not reported
45 Day Report: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
SOC Sighned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
RS Designation: Not reported
Closure Request Date: Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S706896107
TC1736016.2s Page 10

Appendix 4
Rainfall Information

P,:-~"a'1~5i1~lw .: 'd.74'..':°a/N.93~~%€a:F+`i4F~'4.5~"~9`?~£~~~:~57` `~
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~.
•
•
•
i
•
i
s

MONROE 4 SE, NORTH CAROLINA Period of Record General Climate Summary -Pre... Page l of 2
MONROE 4 SE, NORTH CAROLINA
Period of Record General Climate Summary -Precipitation
From Year=1933 To Year=2005
Station:(315771) MONROE 4 SE
Averages Daily Extremes
Precipitation Total Snowfall
High Year Low Year 1 Day Max. 0 O1 0 10 0 50 1 00 Mean High Yep
~uu~
dd/yyyy # # # # _
in. in. - in. - ~• yyyy~dd Days Days Days Days m. m.
January 3.96 9.81 98 0.48 81 3.62 11/1984 00~~ 1.5 19.0 100
February 3.80 8.58 39 0.63 78 2.65 14/1984 0000 1.0 11.0 69
March 4.36 9.86 80 1.30 85 3.93 24/1989 ~9 0~3 ~1 0.5 10.5 60
April 3.30 7.60 36 0.48 76 3.49 01/1973 ~7 ©0~1 0.0 0.0 33
May 3.18 8.25 57 0.04 41 3.11 28/1990 ®©0~l 0.0 0.0 33
June 4.01 10.30 37 0.35 90 3.25 30/1951 ®0~3 ~l 0.0 0.0 33
July 4.91 12.19 59 0.75 83 4.90 10/1959 10 ®0~1 0.0 0.0 33
August 4.86 13.66 86 0.32 97 5.01 24/1983 0~~3 ~ 0.0 0.0 33
September 4.16 13.90 104 0.00 54 6.74 04/1998 ©001 0.0 0.0 33
October 3.29 15.94 90 0.00 74 7.72 11/1990 ©®0~1 0.0 0.0 33
November 2.96 11.12 48 0.35 73 2.69 28/1948 ~7 ~5 0~1 0.0 1.5 68
December 3.40 9.07 72 0.44 55 3.65 15/1972 ®©0~1 0.6 11.8 35
Annual 46.19 61.56 64 31.12 40 7.72 19901011 96 76 32 13 3.8 19.5 100
Winter 11.16 21.57 84 3.55 86 3.65 19721215 26 20 ®~ 3.2 27.5 36
Spring 10.84 20.10 103 3.24 104 3.93 19890324 24 20 ®0 0.5 10.5 60
Summer 13.78 22.54 85 5.84 80 5.01 19830824 27 21 0® 0.0 0.0 33
Fall 10.41 19.61 90 2.77 33 7.72 19901011 19 15 0~3 0.0 1.5 68
Table updated on Jul 28,
For monthly and annual means, thresholds, and sums:
Months with 5 or more missing days are not considered
Years with 1 or more missing months are not considered
Seasons are climatological not calendar seasons
Winter =Dec., Jan., and Feb. Spring =Mar., Apr., and May
http://cirrus.dnr.state.sc.us/cgi-bin/sercc/cIiGCStP.pl?nc5771 12/5/2006

Appendix 5
HEC-RAS Analysis

HFR_RAR River IIT fn Wicker Rra Reach• RMN
Reach River S[a Profile Plan Q7otal Min Ch EI W S. Ele4 Vel Chnl Vel Total Shear Total Power Total
_ _ __ _ - - ---- ~ (cfs) (ft) tt ft/s ~ (ft!s --(Ib/sq ft) -(Ib/ft s~
601N 2500 BKF Existing02 20.00 608.00 608.36 2.85 2.85 0.55 1.56
601N __ 2500 BKF ____ Proposed_ i 20.00 607.20 608.34 3.02 2.09 0.29 0.61
601N 2500 ,10 Ew.sting02 ~ 219.00 608.00 609.49 4.64 4.64 0.97 4.50
601N 2500 X10 Proposed ~ 219.00 607.20 609.50 6.58 4.02 1.22 4.91
601N 2_500 100 Existin 02 501.00 608.00 610.24 5.74 5.74 1.32 7.56
601N 2500 100 Proposed 501.00 607.20 610.24 9.01 5.30 2.01 10.62

601N 2400 BKF Exisling02 20.00 606.00 606.97 2.31 2.31 0.29 0.67
601N _ 2400 BKF Pro osed ~ 20.00 606.00 606.84 2.96 2.96 0.63 1.85
601N 2400 10 Exislin 02 219.00 606.00 608.58 3.25 3.25 0.47 1.52
601N 2400 10 Proposed 219.00 606.00 608.43 3.82 3.47 0.56 1.95
601N 2400 100 Existing02 501.00 606.00 609.29 4.08 4.08 0.69 2.81
601N 2400 100 Proposed 501.00 606.00 609.22 5.02 4.09 0.71 2.92

$01N 2300.` BKF Existing02 20.00 605.50 606.44 1.48 1.48 0.13 0.19
601N 2300.` BKF Proposed 20.00 604.80 606.28 1.53 1.18 0.09 0.10
60iN 2300.` 10 _ Existin 02 219.00 605.50 607.15 4.94 4.94 1.22 6.05
60YN 2300.` 10 Proposed 219.00 604.80 607.20 5.46 3.63 0.82 2.99
601N 2300.` 100 Existing02 501.00 605.50 607.73 5.63 5.63 1.46 8.23
601N 2300.` 100 Proposed 501.00 604.80 607.87 7.53 4.36 1.19 5.20

601N 2200 BKF Existing02 20.00 605.00 605.39 2.66 2.66 0.53 1.42
601N 2200 BKF Proposed 20.00 604.20 605.25 4.45 4.45 1.36 6.05
601N 2200 10 Existing02 219.00 605.00 607.04 1.32 1.32 0.08 0.10
601N 2200 10 Proposed 219.00 604.20 606.97 2.37 1.26 0.13 0.17
601N 2200 100 Existing02 501.00 605.00 607.58 1.94 1.94 0.15 0.30
601N 2200 100 Proposed 501.00 604.20 607.56 3.42 1.83 0.26 0.48

601N 2100 BKF _ Existin 02 _ 20.00 604.00 605.14 0.89 0.85 0.03 0.02
601N 2100 BKF Proposed 20.00 603.20 604.99 0.88 0.45 0.02 0.01
601N _ 2100 10 Existing02 219.00 604.00 606.99 1.33 0.78 0.03 0.03
601N 2100 10 Pro osed 219.00 603.20 606.92 1.24 0.67 0.03 0.02
601N
- _ 2100
_ ----- 100 Existing02 501.00 604.00 607.47 2.28 1.31 0.10 0.13
601N 2100 100 Proposed 501.00 603.20 607.47 2.09 1.15 0.09 0.11

601N 2000 BKF Existin 02 20.00 604.00 605.14 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.00
601N 2000 BKF Proposed 20.00 602.80 604.98 0.43 0.20 0.00 0.00
601N 2000 10 Existin 02 219.00 604.00 606.99 0.43 0.43 0.01 0.00
601N 2000 10 Proposed i 219.00 602.80 606.91 0.79 0.44 0.01 0.01
601N 2000 100 Existing02 ~ 501.00 604.00 607.47 0.80 0.80 0.02 0.02
601N 2000 100 Proposed 501.00 602.60 607.44 1.40 0.80 0.04 0.04

601N 11-915 _ BKF Existin~02_ 20.00 603.00 605.14 0.30 0.14 0.00 0.00
BO1N j 1915 BKF Proposed 20.00 602.40 604.97 0.28 0.13 0.00 0.00
601N
- 1915
- 10
---- Existin 02 219.00 603.00 606.98 0.73 0.38 0.01 0.00
601N 1915 10 Proposed 219.00 602.40 606.90 0.67 0.36 0.01 0.00
601N __ 1915 ___ 100 Existing02 501.00 603.00 607.46 1.34 0.70 0.03 0.02
601N 1915 100 Pro osed 501.00 602.40 607.42 1.22 0.67 0.03 0.02

601N 1890 ' BKF Existing02 20.00 602.00 605.13 0.56 0.49 0.01 0.01
601N 1890 _ BKF Proposed 20.00 602.00 604.97 0.39 0.31 0.01 0.00
601N 1890 10 Existin 02 219.00 602.00 606.97 0.87 0.46 0.01 0.01
601N 1890 10 Proposed 219.00 602.00 606.89 0.90 0.55 0.02 0.01
BO1N 1890 100_ Existing02 501.00 602.00 607.42 1.62 0.85 0.04 0.04
601N 1890 100 Proposed 501.00 602.00 607.39 1.42 0.78 0.04 0.03

601N 1870 i Culvert
_
601 N 1850 ' BKF Existing02 20.00 601.00 602.35 3.09 3.09 0.46 1.42
601N 1850 ! BKF
-- Proposed 20.00 601.00 602.36 2.72 2.00 0.17 0.34
601N _ __ _1850_ I 1~ Existing02 219.00 601.00 604.59 7.38 6.18 1.15 7.14
601N _
-_
1850 10 __ Pro osed 219.00 601.00 603.99 5.24 3.63 0.86 3.14
_
601N 1850 100 Existin 02 501.00 601.00 605.21 6.70 3.39 0.67 2.26
601 N'` x,1850 .100 Proposed 501.00 601.00 604.74 4.96 2.54 0.48 1.22
- ------

l: - -
~-- - ~---

NF(`_RAC Rivcr I IT t.. IN I~Lor ^... R...,..L.. c ,...~.....
Reach River Sta Profile Plan Q Total Min Ch EI W.S. Elev Vel Chnl Vel Total.. -Shear Total r Power Total
--- cfs) R) ft (ft/s ft/s) (Ib/sq ft Ib/ft s
601N` 1800 BKF Existing02 20.00 601.00 601.66 4.35 4.35 1.05 4.55j
601N 1800 ` BKF Proposed 20.00 601.00 601.66 4.35 4.35 1.32 5.76
601N 1800 10 Existin 02 219.00 601.00 603.90 5.79 3.06 0.35 1.06
601N 1800 10 Proposed 219.00 601.00 603.44 6.17 3.62 0.71 2.56
601N 1800 100 Existing02 501.00 601.00 604.47 7.33 3.45 0.65 2.25
601N 1800 100 Proposed 501.00 601.00 604.09 7.51 3.95 0.99 3.93

601N. 1700 BKF _ Existing02 20.00 599.00 600.18 1.26 1.26 0.09 0.11
601N 1700 BKF Proposed 20.00 599.00 600.28 1.19 1.07 0.06 0.06
BO1N 1700 -' 10 Existing02 219.00 599.00 601.60 3.09 2.90 0.27 0.79
601N= 1700 10 Pro osed 219.00 599.00 601.69 3.29 2.30 0.25 0.57
601N; 1700 100 Existing02 501.00 599.00 602.41 4.43 3.64 0.39 1.42
601N' 1700 100 Pro osed 501.00 599.00 602.93 4.42 2.55 0.33 0.84

601N 1600 BKF Existing02 20.00 599.00 599.68 2.14 2.14 0.28 0.59
601N 1600 __ BKF Proposed 20.00 596.80 599.67 3.74 3.05 0.44 1.35
601N 1600 10 Existing02 219.00 599.00 601.08 3.26 3.26 0.47 1.53
601N 1600:- 10 Pro osed 219.00 598.80 601.35 4.51 2.56 0.45 1.15
601N 1600 100 E>asting02 501.00 599.00 601.89 3.82 3.82 0.59 2.26
601N 1600 100 Pro osed 501.00 598.80 602.45 4.95 2.65 0.47 1.25

601 N 1500 BKF Existing02 20.00 598.00 596.81 2.09 2.09 0.25 0.51
601N 1500 , BKF Proposed 20.00 597.10 598.47 1.92 1.72 0.14 0.24
601N 1500 10 Existing02 219.00 598.00 600.09 4.09 4.09 0.75 3.08
601 N 1500 10 Pro osed 219.00 597.10 600.24 4.44 2.68 0.42 1.22
601N ' 1500 100 Existin 02 501.00 598.00 600.79 5.11 5.11 1.08 5.49
601N 1500. 100 Proposed
-- 501.00 597.10 601.26 5.82 3.33 0.59 1.97
~
601N 1400 __ I BKF Existin002__ 20.00 597.00 597.65 2.72 2.72 0.45 1.22
601N 1400 BKF Proposed 20.00 596.80 597.87 2.48 1.75 0.17 0.30
601N 1400 10 Existin 02 _ 219.00 597.00 599.03 3.58 3.58 0.57 2.05
601N 1400 10 Pro osed 219.00 596.80 599.08 5.79 3.20 0.73 2.34
601N 1400 100 _ Existing02 501.00 597.00 599.57 5.12 4.72 0.73 3.44
601N 1400 100 Proposed 501.00 596.80 599.72 8.03 3.96 1.14 4.51

601N 1300 BKF Existing02 20.00 596.00 596.70 1.63 1.63 0.16 0.27
601N _
1300 BKF < Proposed 20.00 595.80 596.67 3.67 2.90 0.39 1.13
601 N 1300 10 Existing02 219.00 596.00 597.40 5.27 4.93 0.98 4.83
601N 1300 10 Pro osed 219.00 595.80 597.67 6.85 3.57 1.01 3.60
601N 1300 100 Existing02 501.00 596.00 598.06 6.48 5.28 1.06 5.57
601N 1300 400 Pro bsetl 501.00 595.80 598.21 8.27 4.35 1.52 6.60

601N__ 1200 BKF Existin 02 20.00 595.00 595.30 2.64 2.64 0.53 1.39
601N _ 1200 BKF Proposed 20.00 594.60 595.68 2.15 1.28 0.10 0.13
601N 1200 _ 10 _ Existing02 219.00 595.00 596.46 2.32 2.26 0.23 0.53
601N 1200_ 10 Proposed 219.00 594.60 596.86 3.34 1.59 0.22 0.35
601N 1200 100 Exisling02 501.00 595.00 597.14 2.68 2.51 0.26 0.66
601N 1200 100 Pro osed 501.00 594.60 597.52 3.88 1.98 0.32 0.63

601N 110_0 BKF_ Existin~02 20.00 593.00 594.32 2.14 1.81 0.10 0.18
601N 1100 BKF Pro osed 20.00 593.80 594.75 3.12 2.33 0.28 0.65
601N 1100 10 Exislin 02 219.00 593.00 595.74 5.32 2.49 0.37 0.92
601N 1100 10 Proposed 219.00 593.80 596.11 4.41 2.15 0.36 0.77
601N 1100 100 . Existin 02 501.00 593.00 596.35 7.03 3.13 0.65 2.03
601N 1100 100 Pro osed. 501.00 593.80 596.78 5.22 2.58 0.52 1.34

601N 1000 BKF Exisfing02 `- 20.00 593.00 593.88 2.14 2.14 0.25 0.53
601N 1000 BKF Pro osed- 20.00 592.40 593.38 3.10 2.61 0.40 1.05
601N 1000 10 Existin 02 219.00 593.00 595.06 4.36 2.29 0.30 0.68
601 N 1000 ~ 10 _ Proposed 219.00 592.40 595.03 5.86 2.51 0.40 0.99
601N 1000 __ 100 Existin 02 501.00 593.00 595.77 4.67 2.39 0.36 0.86
601N 1000 _ 100 Proposed 501.00 592.40 595.43 7.96 3.41 0.86 2.92

601N ' 900 BKF Existing02 20.00 592.00 592.96 3.18 3.18 0.50 1.59
601N' 900. BKF Proposed 20.00 591.40 592.46 2.52 1.75 0.17 0.31

HEC-RAS River: UT to Wicker Bra Reach: 601N fConfinuedl
Reach ! River Sta Profile Plan QTotal Mm Ch EI W:S. Elev Vet Chnl Vel Total Shear Total Power Total
cis) (ft (ft ft/s (R/s (Ihlsq tt) Iblft s
601N 900
---- 10 Existing02 219.00 592.00 594.57 3.68 1.67 0.21 0.35
601N 900 ;10 Proposed _ _ 219.00 591.40 593.82 4.29 2.24 0.39 0.86.
601N _ _ 900 __ _ _ 10_0 _ Existing02 501.00 592.00 595.34 4.24 1.98 0.29 0.58'
601N f900 100 Proposed 501.00 591.40 594.58 5.42 2.70 0.55 1.48
_ _ I _ _ __
601N B00 BKF _ Existing02 _ 20.00 591.00 592.08 2.72 2.72 0.37 1.02
601N 800 BKF , Proposed 20.00 590.40 591.37 3.04 2.28 0.28 0.63
601N 800 10 ~ Existing02 219.00 591.00 593.83 3.77 2.58 0.24 0.62
601N _ 800 10 Proposed 219.00 590.40 592.64 5.43 2.92 0.64 1.87
601N 800 100 Existin 02 501.00 591.00 594.65 4.20 2.46 0.30 0.73
601N 800 100 Proposed 501.00 590.40 593.63 5.54 2.87 0.61 1.73

601N 700 BKF Existin902 20.00 590.00 591.26 2.65 2.65 0.36 0.95
801N 700 BKF Proposed 20.00 589.40 590.49 2.33 1.56 0.14 0.22
601N 700 10 Existin 02 219.00 590.00 592.93 4.83 3.33 0.40 1.33
601N 700 10 Proposed 219.00 589.40 592.27 2.80 1.41 0.15 0.22
601 N _ _700 100 ~ Existing02 501.00 590.00 593.65 5.33 2.92 0.41 1.19
601N 700 100 Proposed 501.00 589.40 593.36 3.15 1.55 0.18 0.27

601N 600 BKF Existing02 20.00 589.00 590.34 2.03 2.03 0.21 0.43
601N 600 BKF_ Proposed 20.00 588.20 589.22 2.89 2.41 0.35 0.83
601N 600 10 _ I Exisling02 219.00 589.00 592.04 3.73 2.81 0.27 0.77
601N 600 10 i Proposed 219.00 588.20 590.60 8.67 6.31 2.26 14.24
601N 600 100 ~ Existing02 501.00 589.00 592.81 5.10 3.25 0.42 1.37
601N 600 100 _
Proposed 501.00 588.20 591.72 10.31 5.76 1.76 10.12

601N 500 BKF Existing02 20.00 588.00 588.92 3.78 3.78 0.72 2.73
601N 500 BKF Proposed 20.00 586.60 587.60 2.93 2.30 0.29 0.68
801N 500 10 Existing02 219.00 586.00 590.65 6.62 3.62 0.61 2.21
601N 500 10 Pro osed 219.00 586.60 589.79 3.66 2.08 0.28 0.59
601N 500 100 Existing02 501.00 586.00 591.28 8.06 4.11 0.89 3.65
601N 500 100 Pro osed 501.00 586.60 591.02 4.58 2.42 0.37 0.90
_ I
601N 400__ BKF Existing02 20.00 587.00 588.57 1.32 1.32 0.09 0.12
601N 400 BKF _~ Proposed 20.00 585.80 587.00 2.24 1.61 0.20 0.36
601N 400 10 i Existing02 219.00 587.00 589.95 2.95 2.15 0.17 0.36
601 N_ 400 10 Proposed 219.00 585.80 589.31 4.97 3.40 0.62 2.10
601N __ 400_ 100 Existing02 501.00 587.00 590.54 4.23 2.72 0.32 0.86
601N 400 100 _
Proposed 501.00 585.80 590.45 6.72 2.88 0.42 1.21

601N 1 300 BKF __ _Existing02 20.00 587.00 588.18 2.40 2.11 0.11 0.23
601N _ 300 _ BKF Proposed 20.00 565.30 586.52 2.19 1.76 0.19 0.33
601N 300 10 _
Existing02 219.00 587.00 589.52 4.11 1.64 0.19 0.31
601N 300 10 _
Proposed 219.00 585.30 588.65 5.33 3.67 0.73 2.66
601N 300 100 Existin 02 501.00 587.00 590.07 4.79 1.85 0.27 0.50
601N 300 100 Proposed 501.00 585.30 589.65 6.06 2.16 0.27 0.59

601N 200 BKF Existing02 20.00 586.00 586.90 5.08 5.08 1.35 6.85
601N 200 BKF Promised 20.00 584.60 585.45 3.98 3.51 0.67 2.35
601N 200 10 ( Existin 02 219.00 586.00 588.51 4.85 3.44 0.42 1.46
601N _ 200 __ 10 Proposed 219.00 584.60 587.05 8.40 6.09 2.09 12.74
601N 200 100 _
Existing02 501.00 586.00 589.01 5.89 3.28 0.54 1.78
601N 200 100 Pro osed 501.00 584.60 588.91 7.57 2.84 0.45 1.27

601N 100 _BKF Existin 02 20.00 584.00 584.40 1.08 1.08 0.07 0.08
6U1N _ 100 _ BKF Proposed 20.00 584.00 584.43 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.08
601N 100 10 Existin~02 _ 219.00 584.00 585.64 2.59 2.59 0.27 0.70
601N 100 i 10 Pro osed 219.00 584.00 585.76 2.40 2.40 0.29 0.69
601N 100 100 Existing02 501.00 584.00 586.64 3.42 3.42 0.41 1.40
601N 100 100 Proposed 501.00 584.00 586.83 3.16 3.16 0.43 1.37

Appendix 6
Soil Nutrient Testing Report

h
U

U

c M
°" z ~

C~
^
C
r~i ~- ~ N ~
V
o o ~'
v ~ v R~ ~

i~

0

0
O
- J O
O
w
z
w
Q
~~ ~
N
0 z
z
z
w
N
V
a
a~
V
0
O
N
ti
M
1N
'v
~ N .-~
~ ~ ~--~
O
N o 0
U o 0
~ 0 0
0 0
O \O
h
O N o
a O
0
o
0 0
N
~--'
M O
N
~ W
C ~ 'o
O
O ~ ~
Ci Ct ~ ~
cn x
C
O O ~
s..
U
x v ,~ N
~I~
al
~~
a~
'~ o
0
v
h
o ~
~ N
,'~ O

'N

Z ~ N ~--~

O
QQ
~ ~'
N o 0
ti ~+
~ U~ V o 0
~.,
O ~ 0 0
~
N
~ 0 0
~ ,...
N ~
N
ti
n
G~
ti~
~~
O
~n
O
~ ~
v ~^
0
o ~
O O
~ ~
O
O \O
0
--{ o
O O
N
.--+
0~
O O
N
~~
!~ M
'
V W

~ V1
~
O ~
~ '~
~ ~ ~+ v 'd
V ~

t~
~ w x
O
O
~. ~

w a~
~
M
v ~ ~•
d o
~

M
~° v
h
~ ~

~
y ~ ~ ~ y
L" O '~' i..i O '~'

w c• F w H

,
~
~ O
~ M
,'~ O

~ ~ N '-+

ti O
h 'C
~ ~ ~
i ~ ~
N o 0
~ ~
U ~ U o 0
~ 0 0
N ~
0 0
~ _
N~
~ ~ 0
o 0
0

~
O ~
°O
N 4 ~ N
~ ^~

~~
~ 0
~
o

.--r 0
N
.--~ 0
O
.-. ~
O O
~ N
U ~^
~ N
!~i N
'~,
ti W

~' ~
C .b
O
{y ""~ ~ G
U ''"~~"
~ ~ x
~! v~
+ d
~
A
c O
~ O
v ~
~
~ ~ a~
G.'
V
~-+
N
c
~ N
°a `~
a.

w ' a~
=
~
v~ ~
~ ~

,'~ ~~ O
~O
3- v
h
A
O ~
'~
Q~ ~
,'~ O

~ N ~--~
0

ti O
~ 'C
~ ~
~ M
0 0

U ~ U o 0
~ ~ 0 0
~
N
~~ o a

N ~

O o
~
°°
'~ ~ ~

ti ~.,
O °
.-+ o
N
N
M 4 ~ O
~

~ o
--+
o
~ 0
N
.~-~ 0
c O
0
~ 0~
O O
O N
v~
~ ~
y W

~ 'b

N
~ ~
U
~
I
~
Vr
~
~ ~
~
V O O

~ ~

~

c
r..
v ~

~

~ '~ a~
~i
V
.--~
N
o
o a> Q
~
~0 °O a
^~

W ~? a~
~=
~
V ~ +
~ o
~

O ~
V
y
~ ~
N
~ .-i
o~
~ ..
.
O ~ O
y

ti
v~ ~ +yN ~' v~ ~ ~ z
~° w ~ ~ F ~° w °
~
~ ~
.~.~
'~
y
y
a~
E
O
li OM
ti
~v
~ N
U ~
ch
~ `n
N
N ~
N
ti
`' N
G1
~ N
~~
O
N
O
~M
v~
~ N
!.i N
xi N
~~
~o
y' "'
o
h ~
~~
V ~
U v
i ~ O
~~~
\,~
V'~
O
~ y
~z
~~

V _
b~A ,; ',~~ No
+~
~ N .--~
`P)
H
O ~ O ~
~ ~
r--~
i. p0
O ~ ~
R'' ~ ~
~'" N O O
V O O V
~ O O
~ ~
N
c ~°~ 0 0
~ o N ~
O ° ooo
o ~ `N..
':.:
o O o O
C,7 r'-'
4 0 0 ~~
~ ~ `^
'~ ~ M
p ,!`~
Q ~ O ~ ~
O O ti V~
~ N 'C
.--i
U ~ O
N O O
N~ ~ ~
~ 'J ~ O
V ~
~ ~
OJ
.}'r ti V1
~ ~ ~
~ W
G+ ~ ~ '~
~ ~ O
+.+ .v+ 'U
3
~ ~
N ~ ~ Q a ~~
M p p ~
~ V ~ y ~ V V1
~ U `~ N ~' O
r~ .--~
~ ~ ~ ~ O
O ~ ~
a ~ ~" v ~,
~ o v
a ~ ~
.~
.y ~ ~
Q ~ ~
~- ~ 3~
•~
~ ~
;a
~ \ ..~
~ y o
~~ ~~
d c o
~~
v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;
°~ v
A ~ ~ ~ ~ e
Z w ~ F ~