20080008 Ver 1_As Built Monitoring Report_20120823

N-OO(q
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built
Baseline Report - Final
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Project
Henderson County, North Carolina
French Broad River Basin Cataloging Unit 06010105
EEP Project No. 733
D ��LSu V
AUG232012
oENR - WATER QUAI�EMNC11
Submission Date: April 2012
Prepared for: NCDENR -EEP
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
r- .r
loosystem
Cllt
/'ROf.V AM
A7A
NCDENR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND AND ATTRIBUTES
1 1 Project Location
12 Project Goals and Objectives
2.0 PROJECT STRUCTURE, RESTORATION AND APPROACH
2 1 Project Structure
2 2 Restoration Type and Approach
2 3 Project History, Contacts, and Attribute Data
3.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA
3 1 Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
3 1 1 Dimension
3 12 Pattern and Profile
3 13 Substrate
3 2 Vegetation
3 3 Hydrology
4.0 MONITORING PLAN
4 1 Hydrology Attainment and Bankfull Verification
4 2 Stream Channel Stability and Geomorphology
4 2 1 Dimension
4 2 2 Profile
4 2 3 Pattern
4 2 4 Visual Assessment
4 2 5 Bank Stability Assessments
4 3 Vegetation Monitoring
4 4 Photograph Reference Points
5.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLANS
6.0 AS -BUILT
7.0 REFERENCES
�^ Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
`- As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06 -06799 -01
4
4
5
6
6
6
7
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
I1
12
13
14
15
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
April 2012

m
List of Appendices
Appendix A — General Tables and Figures
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Protect Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Protect Baseline Information and Attributes
Appendix B — Summary Data and Plots
Table 5 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 6 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Appendix C — Vegetation Data
Table 7 Vegetation Data
Appendix D — As -Built Plan Sheets
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06 -06799 -01 April 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lewis Creek is located in Henderson County, North Carolina, northeast of the City of
Hendersonville The project is located within the French Broad River Basin (USGS HUC
06010105) The primary objectives of the protect were to stabilize and protect degraded or
vulnerable streambanks along Lewis Creek, restore a natural and stable dimension, pattern, and
profile, and introduce a natural meander pattern Additional objectives include improving
aquatic and riparian habitat and establishing a bankfull bench along Lewis Creek to reduce
velocity and shear stress associated with bankfull and higher storm flows These objectives were
achieved by restoring 1,750 linear feet (10 of Lewis Creek, creating bankfull benches,
establishing a floodplain at an appropriate elevation for the current stream bed, and stabilizing
streambanks through grading bank slopes and replanting streambanks and riparian zones with
native species appropriate to the area
Pre - Construction Site Conditions
The land use within the Lewis Creek watershed is dominated by agricultural land and forest
The primary agricultural activities range from apple orchards to row crops Forested land in the
watershed is being converted to apple orchards and sod farms Also, many upslope areas have
r been developed into residential gated communities The project site, which begins at North
Ridge Road and terminates approximately 1,750 if downstream, was historically used for
agricultural purposes Past land manipulation including channel straightening, dredging, and
berming, led to degradation of Lewis Creek These effects were exacerbated by land use within
the contributing watershed Approximately 10 acres of forested wetlands are located along the
south side of Lewis Creek This area is owned by the Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy
(CMLC) and was not included in work conducted in the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) project area CMLC was involved in the preservation and conservation of the
tiro wetland and was regularly apprised of the stream restoration efforts
The existing surveyed reach of Lewis Creek was classified as an E5 /C5 Typically, E5 stream
types are riffle /pool systems, exhibiting low channel width -depth ratios and displaying moderate
channel sinuosities, which result in higher meander width ratio values E5 channels exhibit
predominantly sand -sized bed substrates with channel slopes usually less than two percent
(Rosgen, 1996) By and large, E5 channel streambanks are composed of materials finer than that
✓
of the dominant channel bed materials These finer streambank materials are usually stabilized
_i
with extensive riparian or wetland vegetation that forms densely rooted sod mats from grasses,
L
sedges, and rushes, as well as woody species (Rosgen, 1996) These channels are considered
hydraulically efficient, maintaining a high sediment transport capacity E5 stream channels are
J—
I
considered stable streams, but can become vulnerable to erosion if streambanks are disturbed
J
and/or significant changes in sediment supply and stream flow occur The C5 designation was
added to the stream classification because the project reach of Lewis Creek has a lower sinuosity
l
that resembles more of a C -type channel than an E -type channel The stream was probably once
�Fl
characterized by a gravel and cobble substrate before land disturbance activities and instability of
the streambanks shifted the substrate to a sandy substrate
I 1
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
1 I
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
f ^i
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

2
The segment of Lewis Creek in the project reach has been classified by the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality as Class C, Trout
waters (NCDWQ, 2007) Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation (e g, wading,
boating, and other uses involving human body contact), fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life
propagation and survival, and agriculture No wetlands, other than the CMLC site described
above, were found in the project area
Restoration Approach and Implementation
Stream
The existing stream length available for restoration was 1,663 linear feet of Lewis Creek The
stream restoration effort consisted of Restoration, Priority Level 2 along the main reach of Lewis
Creek to create 1,750 linear feet of restored stream (Station 0 +00 — 17 +50) The restoration plan
also included replanting the streambanks and riparian zone with native species appropriate to the
area
Existing upstream and downstream bridges established the tie -in elevations for the restored
channel and precluded the ability to raise the channel to its historic floodplain Stream
dimension, pattern and profile were designed so the new stream would maintain stability while
conveying its watershed's runoff and transporting its sediment load The proposed stream was
designed as an E/C channel, which is typically stable Most of the design parameters were
associated with an E channel, but the pattern measurements resembled a C -type stream A new
meander pattern was introduced to mimic the natural sinuosity pattern and establish riffle /pool
sequences that typically occur in naturally stable streams Ratios of radius of curvature to
bankfull width were designed to be 2 0 to 3 0, which provide a moderate to very low potential for
bank erosion to occur The meandering was designed to allow the stream to dissipate energy and
decrease shear stress
Typical riffle and pool cross - sections were designed and include a bankfull floodplain bench to
assist in flow attenutation The constructed channel will provide a stable bedform found in
E5 /C5 streams with riffle, run, pool, and glide features and will also improve in- stream habitat
for macroinvertebrates Root Wad/Log Vane J -Hook Combo structures were installed on the
outside bends of meanders to protect the streambanks while vegetation is establishing and to
provide habitat Rock cross -vanes were used at the upstream end of the project to center stream
flow to the middle of the channel and to provide grade - control The purpose of this vane was
also to remove a mid- channel sand bar that was contributing to the stream's instability A
constructed rock riffle at the downstream end of the project provides a stabile transition from the
flow of the restored reach back into the existing bed elevation of Lewis Creek
The proposed grading of the Lewis Creek project reach included a floodplain bench on outside
meander bends grading up to existing grade at a 2 1 slope On inside meander bends, the ground
was graded to tie into subsequent outside meander bend grading so the water can flow down
valley during larger storm events
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

Ves?etation
The areas of disturbance associated with project construction were planted with native species
The chosen plant species were corresponded to those identified in reference riparian areas
located along middle and lower reaches of the Lewis Creek project reach Selected species were
strategically planted to achieve a Montane Alluvial Forest and Piedmont/Mountain Alluvial
Forest intermediate community type as described in Schafale and Weakely (1990) The protect
area was broken into three vegetation planting zones dependent on hydrologic regime Zone 1
planting areas where located along streambanks in close proximity to baseflow and bankfull
discharge elevations In Zone 1 areas livestaking and brush mattresses was installed in an effort
to quickly establish root - derived soil stability Zone 2, immediate floodprone areas, was planted
with bare root seedlings consisting of species tolerant to moderate inundation and saturation In
drier areas, designated Zone 3, bare root plants more apt to persist in drier conditions were
installed
Hydrology
Restoration Approach and Implementation —As -Built Condition
The project involved restoring 1,750 if of Lewis Creek Project construction (less livestaking,
brush matting, and bare root plantings) was originally completed near the end of November
2010 However, a major storm event occurred at the project site November 29 -30, 2010, causing
the need for reconstruction of the entire project and resulting in a significant deviation from the
construction plans in terms of channel morphology This deviation occurred between stations
1 2 +00 and 3 +00 Details of the restoration approach and implementation are discussed below in
terms of the original construction and the reconstruction of the project site after this storm event
~� in (Refer to section 2.0 Protect Structure, Restoration Type And Approach) Also see
Appendix D, As -Built Plan Sheets, for additional information
Monitoring
Monitoring will consist of collecting the morphological and vegetation data on an annual basis to
assess the project success based on the restoration goals and objectives Specifically, the success
�J of the site will be assessed using measurements of the stream channel's dimension, pattern,
profile, substrate composition, photographic comparison, and vegetation sampling Also
`!l included in the annual monitoring will be surface gauge data collection to document high flow
events The first annual monitoring survey will be conducted following the first full growing
season in 2012
Potential problem areas, such as streambank instability, widespread aggradation/degradation, or
unsuccessful vegetation establishment will be evaluated during the annual monitoring If, during
�- the annual review of the stream reach, a failure is noted, the areas will be evaluated and
discussed with EEP staff to determine if remedial maintenance measures are required to resolve
the problem If remediation of an area is required, a proposal will be submitted for any
necessary work If the vegetation success criteria are not achieved, supplemental plantings will
�) be performed with native species
1 Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

4
1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Protect Location
Lewis Creek is located in Henderson County, North Carolina, northeast of the City of
Hendersonville The project is located in the French Broad River Basin, Catalog Unit 06010105,
DWQ Subbasin 04 -03 -02 The watershed land use is dominated by agriculture land and forest
The primary agricultural activities surrounding the site range from apple orchards to row crops
Forested land in the watershed is being converted to apple orchards and sod farms Also, many
upslope areas have been developed into residential gated communities Lewis Creek is a third
order tributary to Clear Creek with an approximate drainage area of four square miles at the
upstream point of the project area The segment of Lewis Creek in the project reach has been
classified by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( NCDENR)
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) as Class C, Trout waters (NCDWQ, 2007)
The project is generally oriented from southeast to northwest The upstream end of the project
begins at the bridge on North Ridge Road that crosses over Lewis Creek The project area
extends downstream for approximately 1,663 feet along Lewis Creek This project is located in
a local watershed planning area (LWP) The LWP was developed by the Mud Creek Watershed
Restoration Council with assistance from NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP)
and the DWQ Approximately 10 acres of forested wetlands are located along the south side of
Lewis Creek This area is owned by the Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy (CMLC) and was
not included in work conducted in the EEP project area CMLC was involved in the preservation
and conservation of the wetland and was regularly apprised of the stream restoration efforts A
jurisdictional determination was not conducted for this wetland, however, the wetland was
previously delineated Prior to restoration, the stream had been impacted by the
channel ization /straightening and berming of Lewis Creek and the activities associated with the
apple orchards upstream of the project site No wetlands, other than the CMLC site described
above, were found in the project area
The existing surveyed reach of Lewis Creek was classified as an E5 /C5 Typically, E5 stream
types are riffle /pool systems, exhibit low channel width -depth ratios and display moderate
channel sinuosities, which result in the high meander width ratio values E5 channels exhibit
predominantly sand -sized bed substrates, with channel slopes usually less than two percent
(Rosgen, 1996) By and large, E5 channel streambanks are composed of materials finer than that
of the dominant channel bed materials These finer streambank materials are usually stabilized
with extensive riparian or wetland vegetation that forms densely rooted sod mats from grasses,
sedges, and rushes, as well as woody species (Rosgen, 1996) These channels are considered
hydraulically efficient, maintaining a high sediment transport capacity E5 stream channels are
very stable streams, but can become vulnerable to erosion if streambanks are disturbed and /or
significant changes in sediment supply and streamflow occur The C5 designation was added to
the stream classification because the project reach of Lewis Creek has a lower sinuosity that
resembles more of a C -type channel than an E -type channel The stream was probably once
characterized by a gravel and cobble substrate before land disturbance activities and instability of
the streambanks shifted the substrate to a sandy substrate
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitonng Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

6
2.0 PROJECT STRUCTURE, RESTORATION TYPE AND APPROACH
2.1 Protect Structure
Please refer to Figure 2 for a map delineating the restoration reach for Lewis Creek
2.2 Restoration Type and Approach
The mitigation effort for Lewis Creek was determined to be restoration, using a Priority Level 2
approach Stream dimension, pattern and profile'were designed so the new stream will maintain
stability while conveying its watershed's runoff and transporting its sediment load The restored
stream was designed as an E/C channel, which are typically stable Most of the design
parameters are associated with an E channel, but the pattern measurements resemble a C -type
stream A new meander pattern was introduced into the proposed channel to mimic the natural
sinuosity pattern and establish riffle /pool sequences that occur in typical naturally stable streams
Ratios of radius of curvature to bankfull width were designed to be 2 0 to 3 0, which provide a
moderate to very low potential for bank erosion to occur
Original Construction
The pre - existing stream length available for restoration was 1,663 linear feet of Lewis Creek
} I The stream restoration effort consisted of Restoration, Priority Level 2 along the main reach
of Lewis Creek to create 1,750 linear feet of restored stream (Station 0 +00 — 17 +50) The
1 restoration plan also included replanting the streambanks and riparian zone with native
species appropriate to the area
Existing upstream and downstream bridges established the tie -in elevations for the restored
channel and precluded the ability to raise the channel to its historic floodplain Stream
dimension, pattern and profile were designed so the new stream would maintain stability
while conveying contributing runoff and transporting incoming sediment load The proposed
stream was designed as an E/C channel, which is typically stable Most of the design
parameters were associated with an E channel but the pattern measurements resembled a C
type stream A new meander pattern was introduced into the proposed channel to mimic the
natural sinuosity pattern and establish riffle /pool sequences that typically occur in naturally
stable streams Ratios of radius of curvature to bankfull width were designed to be 2 0 to 3 0,
which provide a moderate to very low potential for bank erosion to occur The meandering
was designed to allow the stream to dissipate energy and decrease shear stress
Typical riffle and pool cross - sections were designed and include a bankfull floodplain bench to
assist in flow attenutation The constructed channel will provide a stable bedform found in
E5 /C5 streams with riffle, run, pool, and glide features and will also improve in- stream habitat
for macro invertebrates Root Wad/Log Vane J -Hook Combo structures were installed on the
outside bends of meanders to protect the streambanks while vegetation is establishing and to
provide habitat Rock cross -vanes were used at the upstream end of the project to center stream
flow to the middle of the channel and to provide grade- control The purpose of this vane was
also to remove a mid - channel sand bar that was contributing to the stream's instability A
constructed rock riffle at the downstream end of the project provides a stabile transition from the
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 Apnl 2012

7
flow of the restored reach back into the existing bed elevation of Lewis Creek The designed
dimensions were based on a combination of the dimensionless ratios from the reference reach
Raccoon Branch, the NC Regional Curve for Rural Mountain Streams, Rosgen's stable reference
reach data ranges (Rosgen, 2004a), and existing conditions
The proposed grading of the Lewis Creek project reach included a floodplain bench on outside
meander bends grading up to existing grade at a 2 1 slope On inside meander bends, the ground
was graded to tie into subsequent outside meander bend grading so the water can flow down
valley during larger storm events
Additional Information for the Repair Work
Intense rainstoims during November 29 -30, 2010 produced storm flows with Lewis Creek
that destroyed newly constructed stream banks, dislodged and washed away matting, and
realigned the stream in one section The flow from the storm, combined with the intensified
hydraulic effects from the bridge at the upstream project terminus, eroded a new stream
alignment and abandoned the as -built channel from station 1 +25 to 3 +50 (approximate) The
high flows also eroded streambanks along the entire reach of the stream and deposited a large
amount of sediment (sand) on the as -built excavated floodplain
The repair work required the contractor to re -grade the majority of the stream banks to the
L, designed dimensions, adjust the stream's location from stations 1 +25 to 3 +50 (approximate)
where the stream was relocated during the storm event, widen and straighten the floodplain in
areas where the easement allowed, and excavate the sediment deposition along the as -built
floodplain and in the pools The contractor used some of the excavated material from the
floodplain to fill in the abandoned and degraded sections of channel An additional cross-
vane at approximate station 1 +30 was included in the repair work This structure will add
additional energy dissipation and grade control, which will be needed for reducing the
intensified flows caused by the upstream bridge during heavy rain events Five log vane j-
�— hooks were installed at the locations depicted on the Record Drawings The existing
construction entrance was repaired, and an additional construction entrance, located on the
^~ east side of the bridge, was also included in the repair work plan
During both the original construction and repair work, all of the restoration work occurred within
the conservation easement limits The streambanks and riparian zone were replanted using
native species appropriate to the area
jAll the restoration work will occur within the conservation easement limits The streambanks
and riparian zone were replanted using native species appropriate to the area Some of this
9, 4 material was be harvested from the existing channel
2 3 Project History, Contacts, and Attribute Data
l�
Please refer to Appendix A for project history, contact, and attribute data
! Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
-� As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01
r�
l
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
Apri l 2012

l 1
�t 9
_ period Any change should be evaluated as to whether it is a localized change or something
j larger out of the protect area The following threshold will be considered a concern 1) the D50
increases by 30 percent and 2) the substrate composition has an increase of silt and/or sand by
more than 50 percent
I
3.2 Vegetation
Planted vegetation will be monitored for five years in accordance with the guidelines and
procedures developed by the Carolina Vegetation Survey -EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al ,
2006) To achieve vegetative success criteria the average number of planted stems per acre must
exceed or meet 320 stems/acre after the third year of monitoring, 290 stems /acre after four years,
and 260 stems/acre after the fifth year of protect monitoring High threat invasive species as
defined in Version 2 0 of the EEP Monitoring Template should be limited in their spatial extent
and density such that survival and diversity of native woody trees and shrubs is not
compromised If noxious plants are identified as problematic on the site, the monitoring team
will develop and implement a species - specific control plan During the five -year monitoring
r—, period, EEP will, where necessary, contract with specialists qualified to remove, treat, or
otherwise manage undesirable plant or animal species, including physical removal and use of
}- herbicides
Monitoring will also include photo documentation of vegetative communities within monitoring
plots Photographs will be taken from the monument control (southwest corner of each plot)
3.3 Hydrology
Stream hydrology attainment will be monitored in accordance to the USACE (2003) standards
By the end of the five year monitoring period, two or more bankfull events must occur in
separate years within the restoration reach
I'
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
< As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01
I
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
April 2012

10
4.0 MONITORING PLAN
Methods employed for the project were a combination of those established by the EEP Baseline
Monitoring Document Guidance (2010) and the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003)
Vegetation assessments will be performed following the Carolina Vegetation Survey -EEP Level
2 Protocol (Lee et al , 2006) The Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding
areas by Alan S Weakley was used as the taxonomic standard for all vegetation nomenclature
for this report Please refer to Appendix B for the baseline monitoring data
Monitoring shall be conducted for a minimum of five years or until success criteria are met, as
required in the guidelines The initial baseline assessment was conducted in April and July,
2011
4.1 Hydrology Attainment and Bankfull Verification
Stream flow will be monitored to determine the occurrence of bankfull events on Lewis Creek's
main channel A manual crest gauge has been installed along Lewis Creek and will be
monitored annually to capture stream flow data and carry out necessary gauge maintenance
Should gauge malfunction occur, observations of wrack lines, sediment deposition, or other
indicators of bankfull events may serve to augment gauge observations
4 2 Stream Channel Stability and Geomorphology
Lewis Creek will be visually monitored for stability and vegetation establishment along the
entire stream reach Additionally, stream monitoring will be conducted to evaluate the stability
and function of the restoration reach Geomorphic and stream assessments will be performed
following guidelines outlined in the Stream Channel Reference Sites An Illustrated Guide to
Field Techniques (Harrelson et al, 1994), methodologies utilized in the Rosgen stream
assessment and classification document ( Rosgen, 1994 and 1996), and in the Stream Restoration
a Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al, 2003)
4 2 1 Dimension
Permanent cross - sections were established to represent the restored reach stream type and
capture the variability in the dimensional features Five cross - sections were established
approximately 20 bankfull width lengths apart (three riffles and 2 pools) Permanent monuments
have been installed that are recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a
GPS unit Each assessment following the initial as-built survey should include re- surveying the
same permanent cross - sections Cross - section surveys will detail the stream, bank, and
floodplain topography of the channel including, but not limited to top of bank, bankfull, at all
breaks in slope, water's edge, and the channel thalweg Subsequently, each cross - section's
bankfull area, width -depth Ratio, entrenchment ratio and bank height ratios will be calculated for
comparison with the requirements as described in the EEP monitoring and mitigation protocols
Reference photographs looking upstream and downstream at each cross - section were taken with
the as -built Subsequently, assessments following the mitial as -built survey should capture the
same reference photograph location and direction
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

11
4 2 2 Profile
One longitudinal profile will be conducted along the entire length of the restored channel The
beginning of the longitudinal profile will begin at North Ridge Road and continue downstream
1,750 -feet to the project terminus Each assessment following the initial as -built survey should
include re- surveying the same longitudinal profile Calculated values for water slope, riffle and
pool facet slopes, riffle length, pool -to -pool spacing, and pool depth will be done annually to
evaluate changes in the bedform
4 2 3 Pattern
Evaluation of the stream pattern was assessed and ranges were defined Stream pattern
measurements will only need to be conducted in year five and only if the dimension or profile
measurements indicate pattern assessment might be necessary Calculated sinuosity, meander
width ratio, radius of curvature /bankfull width ratio, and meander length/bankfull width ratio
will be used to evaluate channel migration/changes over the five year monitoring period
4 2 4 Visual Assessment
Visual assessments will be conducted along the restored reach annually and will follow the
EEP's latest monitoring format documentation
4 2 5 Bank Stability Assessments
Streambed and bank composition will provide indicators for changes in channel form,
hydraulics, erosion rate, and sediment supply (Doll et al , 2003) on the restoration reach Two
prediction methodologies will be used to determine the stream's potential for bank erosion
Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) and Near -Bank Stress (NBS) The EEP visual assessment
will also be performed annually to catalog the percentage of active bank erosion The BEHI
analysis will be used to assess the physical properties of the stream bank and to determine the
possible sources of bank instability The NBS will be used to assess the bank with respect to the
stress associated with the velocity in that portion of the channel Using these methodologies, the
expected annual sediment load produced from a stream system will be estimated and compared
to pre - construction conditions BEHI and NBS assessments will only be conducted in year five
4 3 Vegetation Monitoring
Planted woody vegetation will be monitored in accordance with the guidelines and procedures
developed by the Carolina Vegetation Survey -EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al, 2006) to monitor
and assess the planted woody vegetation in the streambank riparian and floodplain areas Five
standard (10x10 meter (m)) vegetation plots were established within the project easement area
Plots were randomly established within planted portions of the stream restoration area to capture
the heterogeneity of the designed vegetation communities The plot corners have been marked
and are recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit Reference
photographs at the origin looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner were taken
with the as -built Reference photographs were taken from the monument control (southwest
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

12
corner of each plot) Subsequently, assessments following the initial as -built survey should
capture the same reference photograph direction and location
4 4 Photograph Reference Points
Permanent photographic reference points established along the channel will be used to support
the qualitative visual assessments for the annual monitoring and subjectively evaluate channel
aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of
erosion control measures Photographs will indicate the presence/absence of developing bars
within the channel, excessive bank erosion, changes in channel depth over time, and maturation
of riparian vegetation Reference photographs looking upstream and downstream at each photo
point were taken with the as -built Subsequently, assessments following the initial as -built
survey should capture the same reference photograph direction and location
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
April 2012

13
5.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLANS
Potential problem areas, such as streambank instability, widespread aggradation/degradation, or
unsuccessful vegetation establishment will be evaluated during the annual monitoring If, during
the annual review of the stream reach, a failure is noted, the areas will be evaluated and
discussed with EEP staff to determine if remedial maintenance measures are required to resolve
the problem If remediation of an area is required, a proposal will be submitted for remedial
requirements If remediation of an area is required, a proposal will be submitted for any
necessary work If the vegetation success criteria are not achieved, supplemental plantings will
be performed with native species
n Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

14
6.0 AS -BUILT
The Lewis Creek restoration construction was completed in April 2011 and the as -built survey
was completed in May 2011 The as -built survey included locating the channel boundaries,
location of structures, cross - sections, monitoring features such as photo points, and vegetation
plots All permanent monitoring markers were located in the survey as well A half size as -built
plan is provided as Appendix D with pre - construction, design and post - construction locations
and alignments for the protect
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01
1 ^I
� y
ft�
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
April 2012

15
7.0 REFERENCES
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E.,
2003. Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites:
An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. (2006). CVS -EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Version 4.0. Retrieved from
http://www.nceep.net/business/monitorinWvejz/datasheets.htm.
Rosgen, D. L., 1994. "A Classification of Natural Rivers ", Catena, Vol. 22, pp. 169 -199.
Rosgen, D L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs,
CO.
Rosgen, D.L. 2004. In press. Waterhhed Assessment for sediment supply and river stability
(WARSSS). USEPA, Watershed Branch, Natioinal Headquarters, Washington D.C., 380pp.
Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North
Carolina, third approximation. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural
Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC.
USACE (2003) Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR -DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
Weakley, A.S. 2008. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Florida, and
Surrounding Areas (Draft April 2008). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Chapel Hill,
NC.
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc.
SCO Project No. 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

APPENDIX A
GENERAL TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Component Map
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

1-26
'. ,'f � / ; i.r i ���J Z., -_f -�I i .`�* � F % i.,�? � i, r!(% � r+! �._ \� _ � � °i —4. N
Ub
1 '64 `I i
2)
M fie e M LHJ 1850
IM,
117
4r
22V
21
-NA
A
0 Project Area
E IDGE
N
7
-7
f4f
1724
1722
RC
At4. I
J 1 . . . . . . . . .
A 4
6, 4
C7
�7
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map, Bat Cave, NC Quad
J
(17
To access the site from Interstate 26 in Hendersonville, NC, take the US 64 East
exit. Travel five miles and turn right on Laycock Road. Continue 0.4 miles and
f turn left on North Ridge Road. Lewis Creek flows between the CMLC and Ingles 2,000 1,000 0 2,000
properties. Entrance is to the left just before North Ridge Road crosses Lewis Creek. Feet '-t
NEESE= — Lr
MIC11,411 Wi
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project 733 Figure 1
LT Project Location Map April 2012
t Henderson County, NC Scale - 1" = 2,000'

,:;-. - • x•,w eta h !�, 'f� �� <.f 'Lh Pq 40 rN F71 :
t* �
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) and is encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is bordered by land R T'
under private ownership. Accessing the site may require traversing areas nearoralong the easement :f
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not permitted Access by authorized personnelp , •
of state and federal agencies or their designeestcontractors involved in the development, oversight and
stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their defined roles.
Any intended site visitation or activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles and 4
activities requires prior coordination with EEP. Y #y� •
Ilk
6s• ��
•
z
y
M
' Y t7
`y F
1
r
4 .
Legend
Restoration Reach
Conservation Easement
Veg Plot
Cross - Section
Photo Point
USGS Blueline Stream
ireI ,r v r�yarul
s
4
r � t
x,
y+c r
•
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project 733
Project Component Map
Henderson County, NC
Feet 1
Figure 2
April 2012
Scale - 1" = 200'

Table 1 Protect Components
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
SCO# 06-06799 -01, EEP Project 733
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non- Ripanan
Wedand
Buffer
Nitrogen Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorus Nutrient
Offset
Type
11750
RE
R
RE
R
RE
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
1,750
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Prpone
Component
Stationing/Location
FeetlAcres
Feet/Acres r
Approach
Restoration -or-
Restoration
Equivalent
Restoration
Footage or Acres
Mitigation Ratio
Lewis Creek
0+00-17+50
1,663 if
I P II
I Restoration
1,750 If
I 1
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream Of)
Riparian Wetland (ac)
Non- Ripanan
Wetland ac
Buffer (sq ft)
Upland (ac)
Rivenne
Non - Rivenne
Restoration R
1 750
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
1750
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
' BMP Elements
Element
Location
Purpose/Function
Notes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Appendix A - General Tables and Figures
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
SCO# 06- 06799 -01, EEP Project 733
Activity or Report
Data Collection Completed
Actual Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
Sep-07
Dec -07
Final Design - Construction Plans
Aug-09
Aug-09
Construction
Sep-10
Apr- I I
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area
Apr -11
Apr -11
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
Apr -11
Apr -11
B &B plantings for reach/segments
Apr- I I
A r -1l
Bare root and livestake plantings for reach/segments
Apr -11
Apr -11
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring -
baseline
Jul -11
Dec -11
Section 404 Permit
Sep-07
February 21 2008
Year 1 Monitoring
2012
2012
Year 2 Monitoring
2013
2013
Year 3 Monitoring
2014
2014
Year 4 Monitoring
2015
2015
Year 5 Monitoring
2016
2016
Appendix A - General Tables and Figures
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitonng Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Table 3 Project Contact Table
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
SCO #06- 06799 -01, EEP Project 733
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
Designer
309 E Morehead Street, Suite 110
Charlotte, NC 28202
Matthew Clabau h PE
704 -527 -4106
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc
Construction Contractor
P O Box 1905
Mt Airy, NC 27030
Stephen James
336 - 320 -3849
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc
Planting Contractor
P O Box 1905
Mt Airy, NC 27030
Stephen James
336- 320 -3849
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc
Seeding Contractor
P O Box 1905
Mt Airy, NC 27030
Stephen James
336 - 320 -3849
Green Resources
Seed Mix Sources
Rodney Montgomery
336 - 215 -3458
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Mellow Marsh Farm, Inc
919- 742 -1200
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
Monitoring Performers
6801 Governor's Lake Pkwy
Baseline Year 0
Norcross GA 30071
Stream Monitoring, POC
Alison Nichols, 704 - 301 -7563
-Vegetation Monitoring, POC
Appendix A - General Tables and Figures
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration SCO 06-06799 -01 EEP Project #733
Project Information
Project Name
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
Project County
Henderson County, NC
Project Area acres
253
Project Coordinates
35 °2240 5N 82°2056 1 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Blue Ridge
Project River Basin
French Broad
USGS RUC for Protect 8 digit)
06010105
NCDW Sub -basm for Project and Reference
04 03 -02
Protect Drainage Area acres
2,560
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
0
CGIA Land Use Classification
2 01
Reach Summary Information*
Parameters
Length of reach (linear feet)
1 750
Valley classification
Vill
Drainage area acrrs
1,856
NCDWQ stream identification score
N/A
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
N/A
Morphological Description stream
Perennial
Evolutionaly trend
Agricultural
Underlying mapped soils
Codorus and Hatboro loam
Drainage Class
moderate to poor
Soil H dnc status
Hatboro - hydric
Sloe
00030
FEMA classification
100 year flood lain
Native vegetation community
Montane Alluvial Forest and Piedmont/Mountain Alluvial Forest intermediate community type
Percent comDosition of exotic invasive vegetation
U
Weiland Summary Information"
Parameters
Size of Weiland acres
Wetland Type (non riparian, riparian nvenne or riparian
non nvenne
Mapped Soil Series
Drainage class
Soil Hydne Status
Source of Hydrology
Hydrologic im invent
Native vegetation community
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
Regula to Considerations
Regulation
Apphcable9
Resolved9
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
SAW 2008 0072
Waters of the United States Section 401
Yes
Yes
SAW 2008 0072
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
SAW 2008 0072
Historic Preservation Act
N/A
N/A
N/A
Costal Zone Management Act (CZMA)ICostal Area
Management Act CAMA
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
No
Henderson County Floodp sin Development Permit Issue 5/20
LOMR submitted Nov 2011 waiting on FEMA approval Dec 2011
Essential Fishenes Habitat
N/A
N/A
N/A
�--� 'This site is not within an EEP planning area but n in a Targeted Local Watershed
**Wetland mitigation was not included for this restoration project
"N /A news do not apply / items are unavailable / T nears are unknown
I� Appendix A - General Tables and Figures
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)
{t`
4�1

I�
`.J
h
APPENDIX B
MORPHOLOGICAL SUMMARY DATA AND PLOTS
Table 5 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 6 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Longitudinal Plot
Cross - section Plots
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01
Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
April 2012

Exhibit Table 5 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project Number 733 (1750 11)
Parameter
Gau e3
Regional Curve
Pre - Existing Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
LL
UL
Ea.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
qD
n
can
Mod,
Max
SID
n
Min
Med
Max
Bankfull Width ft
22111
2521
300
1590
2471
2265
2398
2381
2538
108
5
Flood prone Width ft
>100
10000
6000
7091
11425
11493
14886
2802
5
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
2 12
256
300
FOO
-
1 54
225
1 60
1 96
1 89
260
039
5
Bankf ill Max Depth ft
355
458
300
270
339
264
355
309
587
131
5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
5141
-
5522
300
-
2376
5550
3631
47 15
4425
6597
1129
5
Width/Depth Ratio
825
1151
300
1067
1100
1
976
1256
1236
1462
1 94
5
Entrenchment Ratio
>2 2
600
629
648
240
279
479
495
625
1 25
5
iBank Height Ratio
153
-
1 79
-
125
-
125
-
-
too
100
100
100
100
000
5
d50 (mm)
028
028
-
028
-
075
-
-
075
021
3146
1930
10538
4346
5
Profill-
Riffle Len ft
764
2150
900
970
12190
1175
3418
5875
Riffle SI a ft/ft
000
002
900
1 74
240
288
001
002
005
Pool Length ft
690
29411
1900
3030
12540
1492
1939
2386
Pool Max Depth ft
348
472
300
490
539
050
080
1 19
Pool Spacing ft
3560
8458
1600
4200
16300
7630
17200
6264
18830
27742
2Pool Volume (ft')
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft 2200 5100 2600 52 00 4942 9883
Radius of Curvature ft 14 37 6928 29 00 8 50 I S 80 49 42 76 60
Rc Bankfull width ft/ft 068 275 2900 054 101 200 3 10
Meander Wavelength ft 4300 16300 2600 30 00 8400 19767 29650
Meander Width Ratio 204 647 2600 3 32 200 400
°SC %/Sa ° /u/G %/C%/B %/Be%
-
-
-
-
°d l 6/d35/d50/d84/d95/d /dis° (mm)
(Riffle/Pool)
0 07/0 1
0 16/0 18
0 28/0 28
9 1 /0 95
16/ 10 28
0 12
0 30
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib /ft2
t7564
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankful
Stream Power (transport capacity) W /m2
-
-
-
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Arra (SM)
4.00
2.90
4.00
brivervious cover estimate 0
Rosizen Classification
E5/C5
E5
EJ/ 5
C5
Bankfull Velocity (fbs)
2.63
5.50
2.52
Bankful Disch a cfs
140'
13100
140
Valley Len ft
-
-
1326
Channel Thalweg Len ft
1750
1750
Sinuosity ft
1 II
130
132
129
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
00030
00109
00025
00022
BF sloe tuft
00024
SBankful Flood lain Area (acres)
-
-
6Proportion over wide ( %)
-
Entrenchment Class R Range)
Incision Class HR Ran
BEHI VLo /�° /moo /moo /dVHO /�%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
i 1 al or Other
• Calculated using HECRAS
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross- section surveys and the longitudinal profile 2 = Methodology should be descnbed/ated 3 = For protects with a proximal USGS gauge mama with the project reach (added bankfull venfipbon rare)
4 = Riffle Run Pool Glide Step SiltlClay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock dip = max pave disp = max subpave Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in 5 Utilizing survey data produce and estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres which should be the area from the
top of bank to the toe of the terrace nser /slope 6 = Proportion of reach determined to be over wide based on the visual survey using the regional curve UL for wdth (see monitoring methodology document pending) 7 = Entrenchment Gass (ER ranges (see monitoring methodology document pending) 8 = Incision Class
(BHR ranges see monitoring methodology document pending) Footnotes 6 7 8 involve planned pro-construction monitoring for future projects If the referenced monitoring methodology document is not available at the time of contracting or RFP review the provider is not expected to address these parameters
Appendix B Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Exhibit Table 6 Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Dimensional Parameters - Cross Section
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Project #733
PARAMETER
Cross - Secti
on i (Riffle)
Cros
ection 2 (Pool)
DIMENSION AND SUBSTRATE
Baseline
MYI -2010
MY2 -2011
MY3 -2012
MY4 -2013
MY5 -2014
MY+
Baseline
MYI -2010
MY2 -2011
MY3 -2012
MY4 -2013
MY5 -2014
MY+
Based on fixed baseline bankfuW elevation'
Bankfull Width ft
234
227
Flood prone Width ft
11491
1142
Bankfull Mean Depth
1 9
1 6
Bankfull Max Depth ft
32
3 1
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ftZ
443
363
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
124
142
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
49
50
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
101
10
Based on current/developing current/developing bankfull feature
Bankfull Width ft
Flood prone Width ft
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth ft
Bankf ill Cross - sectional Area (ft)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
Cross Sectional Area between end pins ftZ
d50 (mm)l
021
1054
PARAMETER
Cross - Section
3 Poo
Cross
- Section 4
e
Cross - Section
5
e
DIMENSION AND SUBSTRATE
Baseline
MYI -2010
MY2 -2011
MY3 -2012
MY4 -2013
MY5 -2014
MY+
Baseline
MY1 -2010
MY2 -2011
MY3 -2012
MY4 -2013
MY5 -2014
MY+
Baseline
MYI -2010
MY2 -2011
MY3 -2012
MY4 -2013
MY5 -2014
MY+
Based on fixed baseline bankfutH elevation'
Bankfull Width ft
247
238
254
Flood prone Width ft
1223,
1489
709
Bankfull Mean Depth
1 7
2 0
2 6
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2 6
3 0
5 9
Banldull Cross - sectional Area ftZ
41 7
476
660
Bankfull WidftDepth Ratio
14 6
119
9 8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
5 0
63
2 8
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
10
10
1
1 10
Based on current/developing current/developing bankfull feature
Bankfull Width ft
Flood prone Width ft
Bankfull Mean Depth
Bankfull Max Depth ft
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area (ft)
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
BaiiUall Bankheight Ratio
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ft)
d50 (mm )j
3201
193
1
0 4
1 = Widths and depths for each resurvey will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensionalldepositional development 2 = Based on the elevation of any dominant depositional feature that develops and is observed at the time of survey If the baseline datum remains the only significant depositional feature
then these tow sets of dimensional parameters will be equal however if another depositional feature of significance develops above or below the baseline bankfull datum then this should be tracked and quantfed in these calls
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B - Morphological Summary
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)
Appendix B
•
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 733
Longitudinal Profile
2011 Monitoring Year
MYO
2154.00
2153.00
2152.00
- 2151.00
ca
L
2150.00
r+
W
0 2149.00
a
W
2148.00
2147.00
2146.00
2145.00
0 200 400
600 800
1000 1200
1400 1600 1800 2000
Station (ft)
TW (MYO 2011)
......••• WS (MYO -2011)
• LBKF (MYO- 7/2011)
• RBKF (MYO- 7/2011) O Cross - sections
Appendix B - Morphological Summary
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)
•
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Cross- Section Plot
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring 2011
Pro'ect Name Lewis Creek
EEP Project Number 733
Cross - Section ID X8-1, Pool, +292.52
Survey
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.80
w
XS-1:
View Upstream
Bankfull Width tt
Date
7/2011
2154.96
XS-1:
View Downstream
Bankfull Mean De th ft
Station
Elevation
Notes
W/D Ratio
12.36
Entrenchment Ratio
4.92
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
99.44
2152.32
2149.00
0
2155.94
xs1 -I t
66.42
2151.05
xsl
81.46
1.66
2155.14
xs1
3.64
2154.32
xs1
6.62
2152.82
xs1
2151.36
xsl
84.44
2152.1
9.45
2152.1
xsl
xs1
61.94
2150.37
xsl
68.45
2151.68
12.41
2152.32
xsl
15.59
2152.23
xs1
xs1
62.05
2150.4
xsl
69.58
2151.83
18.71
2152.18
xs1
21.89
2152.12
xsl
xs1
63.55
2150.43
xs1
72.45
2151.93
24.75
2152.25
xs1
xs1
1]4.21
2154.27
xs1
64.43
2150.47
27.39
2152.42
xs1
30.64
2152.32
xs1
xs1
117.02
33.53
2152.36
xsl
36.38
2152.24
xs1
39.82
2152.24
xsl
42.64
2152.17
xsl
43.59
2152.28
xs1
44.51
2151.9
xsl
45.34
2151.3
xs1
46.17
2150.71
xs1
47.48
2149.85
xs1
48.33
2149.44
lew
49.45
2149.11
xsl
50.34
2148.9
xsl
51.48
2148.64
xsl
52.52
2148.77
xsl
53.48
2148.94
xsl
55.55
2149.21
xsl
56.41
2149.45
rew
57.51
2149.61
xsl
58.46
2149.72
xsl
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.80
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
44.25
Bankfull Width tt
Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.80
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
44.25
Bankfull Width tt
23.36
Flood Prone Area Elevation tt
2154.96
Flood Prone Width ft
114.93
Bankfull Mean De th ft
1.89
Bankfull Max Depth ft
3.16
W/D Ratio
12.36
Entrenchment Ratio
4.92
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Lewis Creek (Unnamed Tributary) - MYO
Cross - Section 1 -Pool
2157.00
Notes
Station
2156.00
Notes
Station
2155.00
Notes
Station
2I 54.00
b
Notes
59.59
2153.00
2152.00
0
xs1
65.58
............. ............................... ....................... .... ...............................
2151.00
d
m
78.55
2152.02
zlso.00
99.44
2152.32
2149.00
60.51
2150.08
21 as.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00
Station (ft)
MYO- AsBuilt 2011 •••••• Bankfull
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
59.59
2149.9
xs1
65.58
2150.9
xsl
78.55
2152.02
xsl
99.44
2152.32
xsl
60.51
2150.08
xsl
66.42
2151.05
xsl
81.46
2152.08
xs1
102.37
2152.17
xsl
61.47
2150.15
xsl
67.56
2151.36
xsl
84.44
2152.1
xs1
105.31
2152.25
xs1
61.94
2150.37
xsl
68.45
2151.68
rbf
87.43
2152.22
xsl
108.23
2152.77
xs1
62.05
2150.4
xsl
69.58
2151.83
xsl
90.49
2152.24
xsl
111.23
2153.65
xs1
63.55
2150.43
xs1
72.45
2151.93
xs1
93.35
2152.2
xs1
1]4.21
2154.27
xs1
64.43
2150.47
xs1
75.38
2151.99
xs1
96.59
2152.19
xs1
117.02
2150.95
xs1 -r t
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Cross - Section Plot
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 370
Baseline Monitoring 2011
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.26
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
36.31
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
7/2011
2154.35
Flood Prone Width ft
114.23
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.60
Bankfull Max Depth ft
Pro'ect Name Lewis Creek
EEP Pro'ect Number 733
Cross- Section ID X8-2, Riffle +51 L9
Surv
W/D Ratio
14.16
XS-2:
View Upstream
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
112.14
XS-2:
View Downstream
59.62
Station
Elevation
Notes
2151.56
� 2151
97.21
2151.61
0
114.99
2148.17
2150
64.43
2151.5
0
2154.44
xs2 -I t
2149
100.47
2151.68
x52
3.53
2154.75
xs2
6.37
2153.42
xs2
9.98
2152.27
xs2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
MYO- AsBuilt ...... Bankfull
118.61
2149.3
xs2 -r t
12.84
2151.62
xs2
88.5
2151.57
xs2
106.35
2151.62
x52
15.62
2151.35
xs2
18.75
2151.22
xs2
91.25
2151.53
xs2
109.38
2151.61
xs2
21.32
2151.45
xs2
64.43
2150.47
x51
75.38
2151.99
x51
24.58
2151.31
xs2
27.56
2151.51
xs2
30.65
2151.45
xs2
33.52
2151.29
xs2
34.43
2151.21
xs2
35.45
2151.25
xs2
37.46
2151.24
xs2
38.38
2150.56
xs2
39.68
2150.31
xs2
40.65
2150.05
xs2
41.58
2149.86
lew
42.78
2148.96
xs2
43.86
2148.87
xs2
45.29
2148.74
xs2
46.28
2148.7
xs2
47.47
2148.67
xs2
48.53
2148.77
xs2
49.78
2148.68
xs2
50.58
2148.84
rew
51.68
2149.07
xs2
53.06
2149.25
xs2
53.73
2149.64
xs2
55.06
2150.17
xs2
56.5
2150.57
xs2
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.26
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
36.31
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.26
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
36.31
Bankfull Width ft
22.65
Flood Prone Area Elevation tt
2154.35
Flood Prone Width ft
114.23
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.60
Bankfull Max Depth ft
3.09
W/D Ratio
14.16
Entrenchment Ratio
5.04
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Lewis Creek (Unnamed Tributary) - MYO
Cross - Section 2 -Riffle
2156
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
2155
Station
Elevation
Notes
58.11
2150.84
2154
76.29
2151.65
x52
94.3
2151.68
2153
112.14
2151.62
2152
59.62
2151.26
rb
79.41
2151.56
� 2151
97.21
2151.61
0
114.99
2148.17
2150
64.43
2151.5
W
82.63
2151.49
2149
100.47
2151.68
x52
II8.03
2148.76
zlas
67.36
2151.53
x52
85.46
2151.39
2147
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
MYO- AsBuilt ...... Bankfull
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
58.11
2150.84
xs2
76.29
2151.65
x52
94.3
2151.68
x52
112.14
2151.62
x52
59.62
2151.26
rb
79.41
2151.56
x52
97.21
2151.61
x52
114.99
2148.17
x52
64.43
2151.5
x52
82.63
2151.49
x52
100.47
2151.68
x52
II8.03
2148.76
xs2
67.36
2151.53
x52
85.46
2151.39
x52
103.3
2151.57
x52
118.61
2149.3
xs2 -r t
70.65
2151.36
x52
88.5
2151.57
xs2
106.35
2151.62
x52
73.84
2151.62
x52
91.25
2151.53
xs2
109.38
2151.61
xs2
64.43
2150.47
x51
75.38
2151.99
x51
96.59
2152.19
x51
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Cross - Section Plot
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring 2011
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.01
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft2
41.69
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
78011
2153.65
Flood Prone Width ft
122.30
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.69
Bankfull Max Depth ft
Project Name Lewis Creek
EEP Project Number 733
Cross - Section ID XS-3, Riffle, +641.70
Surv
W/D Ratio
XS-3:
View Upstream
4.95
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
120.88
XS-3:
I. b
View Downstream
69.78
Station
Elevation
Notes
2151.05
a
103.09
2151.1
� 2152.00
123.53
2149.61
0
71.34
2149.59
ztst.00
v
86.11
2151.04
0
2154.25
xs3-I t
0.23
2154.12
xs3
3.63
2152.79
xs3
7.03
2151.51
xs3
xs3
109.01
2151.14
2148.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00
Station (ft)
10.09
2150.91
xs3
xs3
92.02
2151
xs3
112.39
2151.11
13.19
2151.18
xs3
15.88
2151.31
xs3
xs3
95.14
2151.06
xs3
115.01
2151.34
19.2
2151.34
xs3
76.51
2151.01
rb
98.06
2151.19
22.57
2151.51
xs3
25.82
2151.08
xs3
29.12
2151.13
xs3
32.13
2151.16
xs3
34.83
2151.08
xs3
37.81
2151.06
xs3
41.2
2151.12
xs3
44.41
2151.13
xs3
47.46
2151.19
xs3
50.17
2151.16
xs3
51.1
2151.03
xs3
52.11
2150.95
xs3
53.34
2150.6
xs3
55.1
2150.09
xs3
55.75
2149.44
xs3
57.57
2148.7
lew
59.08
2148.58
xs3
60.78
2148.38
xs3
62.13
2148.49
xs3
63.19
2148.37
xs3
64.38
2148.43
xs3
65.46
2148.51
xs3
66.94
2148.54
xs3
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.01
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft2
41.69
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
78011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2151.01
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft2
41.69
Bankfull Width ft
24.70
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
2153.65
Flood Prone Width ft
122.30
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.69
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.64
W/D Ratio
14.62
Entrenchment Ratio
4.95
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Lewis Creek (Unnamed Tributary) - MYO
Cross - Section 3 -Riffle
2157.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
2156.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
68.07
2148.69
2155.00
78.69
i
xs3
100.15
2151.14
J2154.00
120.88
2153.3
69.78
2149.1
2153.00
82.95
2151.05
a
103.09
2151.1
� 2152.00
123.53
2149.61
0
71.34
2149.59
ztst.00
v
86.11
2151.04
w
106.2
2151.12
2150.00
123.75
2154.06
xs3 -r t
72.38
2149.98
2149.00
89.11
2151.01
xs3
109.01
2151.14
2148.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00
Station (ft)
•�+�MYO- AsBuilt •••••• Bankfull
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
68.07
2148.69
rew
78.69
2151.05
xs3
100.15
2151.14
xs3
120.88
2153.3
xs3
69.78
2149.1
xs3
82.95
2151.05
xs3
103.09
2151.1
xs3
123.53
2149.61
xs3
71.34
2149.59
xs3
86.11
2151.04
xs3
106.2
2151.12
xs3
123.75
2154.06
xs3 -r t
72.38
2149.98
xs3
89.11
2151.01
xs3
109.01
2151.14
xs3
73.63
2150.28
xs3
92.02
2151
xs3
112.39
2151.11
xs3
75.23
2150.75
xs3
95.14
2151.06
xs3
115.01
2151.34
xs3
76.51
2151.01
rb
98.06
2151.19
xs3
117.82
2152.31
xs3
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Cross - Section Plot
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring 2011
Bankfull Elevation ft
2149.58
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft=
47.55
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
7/2011
2152.55
Flood Prone Width ft
148.86
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.00
Project Name Lewis Creek
EEP Pro'ect Number 733
Cross - Section ID XS-4, Riffle 1 +214.24
Surv
2.97
W/D Ratio
XS-4: View Upstream
Entrenchment Ratio
6.25
Bank Height Ratio
XS-4: View Downstream
130.1
Station
Elevation
Notes
2148.2
xs4
89.5
2149.8
q 2149.00
0
11(.15
2149.96
ro
133.49
2150.12
'�' 2148.00
u�
72.84
2149.19
xs4
0
2152.13
xs4 -I t
1.23
2151.95
xs4
2.67
2152.11
xs4
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Station (ft)
�MYO- AsBuilt •••••• Bankfull
95.36
2149.82
xs4
6.61
2151.78
xs4
9.34
2151.1
xs4
12.51
2149.96
xs4
98.41
2149.91
xs4
121.44
2150.09
xs4
15.56
2149.8
xs4
18.82
2149.92
xs4
102
2149.86
xs4
124.39
2150.07
xs4
21.52
2149.91
xs4
24.35
2149.77
xs4
105.31
2150.07
xs4
127.06
2150.1
xs4
27.77
2149.84
xs4
30.69
2149.81
xs4
34.44
2149.76
xs4
39.23
2149.8
xs4
42.71
2149.49
xs4
46.11
2149.44
xs4
49.59
2149.58
lb
50.55
2149.48
xs4
51.19
2149.23
xs4
52.37
2148.57
xs4
53.59
2148.11
xs4
55.22
2147.62
xs4
56.51
2147.17
lew
58.25
2146.82
xs4
59.33
2146.7
xs4
60.34
2146.8
xs4
61.63
2146.8
xs4
63.21
2146.61
xs4
64.58
2146.82
xs4
65.91
2146.88
xs4
67.19
2147.16
xs4
68.41
2147.14
rew
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2149.58
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft=
47.55
Bankfull Width ft
e Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2149.58
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft=
47.55
Bankfull Width ft
23.81
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
2152.55
Flood Prone Width ft
148.86
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.00
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.97
W/D Ratio
11.91
Entrenchment Ratio
6.25
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Lewis Creek (Unnamed Tributary) - MYO
Cross - Section 4 -Riffle
2153.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
2152.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
70.12
2147.64
,-, 2151.00
86.65
2149.87
xs4
107.97
2150.03
xs4
130.1
2150.06
2150.00
71.11
2148.2
xs4
89.5
2149.8
q 2149.00
0
11(.15
2149.96
ro
133.49
2150.12
'�' 2148.00
u�
72.84
2149.19
xs4
92.44
2149.84
2lazoo
114.7
2150.14
xs4
136.43
2150.16
2146.00
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Station (ft)
�MYO- AsBuilt •••••• Bankfull
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
70.12
2147.64
xs4
86.65
2149.87
xs4
107.97
2150.03
xs4
130.1
2150.06
xs4
71.11
2148.2
xs4
89.5
2149.8
xs4
11(.15
2149.96
xs4
133.49
2150.12
xs4
72.84
2149.19
xs4
92.44
2149.84
xs4
114.7
2150.14
xs4
136.43
2150.16
xs4
74.45
2t49.75
rb
95.36
2149.82
xs4
118.46
2149.99
xs4
139.48
2150.2(
xs4
77.17
2149.86
xs4
98.41
2149.91
xs4
121.44
2150.09
xs4
142.74
2151.15
xs4
80.46
2149.81
xs4
102
2149.86
xs4
124.39
2150.07
xs4
145.42
2151.65
xs4
83.92
2149.81
xs4
105.31
2150.07
xs4
127.06
2150.1
xs4
148.86
2152.19
xs4 -r t
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Cross - Section Plot
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration, EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring 2011
Pro'ect Name Lewis Creek
EEP Pro'ect Number 733
Cross-Section ID X8-5, Pool, 1 +564.9
Survey �.
y
c.._ .
View Downstream
XS-5: View Upstream XS-5. e
2148.95
Station
Elevation
Notes
Date
0
2150.75
xs5 -I t
2.96
2149.61
xs -5
Bankfull Max Depth ft
5.87
W/D Ratio
6.1
2149.28
xs -5
9.34
2149.16
xs -5
11.9
2149.19
xs -5
z1a7.00
15.31
2149.19
xs -5
2146.00
18.24
2149.11
xs -5
21.29
2149.19
xs -5
zlaa.00
24.3
2148.95
lb
2143.00
25.96
2148.99
xs -5
27.16
2148.73
xs -5
28
2148.86
xs -5
29.3
2148.68
xs -5
31.23
2147.89
xs -5
32.16
2147.61
xs -5
32.88
2146.49
lew
34.54
2146.22
xs -5
36.47
2146.29
xs -5
37.06
2146.34
xs -5
38.38
2146.26
xs -5
39.67
2146.13
xs -5
40.95
2146.07
xs -5
42.05
2145.86
xs -5
42.99
2145.77
xs -5
44.62
2146.49
rew
45.41
2143.08
xs -5
47.22
2144.09
xs -5
47.74
2144.99
xs -5
49.39
2145.53
xs -5
50.81
2145.82
xs -5
53.55
2149.92
rb
56.4
2149.86
xs -5
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2148.95
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
65.97
Bankfull Width ft
Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
2148.95
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
65.97
Bankfull Width ft
25.38
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
2154.82
Flood Prone Width ft
70.91
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
2.60
Bankfull Max Depth ft
5.87
W/D Ratio
9.76
Entrenchment Ratio
2.79
Bank Hei ht Ratio
1.00
Lewis Creek (Unnamed Tributary) - MYO
Cross - Section 5 -Pool
-- -- -----
2153.00
..�--
2149.73
i
2152.00
2149.84
xs -5
65.83
2151.00
xs -5
68.83
2151.38
2150.00
70.74
2151.61
b2149.00
70.91
2152.02
� 2148.00
x
z1a7.00
0
2146.00
zlas.00
zlaa.00
2143.00
2142.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Station (ft)
MYO- AsBuilt 2011 •••••• Bankfull
Station
Elevation
Notes
59.78
2149.73
xs -5
62.79
2149.84
xs -5
65.83
2150.47
xs -5
68.83
2151.38
xs -5
70.74
2151.61
xs -5
70.91
2152.02
xS5 -r t
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring
Project Name: Lewis Creek
D50 0
Cross-Section: I
D84 1
Cumulative Percent
D95 3
Feature: Pool
MY0.4/2011
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
—
Silt/Clay
silticlay
0.062
0
0%
0%
90%
Sand
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
0%
80%
fine sand
0.250
72
70%
70%
70%
a 60%
medium sand
0.50
0
0%
70%
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
70%
a 50%
i 40%
very coarse sand
2.0
20
19% 1
89%
I
I
�
Gravel
very fine gravel
4.0
7
7%
96%
= 305A
fine gravel
5.7
3
3%
99%
20%
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
99%
10%
i
medium gravel
11.3
1
1%
100%
0%
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
100%
�y oN do o
ti
Particle She (mm)
—MYO.4 /2011
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
100%
course suet
32.0
0
0%
100%
coarse
45
0
0%
100%
_very gravel
very coarse gravel
64
0
0%
100%
Cobble
small cobble
90
0
0%
100%
Individual Class Percent
80%
medium cobble
128
0
0%
100%
large cobble
180
0
0%
100 °i°
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
small boulder
362
1 0
0%
100%
70%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
Boulder
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
60%
C
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
50%
X
Bedrock I bedrock 40096 0 0% 100%
TOTAL % of whole count 103 100% 100%
Summpry Data
40%
30%
20%
v 10%
E
ci .tio y1 .ti'L ,ti'b ,Sb ,tih .tiro .v1 .ti0 ti9 ,t0 ti~ titi ,y0 .tib
Particle Size (mm)
a MYO- 4/2011
Appendix B - Morphological Summary
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)
D50 0
0.21
D84 1
1.73
D95 3
3.67
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring
Project Name: Lewis Creek
Cross - Section: 2
Cumulative Percent
Feature: Itiffle
MYO-412011
Description
Material _
Size (mm)
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
Hill
Z'
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
0
0%
0%
90%
Sand
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
0%
80%
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
0%
70%
medium sand
0.50
17
17%
17%
S 60%
d so%
ll
1
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
17%
very coarse sand
2.0
4
4%
1 21%
40%
1 Hill
I
i I I I I
I
Gravel
very fine gravel
4.0
0
0%
1 21%
.1
30%
—r-T
-4-
fine gravel
5.7
o
0%
21%
q 20%
IM-Op"
fine gravel
8.0
2
2%
23%
10% i oFi H l lil
0%
01* N
Particle Size (mm)
—MYO-4/2011
medium gravel
11.3
2
2%
25%
medium gravel
16.0
3
3%
28%
course gravel
22.3
1
1%
29%
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
29%
45
2
2%
31%
very coarse gravel
very coarse wave]
3
3%
34%
Cobble
small cobble
E64
90
7
7%
1 41%
Individual Class Percent
25%
medium cobble
128
21
21%
1 63%
large cobble
180
I !?
21
21%
1 84%
very large cobble
256
12
12%
1 96%
Boulder
small boulder
362
4
4%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
20%
-C
§
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
1 tare boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
15%
ma
!2
ck bedrock 40096 0 0% 100%
Bedrock
TOTAL % of whole count 99 100% 1000%
Summary Data
D5 15038
D8� 181.00
0 1
D95 249.98
10%.
5%
V
C
0%
C5 '�Z' '� '�' .y ", '�' '\ '% 'C5
Particle Size (mm)
8 MYO-4/2011
Appendix B - Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring
Project Name: Lewis Creek
Data
D50 3
Cross - Section: 3
D84 2
Cumulative Percent
D95 2
Feature: Rime
MY0.4/2011
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
0
0%
0%
90%
I
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
0%
80%
70%
•
I
I!
—
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
0%
Send
medium sand
0.50
27
27%
27%
60%
i 50%
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
27%
P""",
ve coarse sand
2.0
7
7%
. 34%
40%
=
ve fine avel
4.0
3
3%
37%
!
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
37%
11 20%
fine wave]
8.0
0
0%
37%
V
10%
medium gravel
11.3
3
3%
40%
I ! 1
0%
o
Particle She 11
�MV03 /2011
Gravel
medium gravel
16.0
1
1%
41%
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
41%
course gravel
32.0
9
9%
50%
very coarse gravel
45
1
1%
51%
ve coarse avel
64
0
0%
51%
Cobble
small cobble
90
6
6%
57%
Individual Class Percent
30%
medium cobble
128
8
8%
65%
large cobble
180
15
15%
80 °ro
very lar a cobble
256
12
12%
92%
Boulder
small boulder
362
8
8%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
25%
-c 20•
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
g
Bedrock
bedrock
40096
0
0%
100%
15%
LJ
TOTAL % of whole count 100 100% 1000/6
10%
A
9
3 5%
v
c
0%
'Y ti N b h 6 1 B Pi .y0 ,y'v .y'L .ti3 yb ,yy .yro ,y1 ,y0 .yoi ,tiQ .y1 .l'L .t''5 ,tib
Particle Size (mm)
■ MYO-4 /2011
Summa D
Data
D50 3
32
D84 2
205.33
D95 2
295.75
ng Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring
Project Name: Lewis Creek
Data
D50 1
Cross - Section: 4
D84 1
Cumulative Percent
D95 1
Feature: Rime
MY0.4/2011
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
- --
—
` 111
f
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
0
0%
0%
90%
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
0%
80%
EA
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
0%
70%
;
11
" III
I
I
Sand
medium sand
0.50
28
22%
22%
60%
a 50%
- --
- - - --
coarse sand
1.00
6
5%
27%
very coarse sand
2.0
7
5%
32%
�' 4015
very fine gravel
4.0
12
9%
41%
23 3095
—
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
41%
E
5 20%
--
Gravel
fine gravel
8.0
1
1%
42%
10%
-
I
medium gravel
11.3
2
2%
44%
0%
Oti O~ y0 o
O
Particle Size (mm)
—MYO -4 /2011
medium gravel
16.0
6
5%
48%
course gravel
22.3
4
3%
52%
course gravel
32.0
1 0
0%
52%
very coarse
45
2
2%
53%
gravel
very coarse gravel
64
8
6%
59%
Cobble
small cobble
90
14
11%
70%
Individual Class Percent
medium cobble
128
33
26%
96%
large cobble
180
5
4%
100 °�°
ve large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
30%
Boulder
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
25%
20%
medium boulder
1024
0
1 0%
1 100%
large boulder
1 2048
0
1 0%
1 100%
Bedrock
bedrock
40096
0
0%
100%
g 15%
D
TOTAL % of whole count 128 100% 100%
10%
A
J
a
� 5%
°e
0%
'v ti '6 D h 0 1 0 A ,ti0 .�1 .�'L ti'b ,tib ,tih .yto ,�'� .y0 ,v9
Particle Size (mm)
al MYO-4 /2011
Summa D
Data
D50 1
19.3
D84 1
110.18
D95 1
126.39
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

Appendix B
Pebble Count Plots
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 733
Baseline Monitoring
Project Name: Lewis Creek
D50 0
0.39
Cross - Section: 5
0.51
Cumulative Percent
100%
0.96
Feature: Pool
MY0.4/2011
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
8
8%
8%
90%
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
8%
80%
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
8%
70%
i,
I
'
!
Sand
medium sand
0.50
75
76%
84%
60%
i 501A
I
coarse sand
1.00
12
12%
96%
very coarse sand
2.0
4
4%
100%
i 40%
_5 30%
I E
!
very fine gravel
4.0
0
0%
100%
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
100%
E
20%
I
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
100%
10%
medium gravel
11.3
0
0%
100%
0%
Gravel
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
100%
o o� 01 y yo y� 000
Particle Size (mm) y
—MYO -4 /2011
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
100%
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
100%
45
0
0%
100%
very coarse gravel
Very coarse gravel
64
0
0%
100%
Cobble
small cobble
90
0
0%
100%
Individual Class Percent
medium cobble
128
0
0%
100%
large cobble
180
0
0%
100 °r°
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
80%
70%
Boulder
small boulder
362
1 0
0%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
6m/
c
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
$ 50%
°
Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100%
TOTAL % of whole count 99 100% 100%
40%
30%
20•/
v
10%
c
0%
y ti 'S P h (b '� 4 of yo yy yti y3 . yd y<, N� y 't y4 yc .y0 ti'r .ti'L .y'6 tia
Particle Size (mm)
MYO- 4/2011
Summa Data
D50 0
0.39
D84 0
0.51
D95 0
0.96
Data and Plots
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document
MY 0 (Baseline)

APPENDIX C
VEGETATION DATA
Table 7 Planted and Total Stem Counts
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

Appendix C
Table 7 Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Lewis Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration/EEP Protect No 733
Baseline Monitoring
Type--Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total
Current Data (MY0412011)
Annual Means
Species
Common Name
Type
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Current Mean
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
T
2
2
1
1
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
S
1
1
1
1
Asimma triloba
pawpaw
S
4
41
1
5
51
3
3
2
2
Betula rngra
river birch
T
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
7
71
3
3
Carpmus carohniana
American hornbeam
T
1
1
2
2
1
1
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
T
1
1
2
2
4
4
2
2
2
2
Ilex opaca
American holly
S
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
Ltriodendron tuhpifera
tuliptree
T
1 2
21
1 1
11
1
1
1
1
Platanus occidentals
American sycamore
T
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
1
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
T
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
Rhus glabra
Ismooth sumac
S
1
11
1
1 1
Plot Area acres
00247
Species Count
5
5
5
1 5
1 6
6
8
8
6
1 6
1 5
1 6
Stem Count
8
8
11
11
12
12
14
14
15
1 15
1 12
12
Stems per Acre
324
324
1 445
445
486
486
567
567
607
1 607
1 486
486
Type--Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total

APPENDIX D
AS -BUILT PLAN SHEETS
Lewis Creek Baseline Monitoring Document and
As -Built Baseline Report Jordan, Jones and Goulding, Inc
SCO Project No 06- 06799 -01 April 2012

1
AN AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LEWIS CREEK STREAM RESTORATION
LEGEND
1
117t0 FUNT (PP -E)
44
,PS CC ITR01 PO NT (I RCN FFE /f AP SET IN CENCFET_)
A
SURETY Ci NTRIX c0 0 -(I ?IN F FF /r_A- %1)
RE-AR/CAP SET B4 DF --C FR
gCix
ca-u-It.
WO6 VANF
W'24s
11MTWAO/LO AI ` r IOOK EOVBr
r
UTJ"I POLE
-- CE --
CONcSRIATON EASrM,N' RCU+DARr (N ^T SJFL• (LD)
- — T-E - -
EMPORARY CDNSTPUtTON EASEMENT (Nor SURW - ,M)
—3,1—
'TERtiEAD W RE
IC
or OF E AN+
ECCL UI Ir4'ER
- - - - --
*nALWEG
—A�—
R00 OF WIN
u
PA[PDjro V A K NC `TAIL
D
RrfU
Q
P001
O
C-,7 A va
ASPNA! T
FCETATOV PLOT ( \TO A)
OR -5.1 MATTFESS
FLEV
FI FVATICN
N 4.1A
NCN1i AMEn'.04 CAIUM T P7
;PC
PED4R WTN CAP
P-
PC NT
EEP PROJECT #733 SCO PROJECT #06 -06- 799 -01
_ 1ti
�1ti4! �1
~� Ii
M-1w
u4aa4 gc+vvcsa
AI.GYTL A14LW RP7 4.T4
= 0141 1111 MSC ]74
SUKV&01C5 %01 E5
I ALL DISTANPES A-d GROJ•10 MEASURELIENTS IN
US SURVEY FEET UNLESS OTHERNSE NOTED
2 AREAS CA CULATFr) -Y THE COORDINATE MEIhCD
3 °ROPERTf S.16JECT TO ALL [ASrM,TNTS R;G4T CF
WAYS AND RESTRCTIONS THAT ARC RECORDED
UhFELDkDCD WRITTEN AND 11.144"31TTEN
4 CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
LONSTRUCIION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES 5110x1
HEREON AERE TARE4 ERLr.M FLAT SURE 7891 AND
PLAT SL DE 8746 ENTITLED- A CONSERVATION
EAWAE41 SURVEY FOR THE STATE OF NO
PREPARro BY JOEL JOHIJSON LAND SUiVEtIm,3
5 8Y GRA711C DETERMNATION FHE CONSERVATION
EASEMENT AREA APPEARS TO uEIN A S°ECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONE AE) W1,ERE BASE FLOW
ELEVATIONS ARE D- TERMINED PER THE FEW! A
NAPr311EO60DDDJ DATED DCTCSFR 2 2008
6 LOG CS OPES ARE CALCULATED TO THE N_AREST
7 STATE PLANE. CCORD,NATES AMU F,FVA,IDIS WERE
DERIVED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITI04S AS -EULT
SURV_Y PLAT SLIDE 7691 AID PLAT SU -E 9348
ALL COORCNA•ES SHOWN HEREON ARE GRCUNO
M_ASkRELIENTS IN US SURVEY FEET
B UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASLO 04 VISBLE ABOVE
GnO 4D STRUCtIRES THEREFORE TH- LOCATION OF
Ur O_RGROAD UTLITIES ARE AF'PROXVATE OR MAY
BE PR =SENT AND NOT SHOWN I•EREON CA-
I BGO- 632 -4949 BEFORE DOGGING
DISTURBED AREA 4 80 ACRES
Iti
,CIA
SHED 2i . -'sue
-'NEB
'S
N a,
� rn
� b -
t
D!1 tp CA! Ful -WIM ITTT
�r
� r
L\
tf C
(NOT TO SCALE) 3 f
D I
I �
E � SITE' r ("4,
1 �,a
VICINITY MAP
LEADFICAIF Or R41RVn
CGwA�EAT O.RYR U347 AY
I awa+R� ac v u'u I FP LLIp 8, KCE CLR 9 f THAT TP S FIAT ,SAS E -AAN
mod' I'�IA� U5DE4 M) SLFERN9CN rROY AN ACTLAI URVE1 MADE
caa Cxr 11 ♦ s FWl S?!
_ IMDcR Nl SLFERVISIOII THE OVSERVA itDN EASEMENT AND
TEV.ORARI COISTRuCT`OV EA5CNENT BUNDARIES MERE NOI
PJR1TYFD AND FIRE WEN FROM PLAT SLIDES 769 AND
E+346 TN,S YAP MEEK TH' 'PECIFICAI UNS I C9 TOPCORAPHIC
''URV_TS AS STA-ED IN To-LE 21 CHAPT'R 56 SECTON 16V6
TiAT THIS. MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN ACLORDAF CE A TH r S
4' -t0 AS AMENDED
WITNESS I" nGINA! S GNATLRE R_GISTRATICh 4 -VBER AND
SEAL TFIIS TIE AI ST DAY Or MAY 201
\� ``WpaW a rlllr
\\ ? 111 CA
ESE ?O rim:
Z L 4111g
14t, gb +�` P14111 P ICE PLS NC -4647
'y'�
D�SN CARD
t�R�� Owic9 S
INDEX OF SHEETS"y'cN�
SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE
I Project Information
2 As -Built Survey Stream Profiles
3 As -Built Survey Stream Data
4 As -Bullt Survey Stream Data

2160
2155
2150
2145
140
LONGITUDINAL PROFILES
2 p o O 0 O O O 0 O o O 0 O O o 0 o O o
o vT o Ln o in o n c fn o t In 0 n o
} + + 4 } + - + + + 4 + + + + y A
p O N 11 M M d d n Ir1 ,O tC1 r n /n CO rn
216,1
2155
2150
r�i /�48 =b• s
r` ry
2140
I
Q' �46d p tom;
+p-4
I a �; i
1
TOP OF BANK
SURFACE
►
I
I
I
2150
I
I
I
WATER
L
I
1
}--"
I
�� — I- �-�� -.� _ I.� .
- I"
✓���'
y., �,.__� -- THAL EG �I-.�
—T-
t TOP OF
8ANK1
1 I
� f
WATER SURFACE
~THA�WEG
i
I
2 p o O 0 O O O 0 O o O 0 O O o 0 o O o
o vT o Ln o in o n c fn o t In 0 n o
} + + 4 } + - + + + 4 + + + + y A
p O N 11 M M d d n Ir1 ,O tC1 r n /n CO rn
216,1
2155
2150
r�i /�48 =b• s
r` ry
2140
ibI ]N C p O O O O O O O O O
Ii In O In O P O
n* !';"s'o-1
„ 0 m rn o o _ r
CENlLFO[ATE O SURVEY
1 PHaI_IP 6. K;E CERTT THAT Ti HIS PLAT .VAS DRA04 U�LtR MY SUFMASION FROM
4-N pCAI AL MAD: L.tiNDER VY 5VP!'RAStON THE CONSERVATION �ASVJMT AND
TEMPORARr CONSTRLCTION EAS:VENT BOUNDARIES %ERE NOT SLINEYEO AND WER_ TAKZN
FROM PLAT SUM 7691 AN: 6546 TNK MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TCPOCRAPHIC
SURVEYS AS STAT 0 IN TITLE 21 CHAPTER 56 'EC7'ON 1636 THAT T"S MAP IAS NOT
PREPAnED IN ACCORDAN% VAIM OS 47-3' AS ANCA.ED VAT IESS MY QRIQ AL S, r,NATURE. CRO55- 5ECTION # I
RECJSRA
TTTOr, NUMBER AYD SEAL THIS T.IE -1157- OAY Ov _— _MAY___ 20.3_,
„flan „fl +.
c4aor:%
I
Q' �46d p tom;
+p-4
1
TOP OF BANK
SURFACE
1
I
_
,�o PHLUP B KEE, KS NC -4447
% `�
2150
I
I
WATER
I
1
}--"
I
�� — I- �-�� -.� _ I.� .
- I"
✓���'
y., �,.__� -- THAL EG �I-.�
—T-
ibI ]N C p O O O O O O O O O
Ii In O In O P O
n* !';"s'o-1
„ 0 m rn o o _ r
CENlLFO[ATE O SURVEY
1 PHaI_IP 6. K;E CERTT THAT Ti HIS PLAT .VAS DRA04 U�LtR MY SUFMASION FROM
4-N pCAI AL MAD: L.tiNDER VY 5VP!'RAStON THE CONSERVATION �ASVJMT AND
TEMPORARr CONSTRLCTION EAS:VENT BOUNDARIES %ERE NOT SLINEYEO AND WER_ TAKZN
FROM PLAT SUM 7691 AN: 6546 TNK MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TCPOCRAPHIC
SURVEYS AS STAT 0 IN TITLE 21 CHAPTER 56 'EC7'ON 1636 THAT T"S MAP IAS NOT
PREPAnED IN ACCORDAN% VAIM OS 47-3' AS ANCA.ED VAT IESS MY QRIQ AL S, r,NATURE. CRO55- 5ECTION # I
RECJSRA
TTTOr, NUMBER AYD SEAL THIS T.IE -1157- OAY Ov _— _MAY___ 20.3_,
„flan „fl +.
c4aor:%
2160
Q' �46d p tom;
+p-4
YY-
_- n� St AL �r _
2155
- L 4647 q -
---
�
_
,�o PHLUP B KEE, KS NC -4447
% `�
2150
+fl „MI t�l
2145
AN A546UILT SURVEY FOR•
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM + cD a0 °+
0 O + + +
LEWI5 CREEK STREAM RESTORATION ° ° °
EEP PROTECT #733 SCO PROJECT,O'06 -06- 799 -01
LOCATED ON NORT14 RIDGE ROAD HENDERSONVILLE NC 28793 CROSS - SECTION #3
BLUE RIDGE TOWNShIP 14ENOERSON COUNTY NORTH CAROLM 2160 2160
PARCEL NUMBERS 9972434 & 1001455
PLAT REPERENCE5 PLAT 5UDE 7691 AND PLAT 5UDE 8346 2155 2t 55
SURVEY BY PSK KJ ORtiKN BY -QK CHECKED Br RIP
AS -BUILT SURVEY DATES 04125111 & 05109111 JOB 110D848 2150 2 50
SHEET SIZE 24X36”
SHUT ? OF 4 SCdLE I' =30
2145
1107 O Ir O to 0 to O
F i - + } + i +
rrT a N in 10 f0 1-1
216u
2155
2150
214-5
2140
CR055- 5ECTION #2 CR055- 5ECTION #5
2160 I I I i I 2160 1
I
1155 2155 ---i --
I
2150 - �Tic�i —� - - - I - 2150
LIOU
2155
2150
1145
2140
2160
2155
2150
2145 1 2145
00 0 cli '4 o pp co g N o N a 00
O O d D O ± O O O 6
CR055- 5ECTION #4
2160
2155
2150
%1AS
214s - -
P O Box 2566 0 0 0 0 c a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asheville, NC 28802 ° N v .0 OD 0 N o N a Lo N
O
b Q Q O O ± t O O O O O } + 4
+
(828) 645 -8276
www keema.p cam.
wi
Lwense # C -3039
I
2160
2155
2150
%1AS
214s - -
P O Box 2566 0 0 0 0 c a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Asheville, NC 28802 ° N v .0 OD 0 N o N a Lo N
O
b Q Q O O ± t O O O O O } + 4
+
(828) 645 -8276
www keema.p cam.
wi
Lwense # C -3039

\ 00
S�A� 2♦ �� \ \j�..
M CROSS SECTION 73
KEE CONTROL PT. \\
N- 609196.2]'
E 1 D01965 29'
ELE +'.215467 nw
LEGEND:
AN A5 -13UILT SURVEY FOR:
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LEW15 CREEK STREAM RESTORATION
£EP PROJECT-0733 SCO PROJECT x#06 -06 -799 -01
LOCATED ON NORTH RIDGE ROAD, HENDERSONVILLE. NC 28793
BLUE RIDGE TOWNSHIP, HENDERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PARCEL NUMBER'S: 9972434 & 1001465
PLAT REFERENCE5: PLAT 5UDE 7691 AND PLAT 5UDE 8346
SURVEY By,* PBK. KJ DRANN BY PBK CHECKED BY. RIP
AS -BUILT SURVEY DATES: 04 125111 & 05109111 JOB 1100648
SHEET SIZE: 24 X36" I SHEET 1. 3 OF 4 1 SCALE.- 1 ° =30'
P.O. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
(828) 645 -8275
www.keemap.com
License # C -3039
LOG ELEV.-2149.47
(LOG SLOPE -6%)
LOG ELEV- 214S.N
TOPOGRAPHIC
DATA AND
GRADING LIMITS
s�
l91
t `\I t
• 1
1�Jr r�
\` \A\ `
00,\�,��
GPS CONTR0. xT
Y
.2•YJ9.34'
E�V.2+54.68'
CURRENT OWNER LISTED AS:
CAROLINA AlOUNMIN
LAND CONSERVANCY
PARCEL WUNBFR 9972434
DEED "10 1211 PAGE 256
5URVMR'5 NOT'M
1. ALL DISTANCES ARE GROUND MEASUREMENTS IN
US SURVEY FEET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. AREAS CALCULATED BY THE COORDINATE METHOD.
3. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF
WAYS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE RECORDED,
UNRECORDED. WRITTEN AND UNWRITTEN.
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES SHO'NN
HEREON WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND
PLAT SLIDE 5346; ENTITLED: A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SURVEY FOR THE STATE OF NC;
PREPARED BY JOEL JOHNSON LAND SURVEYING-
S. BY GRAPHIC DETERMINATION, THE CONSERVATION
EASEMENT AREA APPEARS TO UE IN A SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONE AE) WHERE BASE FLOOD
ELEVATIONS ARE DETERMINED PER THE F.E.M.A.
MAP#371006DOWA DATED OCTOBER 2, 2006.
6. LOG SLOPES ARE CALCULATED TO THE NEAREST
PERCENT.
7. STATE PLANE COORDINATES AND ELEVAMNS WERE
DERIVED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS -BUILT
SURVEY, PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT SLIDE 8346.
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREMS ARE GROUND
MEASUREMENTS IN US SURVEY FEET.
8. UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASED ON VISIBLE ABOVE
GROUND STRUCTURES. THEREFORE THE LOCATION OF
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE OR MAY
BE PRESENT AND NOT SHOWN HEREON. CALL
1 -800 -632 -4949 BEFORE DIGGING.
00
• -`�o€ %cam °Z�;
CROSS SECTION 02
I
'X
\. \ (T(y
J �\
O� \ \\
-1 l \\
KEE CONTR0. Pi
N 6cM9x64
E IOO2162 77'
CLV 2t`5.44'
FICATF OF
I, PHIe B. KEE CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE
UNDER MY SUPERVISION. THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES WERE NOi
SURVEYED AND WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDES 7691 AND
8346, THIS MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEYS AS STATED IN TITLE 21. CHAPTER 56, SECTION .1606;
THAT THS MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH G.S.
47 -30, AS AMENDED.
WITNESS MY ORIGINAL SIGNATURE. REGISTRAT:CNt NUMBER, AND
SEAL THIS THE -3151_ DAY OF _b1113�_ 201L.
`tt`tW •CA40 ",
rOPp4lSSipy s
;4L SEAL sr; Z
I'q y',�4• ���� PHRLIP B. REE. PLS NC -4647
_ CONTOUR INTERVAL
LDG ELEV..27se.3 = 1 FOOT
(LOG StCPE�4S)
�� Loc EA£v.- 214s.6'
l�
PHOTO POINT (PP -#)
e
UPS CONTROL POINT (1' IRON PIPE /CAP SET IN CONCRETE)
A
SURVEY CONTROL POINT -(1' IRON PIPE /CAP SET)
REBAR /CAP SET BY DESIGNER
ROCK
as^a�
LOG VANE
395"
R001VADAOG VANE J -HOOK COMBO
UTILITY POLE
CE —
CONSERVATiON EASEMENT BOUNDARY (NOT SURVEYED)
—_ TCE —
TEMPORARY CONSTRUC €ION EASEMENT (NOT SURVEYED)
­019—
OVERHEAD WIRE
--- TS ----
TOP OF BANK
- - - - -
EDGE OF WATER
_- - - - - --
THALWEG
-6/r-
RIGHT OF WAY
PROPOSED WALKING TRAIL
RIFFLE
Q
POOL
Q
GRAVEL
O
ASPHALT
O
VECETATON PLOT (VEC -,#)
O
BRUSH MATTRESS
ELEV
ELEVATION
N.A.D.
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1963
RFC
REBAR WITH CAP
PT
POINT
AN A5 -13UILT SURVEY FOR:
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LEW15 CREEK STREAM RESTORATION
£EP PROJECT-0733 SCO PROJECT x#06 -06 -799 -01
LOCATED ON NORTH RIDGE ROAD, HENDERSONVILLE. NC 28793
BLUE RIDGE TOWNSHIP, HENDERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PARCEL NUMBER'S: 9972434 & 1001465
PLAT REFERENCE5: PLAT 5UDE 7691 AND PLAT 5UDE 8346
SURVEY By,* PBK. KJ DRANN BY PBK CHECKED BY. RIP
AS -BUILT SURVEY DATES: 04 125111 & 05109111 JOB 1100648
SHEET SIZE: 24 X36" I SHEET 1. 3 OF 4 1 SCALE.- 1 ° =30'
P.O. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
(828) 645 -8275
www.keemap.com
License # C -3039
LOG ELEV.-2149.47
(LOG SLOPE -6%)
LOG ELEV- 214S.N
TOPOGRAPHIC
DATA AND
GRADING LIMITS
s�
l91
t `\I t
• 1
1�Jr r�
\` \A\ `
00,\�,��
GPS CONTR0. xT
Y
.2•YJ9.34'
E�V.2+54.68'
CURRENT OWNER LISTED AS:
CAROLINA AlOUNMIN
LAND CONSERVANCY
PARCEL WUNBFR 9972434
DEED "10 1211 PAGE 256
5URVMR'5 NOT'M
1. ALL DISTANCES ARE GROUND MEASUREMENTS IN
US SURVEY FEET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. AREAS CALCULATED BY THE COORDINATE METHOD.
3. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF
WAYS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE RECORDED,
UNRECORDED. WRITTEN AND UNWRITTEN.
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES SHO'NN
HEREON WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND
PLAT SLIDE 5346; ENTITLED: A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SURVEY FOR THE STATE OF NC;
PREPARED BY JOEL JOHNSON LAND SURVEYING-
S. BY GRAPHIC DETERMINATION, THE CONSERVATION
EASEMENT AREA APPEARS TO UE IN A SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONE AE) WHERE BASE FLOOD
ELEVATIONS ARE DETERMINED PER THE F.E.M.A.
MAP#371006DOWA DATED OCTOBER 2, 2006.
6. LOG SLOPES ARE CALCULATED TO THE NEAREST
PERCENT.
7. STATE PLANE COORDINATES AND ELEVAMNS WERE
DERIVED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS -BUILT
SURVEY, PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT SLIDE 8346.
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREMS ARE GROUND
MEASUREMENTS IN US SURVEY FEET.
8. UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASED ON VISIBLE ABOVE
GROUND STRUCTURES. THEREFORE THE LOCATION OF
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE OR MAY
BE PRESENT AND NOT SHOWN HEREON. CALL
1 -800 -632 -4949 BEFORE DIGGING.
00
• -`�o€ %cam °Z�;
CROSS SECTION 02
I
'X
\. \ (T(y
J �\
O� \ \\
-1 l \\
KEE CONTR0. Pi
N 6cM9x64
E IOO2162 77'
CLV 2t`5.44'
FICATF OF
I, PHIe B. KEE CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE
UNDER MY SUPERVISION. THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES WERE NOi
SURVEYED AND WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDES 7691 AND
8346, THIS MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEYS AS STATED IN TITLE 21. CHAPTER 56, SECTION .1606;
THAT THS MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH G.S.
47 -30, AS AMENDED.
WITNESS MY ORIGINAL SIGNATURE. REGISTRAT:CNt NUMBER, AND
SEAL THIS THE -3151_ DAY OF _b1113�_ 201L.
`tt`tW •CA40 ",
rOPp4lSSipy s
;4L SEAL sr; Z
I'q y',�4• ���� PHRLIP B. REE. PLS NC -4647
_ CONTOUR INTERVAL
LDG ELEV..27se.3 = 1 FOOT
(LOG StCPE�4S)
�� Loc EA£v.- 214s.6'
l�
CROSS SECTION 411
�
LOG ELEV.-2151.3'
(LOU SLOPEY %)
i>
LOG ELEV-2.149.8'
PP -3
G7
BRUSH MATTRESS
n
GATE 1
OV° / - COhSTF.UCf!OII.
0
BUFUEO
CROSS PANE
E1.E1- 2149.5'
1 r� y
U�
`1 �OE
A
NGRID NORTH
Cps coNrRoL Fr
N: 606796.03'
EA002377.sa'
EUV 2157.62'
PP -1
R
f,
PROFB£CINAL �RIa 1v • QL1
NcsR , goad
Nort1R Raago ,oaT691) PER l�
IT 30' 60' 90'
ONE INCH = 30 FEET
CURRENT OWNER LISTED AS:
BARBARA DWON INGLE
PARCEL NWABER., 100€465
DEED BOOK: 1188 PAGE:' 578

Ap
�� \ TOPOGRAPHIC
�\ (� DATA AND
�! . GRADING LIMITS
1 \�\ ` \
CROSS 3EC1lON T75 i� TIC
a /� ` 7Q. Yi r� III,{ KEE CONTROL 01 ` \\
N 609717.75' - too `1 E 1001453.84'
� � \ li te r• S H CLEV 2151.5,1'
cc
cir
q.
AN AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LEWI5 CREEK 5TREAM RESTORATION
EEP PROJECT 0733 SCD PROJECT .#06 -06- 799 -01
LOCATED ON NORTH RIDGE ROAD, HENDERSONVILLE, NC 28793
BLUE RIDGE TOWNSHIP, HENDERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PARCEL NUMBER'S: 9972434 eE 1001465
PLAT REFERENCE5: PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT 5LIDE 8346
SURVEY BY. PBK, KJ DRAWN BY: PBK CHECKED BY., RIP
AS -BUILT SURVEY DATES: 04125111 & 05109111 JOB 1100848
SHEET SIZE: 24'X36' I SHEET /: 4 OF- 4 1 SCALE: 1 =30'
P. 0. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
(828) 645 -8275
www. kee7nap. com
TM License # C -3039
CROSS SECTION 04
CURRENT OWNER LIST£O AS'
CAROUM MOUNTAIN
LAND CONSERVANCY
PARCEL NUMBER: 8972434
DEED BOOK F211 PACE, 756
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
1. ALL DISTANCES ARE GROUND MEASUREMENTS IN
US SURVEY FEET UNLESS OPHERIII NOTED.
2 -AREAS CALCULATED BY THE COORDINATE METHOD.
3. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF
WAYS ANO RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE RECORDED,
UNRECORDED, WRITTEN AND UN%RITTtN,
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES SHOWN
HEREON WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDE 7691 A40
PLAT SLIDE 8346; ENTITLED: A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SURVEY FOR THE STATE OF NC:
PREPARED BY JOEL JOHNSON LAND SURVEYING.
5. BY GRAPHIC DETERMINATION, THE CONSERVATION
EASEMENT AREA APPEARS TO LIE IN A SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONE AE) WHERE BASE FLOOD
ELEVATONS ARE DETERMINED PER THE F.E.M.A.
MAPt3710060000J; DATED OCTOBER 2, 2006.
6. LOG SLOPES ARE CALCULATED TO THE NEAREST
PERCENT.
7, STATE PLANE COORDINATES AND ELEVATIONS WERE
DERIVED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS -BUILT
SURVEY, PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT SLIDE 8346.
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREON ARE GROUND
MEASUREMENTS IN US SURVEY FEET,
8. UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASED ON VISBLE ABOVE
GROUND STRUCTURES. THEREFORE THE LOCATION Of
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE OR MAY
BE PRESENT AND NOT SHOWN HEREON. CALL
1- 800 -632 -4949 BEFORE DIGGING.
LOG ELEV -2147.
(LOG SLOPE -7X)
(gj1V
CURRENT OVATR USIM AS:
B4RBAR4 MON INCLE
PARCEL NLA(BER 1001465
DEED &W& I FM PAGE. 578
LOG ELEV.-2147.6'
(LOG SLOPE -4 %)
LOG ELEY.= 2146.5'
�\ KEE CONTROL PT
(,¢ N
E09565 1If
`b C 100167615•
LLEV 2152.15'
ICE . LCG ELEV.- 2148.5'
/\ ` (QrU (LOG SLDPE =474')
V1EG -S \ \\� LOC ELEV.- 2147.3'
\� 7 ^�
ob
00)
MRS CONMIt PT
N 60936289' \� �-
E IC01725.7a' \`
2 2 +53.09
011l�
LOG ELEV. =2148.7'
(LOG SLCPE -4%)
LOG ELEV. 2148.4'
CAP•
P I
JC..IH p44,
C 38 x =
N•u �.
. "s4�cl .
LOG ELEV.= 2148.4'
(LOG SLOPE - =6 %)
LOG ELEV.- 2147.0'
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
1, Pr%1 B. KEE CERTGY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN
UNDER MY SUPERNSION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE
UNDER NY SUPERNSGON. THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT +ON EASEMENT BOUNDARIES WERE NOT
SURVEYED ANO WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDES 7691 AND
8346. M3 MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TOPOGRAPKC
SURVEYS AS STATED IN TITLE 21, CHAPTER 56. SECTION 1606;
THAT THIS MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE W7TI4 G.S.
47 -30, AS AMENDED.
W TNESS MY OR1aNAL SIGNATURE, REGISTRATION NJMBER, AND
SEAL THIS 7HE ~iST DAY OF ___._. Y_____, 201L•
CAgQll,�
ue SEAL I,
s •� L4147 - A
+. 'SUR; °E•�� PHILIP B. KEE, PLS NC -4647
CONTOUR INTERVAL
= i FOOT
\'', e 0
10
VEG-4 Yi
SNP 2i �`
�GNvos SNEEZ �'
MP I
NGRID NORTH
C' 33' 60_ 90'
ONE INCH = 30 FEET
LOG ELEV- =2149.8'
(LOG SLOPE -7%)
LOG ELEV.= 21431' '
!� '00 '
`\11
l \ , \ `arQ•
V, cod
1 "o \�
;\ �A
�0
PHO70 POINT (PP -y)
e
GPS CONTROL POINT (1- IRON PIPE /CAP SET IN CONCRETE)
A
SURVEY CONTROL PaNT -(1' IRON PIPE /CAP SET)
REBAR/CAP SET BY DESIGNER
Q
ROCK
--Nm=mw
LOG VANE
ROOTWADAOG VANE J -HOCK COVSO
UTILITY POLE
— Cr. ­
CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOUNDARY (NOT SURVEYED)
— TCE —
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (NOT SURVEYED)
—OW—
OVERHEAD MARE
- -- T8 - -- TOP OF BANK
-
EDGE OF WATER
-- - - -- -- THALWEG
- -R/W—
RIGHT OF 'WAY
Q
PROPOSED WALKING IRAL
RIFFLE
POOL
Q
GRAVEL
Q
ASPHALT
VEGETATION PLOT (VEG -0)
Q
BRUSH MATTRESS
ELEV
ELEVATION
N.A.D.
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983
R3C
REBAR WITH CAP
PT.
POINT
AN AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
THE ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LEWI5 CREEK 5TREAM RESTORATION
EEP PROJECT 0733 SCD PROJECT .#06 -06- 799 -01
LOCATED ON NORTH RIDGE ROAD, HENDERSONVILLE, NC 28793
BLUE RIDGE TOWNSHIP, HENDERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PARCEL NUMBER'S: 9972434 eE 1001465
PLAT REFERENCE5: PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT 5LIDE 8346
SURVEY BY. PBK, KJ DRAWN BY: PBK CHECKED BY., RIP
AS -BUILT SURVEY DATES: 04125111 & 05109111 JOB 1100848
SHEET SIZE: 24'X36' I SHEET /: 4 OF- 4 1 SCALE: 1 =30'
P. 0. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
(828) 645 -8275
www. kee7nap. com
TM License # C -3039
CROSS SECTION 04
CURRENT OWNER LIST£O AS'
CAROUM MOUNTAIN
LAND CONSERVANCY
PARCEL NUMBER: 8972434
DEED BOOK F211 PACE, 756
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
1. ALL DISTANCES ARE GROUND MEASUREMENTS IN
US SURVEY FEET UNLESS OPHERIII NOTED.
2 -AREAS CALCULATED BY THE COORDINATE METHOD.
3. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF
WAYS ANO RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE RECORDED,
UNRECORDED, WRITTEN AND UN%RITTtN,
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT BOUNDARIES SHOWN
HEREON WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDE 7691 A40
PLAT SLIDE 8346; ENTITLED: A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SURVEY FOR THE STATE OF NC:
PREPARED BY JOEL JOHNSON LAND SURVEYING.
5. BY GRAPHIC DETERMINATION, THE CONSERVATION
EASEMENT AREA APPEARS TO LIE IN A SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA (ZONE AE) WHERE BASE FLOOD
ELEVATONS ARE DETERMINED PER THE F.E.M.A.
MAPt3710060000J; DATED OCTOBER 2, 2006.
6. LOG SLOPES ARE CALCULATED TO THE NEAREST
PERCENT.
7, STATE PLANE COORDINATES AND ELEVATIONS WERE
DERIVED FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS -BUILT
SURVEY, PLAT SLIDE 7691 AND PLAT SLIDE 8346.
ALL COORDINATES SHOWN HEREON ARE GROUND
MEASUREMENTS IN US SURVEY FEET,
8. UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASED ON VISBLE ABOVE
GROUND STRUCTURES. THEREFORE THE LOCATION Of
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE OR MAY
BE PRESENT AND NOT SHOWN HEREON. CALL
1- 800 -632 -4949 BEFORE DIGGING.
LOG ELEV -2147.
(LOG SLOPE -7X)
(gj1V
CURRENT OVATR USIM AS:
B4RBAR4 MON INCLE
PARCEL NLA(BER 1001465
DEED &W& I FM PAGE. 578
LOG ELEV.-2147.6'
(LOG SLOPE -4 %)
LOG ELEY.= 2146.5'
�\ KEE CONTROL PT
(,¢ N
E09565 1If
`b C 100167615•
LLEV 2152.15'
ICE . LCG ELEV.- 2148.5'
/\ ` (QrU (LOG SLDPE =474')
V1EG -S \ \\� LOC ELEV.- 2147.3'
\� 7 ^�
ob
00)
MRS CONMIt PT
N 60936289' \� �-
E IC01725.7a' \`
2 2 +53.09
011l�
LOG ELEV. =2148.7'
(LOG SLCPE -4%)
LOG ELEV. 2148.4'
CAP•
P I
JC..IH p44,
C 38 x =
N•u �.
. "s4�cl .
LOG ELEV.= 2148.4'
(LOG SLOPE - =6 %)
LOG ELEV.- 2147.0'
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
1, Pr%1 B. KEE CERTGY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN
UNDER MY SUPERNSION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE
UNDER NY SUPERNSGON. THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT +ON EASEMENT BOUNDARIES WERE NOT
SURVEYED ANO WERE TAKEN FROM PLAT SLIDES 7691 AND
8346. M3 MAP MEETS THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TOPOGRAPKC
SURVEYS AS STATED IN TITLE 21, CHAPTER 56. SECTION 1606;
THAT THIS MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE W7TI4 G.S.
47 -30, AS AMENDED.
W TNESS MY OR1aNAL SIGNATURE, REGISTRATION NJMBER, AND
SEAL THIS 7HE ~iST DAY OF ___._. Y_____, 201L•
CAgQll,�
ue SEAL I,
s •� L4147 - A
+. 'SUR; °E•�� PHILIP B. KEE, PLS NC -4647
CONTOUR INTERVAL
= i FOOT
\'', e 0
10
VEG-4 Yi
SNP 2i �`
�GNvos SNEEZ �'
MP I
NGRID NORTH
C' 33' 60_ 90'
ONE INCH = 30 FEET
LOG ELEV- =2149.8'
(LOG SLOPE -7%)
LOG ELEV.= 21431' '
!� '00 '
`\11
l \ , \ `arQ•
V, cod
1 "o \�
;\ �A
�0