20171041 Ver 1_Year 0 Monitoring Report_2021_20211011

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20171041 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 10/12/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/11/2021
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
17. Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Paul Wiesner [e-mail]
Project Information
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20171041 Version:*1
Existing IDI# Existing Version
Project Type: C' DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Little Sebastian Site
County: Surry
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Little Sebastian_100027_MY0_2021.pdf 7.76MB
Rease upload only one R7Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Paul Wiesner
Signature:*

As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
FINAL
LITTLE SEBASTIAN SITE
NCDMS Project# 100027(Contract# 7187) RFP 16-006993 (Issued 9/16/2016)
USACE Action ID: SAW-2017-01507 DWR Project#2017-1041
Surry County,North Carolina
Yadkin River Basin
HUC 03040101
1111.111110,
•
44.
144,
Asa
erg.
Provided by:
res
Resource Environmental Solutions,LLC
For Environmental Banc&Exchange,LLC
Provided for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
October 2021

3600 Glenwood Avenue,Suite 100
ores Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 W Loop S#300
Bellaire,TX 77401
Main:713.520.5400
August 26, 2021
Paul Wiesner
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Drive, Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Little Sebastian Mitigation Site: Baseline Report and As-Built Drawings (NCDMS Project
I D #100027)
Listed below are comments provided by DMS on August 11, 2021 regarding the Little Sebastian
Mitigation Site: Baseline Report and As-Built Drawings and RES' responses.
Report Cover: Please also include the RFP# and issuance date of the RFP on the report cover:
RFP 16-006993 (Issued 9/16/2016).
Done.
General: The 2018 IRT approved mitigation plan reported 4,554.300 SMUs on the project site.
The draft MY0 report notes 4,573.960 SMUs on the site due to the addition of Reach JN7 (37
linear feet of stream restoration). This represents a 19.66 SMU increase on the project site; please
provide a separate mitigation plan addendum request (memo) for IRT review and approval to
accompany the revised MY0 report and Record Drawings.
Please confirm that the USACE non-standard buffer width calculation was recalculated on the
entire project site after the addition of Reach JN7. Please provide the full set of revised stream
buffer credit adjustment maps and supporting documentation in the mitigation plan addendum for
IRT review.
Confirmed, the non-standard buffer width calculation was recalculated for the entire project. The
full set of revised maps and supporting documentation are in the mitigation plan addendum.
Section 1.1 — Project Location and Description: "Funding will be supplied by the responsible
party on a yearly basis until such time an endowment is established." Please clarify or remove
this sentence.
This sentence has been removed.
Section 1.3 — Project Success Criteria: This section references the Apple Valley Mitigation
Plan. Please update the text and QA/QC this section to confirm that the success criteria presented
is consistent with the IRT approved mitigation plan for the Little Sebastian project.
This typo has been corrected.
Section 1.4 - Project Components: The proposed addition of JN7 represents a 19.66 SMU
increase from the IRT approved mitigation plan. Please update the section accordingly.
This section has been updated.

Section 1.5 - Stream Mitigation Approach: In the report text, please also note the type of
fencing installed to exclude livestock from the project conservation easement. If multiple fencing
types were utilized, please describe in the report text.
The fence is five-strand high tensile electric. This has been added to Section 1.6
Section 1.7 - Baseline Monitoring Performance (MY0): Please indicate how project photo
points have been established and will be monitored on the site. Fixed digital image locations
appear to have been established at each cross section, vegetation plot, stage recorder, and flow
gauge. Per recent IRT discussion, DMS recommends adding photo points in the MY1 (2021)
report at each project crossing location to document crossing stability and function during the
monitoring term.
RES has added information about fixed digital image locations to Section 2.0 and agrees to
include crossings.
Table 4 and Table 7: Table 4 notes that the project area is 6.42 acres and the planted acreage
is 6.09 acres. Table 7 indicates a planted acreage of 10.7 acres. Please review and update the
report as necessary. Based on the CCPV maps and a construction site visit, numerous areas of
the project site do not appear to have been planted due to existing vegetation within the
conservation easement.
This error has been corrected
Appendix A — Table 1: DMS recommends adding a note to Table 1 indicating that all crossings
and utility easements have been removed from the credit calculations.
Done.
Appendix A— Table 2: In the table, please update the elapsed time since grading and planting.
Done.
Appendix B - Visual Stream Stability Assessment & Vegetation Condition Assessment
Tables: On the tables, please include the date/s that the visual assessments were performed.
These dates should also be included in future monitoring reports in these tables and Table 2.
DMS understands this is a variance from the current template; however, it will help address IRT
concerns discussed at the most recent IRT credit release meeting (2021).
Done.
Appendix D - Cross Section Sheets—Cross Section 4: The cross section sheet notes that the
reach approach associated with the cross section location is Ell. The CCPV sheet notes El.
Please review and update as necessary.
The correct approach is El. This has been updated in the report.
Appendix E - Cover Page: Please update the appendix cover sheet to "Record Drawings" to
coincide with the table of contents and sheets provided.
Done.

Record Drawings:
•The project conservation easement shown on the draft record drawings is identified as the Limits
of Proposed Conservation Easement (LCE). The final recorded conservation easement
(approved by the NC SPO) should be utilized for the record drawings. Please update the record
drawings and legend accordingly. Once updated, please confirm that no areas of fencing or
project crossings are located within the recorded conservation easement.
The record drawings have been updated with the recorded easement. Two areas of fencing within
the easement were found on MC1 and will be removed by MY1.
• Thank you for showing the relocated utility line on the record drawings. Please confirm that no
other utility lines/ utility easements cross the conservation easement. If others exist, please make
sure to show them on the final record drawings.
Confirmed.
Digital Support File Comments:
• A majority of features in the "Streams_AB_LittleSebastian" shapefile have lengths that differ
from the lengths reported in the asset table by more than 5 ft. Please review these features and
ensure that feature lengths reflect asset table lengths. Also, please be sure that there is a feature
representing each record in the asset table.
The stream shapefile has been updated to the most recent version which matches the asset table.
• Note that there is a portion of the feature for MC3-B that is outside of the conservation easement.
This is no longer an issue with the updated shapefile.
• Please include unique ID's with the stream gauge features that correspond with the ID's that will
be used for the supporting data.
Done.
• Please submit features that represent the mitigation plan design, ensuring that there is a feature
representing each record in the asset table and that feature lengths are within 5 ft of asset table
lengths (e.g. Mitigation Plan Footage or Acreage).
Done.
• Please include the as-built .DWG file with the final digital submission.
Done.
• Please associate stem heights and x,y coordinate data with individual stems for the fixed plots,
and be prepared to indicate planted vs. volunteer stems in subsequent monitoring years.
CVS datasheets have been included in the digital submission

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary 1
1.1 Project Location and Description 1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives 1
1.3 Project Success Criteria 2
Stream Restoration Success Criteria 2
Vegetation Success Criteria 2
1.4 Project Components 3
1.5 Stream Mitigation Approach 3
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions 5
1.7 Baseline Monitoring Performance (MYO) 6
Vegetation 6
Stream Geomorphology 6
Stream Hydrology 6
Wetland Hydrology 6
2.0 Methods 7
3.0 References 7
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1. Project Mitigation Components
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Background Information Table
Figure 1. Site Location Map
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photos
Monitoring Device Photos
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Planted Species Summary
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 9. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 11. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Cross Section Overlay Plots
Appendix E: Record Drawings

1.0 Project Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Little Sebastian Mitigation Site ("the Project") is located in Surry County, approximately 10
miles north of Elkin. The Project presents 4,554.300 Cool Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along Mill
Creek and three unnamed tributaries.
The Project's total easement area is approximately 25.91 acres within the overall drainage area of 3,261
acres. The Project has two separate portions and in between those portions is the Gideon Mitigation Site.
The Gideon Mitigation Site has a total easement area that is approximately 11.23 ac and presents 4,782
linear feet of stream restoration,enhancement,and preservation. Therefore,a total 37.14 ac and 12,887 LF
of stream are protected in perpetuity. Grazing livestock historically had access to all stream reaches within
the Project. The lack of riparian buffer vegetation, deep-rooted vegetation, and unstable channel
characteristics contributed to the degradation of stream banks throughout the Project area.
The Project will be monitored on a regular basis throughout the seven-year post-construction monitoring
period,or until performance standards are met. The Project will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship
Program. This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property
and will conduct periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation
easement are upheld.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Project's maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions
Pyramid Framework, specific, attainable goals and objectives were realized by the Project. These goals
clearly address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major
watershed stressors in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River RBRP. The Project will address outlined
RBRP Goals 2,4,and 6 (Mitigation Plan).
The Project goals are:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a stable channel;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and
connection to the active floodplain;
• Improve instream habitat;
• Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation; and
• Indirectly support the goals of the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee RBRP to improve water quality
and to reduce sediment and nutrient loads.
The Project objectives to address the goals are:
• Designed and reconstructed stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that maintain a stable
dimension, profile, and planform based on modeling, watershed conditions, and reference reach
conditions;
• Permanently excluded livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
• Added in-stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
• Installed habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of
varying depths to restored and enhanced streams;
• Reduced bank height ratios and increased entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
Little Sebastian Site 1 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

• Increased forested riparian buffers to at least 30 feet on both sides of the channel along the Project
reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Implemented one agricultural BMP in order to limit inputs of sediment, nutrients, and fecal
coliform to streams from surrounding farming operations;
• Treated exotic invasive species; and
• Established a permanent conservation easement on the Project.
1.3 Project Success Criteria
The success criteria for the Project follows the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update, the Little Sebastian Final Mitigation Plan, and subsequent agency
guidance. Cross section and vegetation plot monitoring takes place in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream
hydrology, wetland hydrology, and visual monitoring takes place annually. Specific success criteria
components are presented below.
Stream Restoration Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take place,they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down-cutting or
erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be above 1.4 within restored riffle cross sections. Channel stability
should be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented in the seven-year
monitoring period.
Digital images are used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation,bank erosion, success
of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should not
indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.Lateral
images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time.A series of
images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Stream restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow. This will
be accomplished through direct observation and the use of hydraulic pressure transducers with data loggers.
Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow. Flow gauges will be installed on
JN2-A and BS1-A. The flow gauge on BS1-A will also be capable of monitoring bankfull events.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Project follow
IRT Guidance. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Project is the survival of at least 320
planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 trees per acre with an average height of six
feet at the end of Year 5,and the final vegetative success criteria is 210 trees per acre with an average height
of eight feet at the end of Year 7. Volunteer trees are counted, identified to species, and included in the
yearly monitoring reports,but are not counted towards the success criteria of total planted stems until they
Little Sebastian Site 2 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

are present in the plot for greater than two seasons. Moreover, any single species can only account for up
to 50 percent of the required number of stems within any vegetation plot.Any stems in excess of 50 percent
will be shown in the monitoring table but will not be used to demonstrate success.
1.4 Project Components
The project streams were significantly impacted by livestock production, agricultural practices,and a lack
of riparian buffer.Improvements to the Project help meet the river basin needs expressed in the 2009 Upper
Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities(RBRP)as well as ecological improvements to riparian
corridor within the easement.
Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 4,554.300 Cool Stream
Mitigation Units(SMU)(Table 1).
Mitigation Approach Linear Feet Ratio Cool Base SMU
Restoration 2,758 1 2,721
Enhancement I 597 1.5 398
Enhancement II 1,898 2.5 759.2
Enhancement II 1,372 5 274.4
Enhancement II 819 7.5 109.2
Enhancement II 243 10 24.3
Preservation 418 10 41.8
Total 8,068 4,327.9
Credit Loss in Required Buffer -278.7
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer 505.1
Total Adjusted SMUs 4,554.300
1.5 Stream Mitigation Approach
The Project includes priority I stream restoration,enhancement I,enhancement II,and preservation.Priority
I stream restoration incorporates the design of a single thread meandering channel,with parameters based
on data taken from reference sites, published empirical relationships, regional curves developed from
existing project streams,and NC Regional Curves.Analytical design techniques also were a crucial element
of the project and were used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole.
Reach JN2-A - Preservation activities included improving the existing livestock exclusion fencing and
buffers greater than 30 feet. The easement was extended to provide preservation beyond the origin point of
the stream as per the PJD.
Reach JN2-B-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing. Minimal bank grading and buffer re-establishment was done along the
downstream end. In-stream structures such as log sills and one log cross vane were installed for stability
and to improve habitat. The restoration of the riparian areas at the downstream end filters runoff from
adjacent pasture,reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach JN2-C-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing. Minimal bank grading and buffer re-establishment were done along the
downstream end. The restoration of the riparian areas at the downstream end filters runoff from adjacent
pasture,reduce sediment loads,and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
Little Sebastian Site 3 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

Reach JN2-D - Enhancement activities included some channel relocation, bed, and bank stabilization,
removing an existing ford crossing and access road, improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings, and livestock exclusion fencing. The restoration of the riparian areas at the downstream end
filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the
Project area.
Reach JN3-A—Enhancement II activities at a 7.5:1 ratio included improving habitat through supplemental
buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the right bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment loads.
Reach JN3-B- Restoration activities included constructing a new channel within the natural valley to the
north with appropriate dimensions and pattern and backfilling the abandoned channel.In-stream structures
such as log sills,brush toes, and log vanes were installed for stability and to improve habitat. Habitat was
further improved through buffer plantings and livestock exclusion.Buffer activities improved riparian areas
that filter runoff from adjacent pastures,thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the channel.Also,
the reach was built through two small jurisdictional wetlands that are currently on the right bank floodplain
and degraded from cattle access and pasture-use. While this project is not claiming any wetland credit,the
raised channel bed enhances the wetlands'hydrology by reconnecting the floodplain wetlands to the stream.
Two groundwater wells were installed on the right floodplain to monitor the wetland hydrology and will be
reported in the yearly monitoring reports.
Reach MC1-A-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the right bank
filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment loads.
Reach MC1-B-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing.The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters
runoff from adjacent pasture,reduce sediment loads,and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project
area.
Reach MC1-C - Restoration activities included using log structures to provide vertical stability, assist in
maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and fill was balanced in an
effort to raise the channel bed to provide regular inundation of the adjacent floodplain. Habitat was
improved through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The Gideon Mitigation
Bank was constructed with the Project.
Reach MC3-A-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the right bank
filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment loads.
Reach MC3-B - Enhancement activities included reshaping the left bank, install coir matting and
livestakes, and improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing.
The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture,
reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area. A ford crossing was
installed on this reach.
Reach MC3-C - Enhancement activities included reshaping the left bank, install coir matting and
livestakes, and improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing.
The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture,
reduce sediment loads,and provide wildlife corridors throughout the project area.
Little Sebastian Site 4 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

Reach MC3-D-Enhancement activities includes improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing.The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters
runoff from adjacent pasture,reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project
area.
Reach BS1-A - Restoration activities included using log and rock structures to provide vertical stability,
assist in maintaining riffle,run and pool features and to provide habitat features.Cut and fill were balanced
in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where topography allows.Habitat
was further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. An
engineered sediment pack was installed at the top of this reach.
Reach BS1-B-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing.The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters
runoff from adjacent pasture,reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the project
area.
Reach BS1-C - Restoration activities included using log and rock structures to provide vertical stability,
assist in maintaining riffle,run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and fill was balanced
in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where topography allows.Habitat
was further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing.
Reach BS1-D-Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings
and livestock exclusion fencing.The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters
runoff from adjacent pasture,reduce sediment loads,and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project
area.
Reach BS1-E - Restoration activities included using log structures to provide vertical stability, assist in
maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and fill were balanced in an
effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where topography allows. Habitat was
further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing.
1.6 Construction and As Built Conditions
Stream construction was completed in February 2021and planting was completed in March 2021.
Additionally,five-strand high tensile electric fencing was installed for cattle exclusion.The Little Sebastian
Site was built to design plans and guidelines.Two minor changes were made during construction: a log sill
was added on JN2-B for extra grade control and log sills were removed from BS1 due to bedrock.
Additionally, JN7 was added between Final Mitigation Plan approval and construction. This reach has a
30-acre drainage area and includes a pond located about 150 linear feet upstream of the easement area.
Historically,this pond drained through a short ditch into JN3-B but due to the relocation of JN3-B,a channel
was constructed in order to connect the pond back to JN3-B.The restored JN7 includes 37 linear feet within
the easement. A photo of JN7 is in Appendix B. RES proposed the addition of JN7 for credit; however,
this request was denied by IRT. RES will monitor the stability and hydrology of this reach and if back-up
credits are needed at closeout there is the potential to use the 19.660 SMUs from JN7.The record drawings
are included in Appendix E.
Planting plan changes included replacing blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica) and elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis)with sugarberry(Celtis laevigata)and buttonbush(Cephalanthus occidentalis).These changes
were based on bare root availability. A planted species summary is included in Appendix C. Minor
monitoring device location changes were made during as-built installation due to site conditions. The only
monitoring devices not installed were the stage recorders proposed for MC1-C and BS1-C due to the reach
Little Sebastian Site 5 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

being less than 1,000 linear feet and there being two stage recorders proposed for the same reach,
respectively.
1.7 Baseline Monitoring Performance (MY0)
The Little Sebastian baseline monitoring activities were performed in March 2021.All baseline monitoring
data is present below and in the appendices.The Project is on track to meeting vegetation and stream interim
success criteria.
Vegetation
Setup and monitoring of six fixed vegetation plots and three random vegetation plots was completed after
planting and stream construction on March 17,2021.Vegetation data are in Appendix C,associated photos
are in Appendix B,and plot locations are in Appendix B.MY0 monitoring data indicates that all plots are
exceeding the interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from
647 to 1,538 planted stems per acre with a mean of 1,111 planted stems per acre across all plots.A total of
10 species were documented within the plots. Volunteer species were not noted at baseline monitoring but
are expected to establish in upcoming years. The average stem height in the plots was 1.5 feet.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project.
Stream Geomorphology
A total of 12 cross sections were installed on March 3,2021,and geomorphology data collection for MYO
was conducted on March 16,2021. Summary tables and cross section plots are in Appendix D. Overall the
baseline cross sections and profile relatively match the proposed design. The as-built conditions show that
shear stress and velocities have been reduced for the restoration reach. The reaches were designed as
gravel/cobble bed channels and remain classified as gravel/cobble bed channels post-construction.
Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed
and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation.
Stream Hydrology
Two stage recorders and two flow gauges were installed on March 17, 2021 and will document bankfull
events and flow days,respectively. Stream hydrology data will be included in the Monitoring Year 1 Report
in this section and in the appendices.Gauge locations can be found on Figure 2 and photos are in Appendix
B. RES will add a flow gauge on JN7 this winter.
Wetland Hydrology
Two groundwater wells with automatic recording pressure transducers were installed in March 2021. The
goal of the groundwater wells is to track the hydrology of the jurisdictional wetlands on site post-stream
construction.There is no hydroperiod success criteria for these groundwater wells.Wetland hydrology data
will be included in the Monitoring Year 1 Report in this section and in the appendices.Gauge locations can
be found on Figure 2 and photos are in Appendix B.
Little Sebastian Site 6 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

2.0 Methods
Stream cross section monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station.Three-dimensional
coordinates associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS
3200). Morphological data were collected at 12 cross-sections. Survey data were imported into CAD,
ArcGIS®,and Microsoft Excel®for data processing and analysis.The stage recorders include an automatic
pressure transducer placed in PVC casing in a pool. The elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage
recorder are used to detect bankfull events.
Vegetation success is being monitored at six fixed monitoring plots and three random monitoring plots.
Vegetation plot monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation,version 4.2
(Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are
processed using the CVS data entry tool.In the field,the four corners of each plot were permanently marked
with PVC at the origin and metal conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the
origin each monitoring year. The random plot is to be collected in locations where there are no permanent
vegetation plots. Random plot will most likely be collected in the form of 100 square meter belt transects
with variable dimensions. Tree species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and the transects
will be mapped and new locations will be monitored in subsequent years.
Wetland hydrology is monitored to track the hydrology of the jurisdictional wetlands on site post-stream
construction.This is accomplished with two automatic pressure transducer gauges(located in groundwater
wells) that record daily groundwater levels. One automatic pressure transducer is installed above ground
for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods are
calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation followed current regulatory guidance. Visual
observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators are also recorded during quarterly site
visits.
Fixed digital image locations are established at each cross section, vegetation plot, stage recorder, flow
gauge,and the upstream and downstream side of each crossing.
3.0 References
Griffith,G.E.,J.M.Omernik,J.A. Comstock,M.P. Schafale,W.H.McNab,D.R.Lenat,T.F.MacPherson,
J.B. Glover,and V.B. Shelburne. (2002). Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina,
(color Poster with map,descriptive text, summary tables,and photographs): Reston,Virginia,
U.S. Geological Survey(map scale 1:1,500,000).
Lee Michael T.,Peet Robert K.,Roberts Steven D.,and Wentworth Thomas R.,2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level.Version 4.2
Peet,R.K.,Wentworth,T.S.,and White,P.S. (1998),A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274
Resource Environmental Solutions(2018). Little Sebastian Final Mitigation Plan.
Schafale,M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina,Fourth Approximation.North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program,Division of Parks and Recreation,NCDENR,Raleigh,NC.
USACE. (2016). Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.NC:
Interagency Review Team(IRT).
Little Sebastian Site 7 As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report
Surry County,NC October 2021

Appendix A
Background Tables

Table 1. Little Sebastian (ID-100027) -Mitigation Assets and Components
Mitigation
Existing As-Built
Plan Migitation Restoration Mitigation Mitigation
Project Segment Footage or Footage or Category Level Priority Level Ratio(X:1) Plan Credits Footage or Comments
Acreage Acreage Acreage
JN2-A 418 418 Cool P NA 10.00000 41.800 418 Livestock exclusion
JN2-B 187 187 Cool El NA 1.50000 124.667 187 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
JN2-C 307 307 Cool ElI NA 2.50000 122.800 307 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion;31-foot crossing
JN2-C 837 837 Cool ElI NA 2.50000 334.800 837 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
Channel relocation,bed and bank stabilization,crossing relocation,buffer plantings,
JN2-D 39 43 Cool El NA 1.50000 28.667 43 and livestock exclusion;62-foot crossing
Channel relocation,bed and bank stabilization,crossing relocation,buffer plantings,
JN2-D 150 153 Cool El NA 1.50000 102.000 153 and livestock exclusion
JN3-A 350 350 Cool ElI NA 7.50000 46.667 350 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
Channel relocation ini the natural valley,improved stream structures,buffer planting,
JN3-B 900 781 Cool R I 1.00000 781.000 781 and livestock exclusion;43-foot crossing
Channel relocation,bed and bank stabilization,crossing relocation,buffer plantings,
JN3-B 224 262 Cool R I 1.00000 262.000 262 and livestock exclusion
JN7* 0 0 Cool R 1.00000 0.000 Channel construction,bed and bank stabilization,buffer plantings,and livestock
37 exclusion;No Credit
MC1-A 469 469 Cool ElI NA 7.50000 62.533 469 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
MC1-B 717 717 Cool ElI NA 5.00000 143.400 717 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion;41-foot utility line crossing
MC1-B 260 260 Cool ElI NA 5.00000 52.000 260 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
MC1-C 545 555 Cool R 1.00000 555.000 Channel bed raised,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock
555 exclusion
MC3-A 243 243 Cool ElI NA 10.00000 24.300 243 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
MC3-B 402 402 Cool ElI NA 2.50000 160.800 402 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion;41-foot crossing
MC3-C 214 214 Cool El NA 1.50000 142.667 214 Bank stabilization,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock exclusion
MC3-D 395 395 Cool ElI NA 5.00000 79.000 395 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
BS1-A 205 214 Cool R 1.00000 214.000 Channel bed raised,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock
214 exclusion
BS1-B 190 175 Cool ElI NA 2.50000 70.000 175 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
BS1-C 580 541 Cool R 1.00000 541.000 Channel bed raised,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock
541 exclusion
BS1-D 185 177 Cool ElI NA 2.50000 70.800 177 Buffer planting and livestock exclusion
BS1-E 278 274 Cool R 1.00000 274.000 Channel bed raised,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock
274 exclusion;45-foot crossing
BS1-E 94 94 Cool R 1.00000 94.000 Channel bed raised,improved stream structures,buffer planting,and livestock
94 exclusion
*Added between Final Mitigation Plan and Construction;no credit but potential to add credits if reach meets success criteria and back-up credits are needed
Note:all crossings and utility easements have been removed from credit calculations.
Project Credits
Stream Riparian Non-rip Coastal
Restoration Level Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh
Restoration 2721.000
Re-establishment
Rehabilitation
Enhancement
Enhancement I 398.000
Enhancement II 1167.100
Creation
Preservation 41.800
NSBW 226.400
TOTALS 4,554.300

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Little Sebastian
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 6 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 5 months
Number of reporting Years : 0
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Delivery
Mitigation Plan NA Nov-18
Final Design — Construction Plans NA Sep-20
Stream Construction NA Feb-21
Site Planting NA Mar-21
As-built (Year 0 Monitoring —VP, XS, Hydro, Visual) Mar-21 Oct-21
Year 1 Monitoring
Year 2 Monitoring
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
= The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Little Sebastian
Designer RES/3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Primary project design POC Frasier Mullen, PE
Construction Contractor KBS Earthwork Inc. /5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
27283
Construction contractor POC Kory Strader
Survey Contractor Acension Land Surveying, PC / 116 Williams Road,
Mocksville, NC 27028
Survey contractor POC Chris Cole, PLS
Planting Contractor Shenandoah Habitats
Planting contractor POC David Coleman
Monitoring Performers RES/3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Monitoring POC Ryan Medric [phone]

Table 4.Project Background Information
Project Name Little Sebastian
County Surry
Project Area(acres) 25.91
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude) 36.40, -80.86
Planted Acreage(Acres of Woody Stems Planted) 10.7
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province 45e - Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit I 03040101 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit I 03040101080020
DWR Sub-basin 03-04-01
Project Drainage Area(Acres and Square Miles) 3,261 acres (5.1 sq mi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <1%
Reach Summary Information
Parameters JN2-A JN2-B JN2-C JN2-D JN3-A
Length of reach(linear feet) 418 187 1114 189 350
Valley confinement(Confined, moderately confined,unconfined) UC MC MC MC UC
Drainage area(Acres) 10 17 37 38 956
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral I P P P P
Parameters JN3-B MC1-A MC1-B MC1-C MC3-A/B/C
Length of reach(linear feet) 1043 469 977 555 859
Valley confinement(Confined, moderately confined,unconfined) C UC UC UC UC
Drainage area(Acres) 999 1862 1915 2921 3225
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral P P P P P
Parameters MC3-D BS1-A/C/E BS1-B/D JN7
Length of reach(linear feet) 395 1029 352 37
Valley confinement(Confined, moderately confined,unconfined) UC C C UC
Drainage area(Acres) 3262 12-29 14-28 30
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral P I/P P I

•,5
Little Sebastian
Mitigation Site
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIt ...--
LJ
1
q
W
,eNion Rq
Ed wLny,
r--)) <JJ
Gideon Mitigation Site
Little Sebastian •
Mitigation Site
Lai
P ,s
d h
ar,O,$
Legend
1
g
\ L Conservation Easement
Proposed Gideon Site
Li
p`.a'�tal� II Service Area -03040101
`C iDpyoilon Rd
TLW-03040101080020
Q1-4 - -.,wi 1
Figure 1 -Site Location Map Date: 10/30/2018
w Drawn by: MDE
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site 0 res
I Checked by ATP
0 500 1,000
Il Surly County, North Carolina
Feet

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

, .
orriks
N
4`4.1,.s?h.; .... 1
• 11 W E
:/• �s: . �ff'.. : `> JN2-B I , __ — — JN3-A
/ / L \— —
. � I T
- ., ," ,i. ,• ay. 47- • �:. i' ,, L: 'ri r.tr 0 100 200
:.: Il
0. • �sF .� J iyr ' .,'�, .. _ I' �' iF, A �' ,� • - I Feet
rr I s^ Z+4. i � -1 1 I� �4 1- } ti
I, + '..1,� ,• ,',. ,r 1 1 • Figure 2
1 `�� ,`4° 4 `jE �Ly . . Tit Current Conditions
: . •
1 i + _ ,^ _ :;. �!: .- Plan View
1 , :. r. a ;. l
1 y . • . x,..- t. �. l MY0 2021
�- f r �s ,r , :a.• f Little Sebastian
is • •;f' +f-'- _ ti k _ `�+(,,' ! .;L ''ihT ` ;,�I:` _ ac
� ; , + "' . . �..� � .., .., ..,ALF r.. - Mitigation Site
p.
I ill;; 's►'r :. - i
- JN2-A ' . t r r. GW1
;,::.• y :' : = Surry County, NC
;'•' �`rt• ' t +F ,' '1 ' _ 4) I JN3-B Date: 10/7/2021 Drawn by:RTM
r•j.•,.' R se. * `A:: ,i Y1. ••...• ,"=rr''r'.+• :; y,. vu.A 1,• E -
F'• * raft^ "y 1 '•., yam; .a• ` i. ,I Lat:35.937509 Long:-81.234876
1 }.- �, . -e ,r, r 1 LEGEND
} f°t- 4 -1,°' `}- '' vcs 1:' = I O Conservation Easement
` �,�. ,.1.--;". 6 ; cwz• Gideon Bank Site
^ •: 4 _ ®V1/4 �. , , ► . o Fixed Veg Plot
` c_ ,h Ili ";, 4 o Random Veg Plot
JN2-D ' is Existing Wetland
` ,t r;,, ,1 5 I —Structure
` •r' ,► - - a Top of Bank
a +� \jsh, ft Cross Section` '!,s;;,�" ,�#� •!�{ 1 F ' 1 Stream Mitigation
Y MC1 A
f `5 .�- r'; II —Restoration
k f+r � .' .-•Ak4 © 1 ,, _, ��• 7 —Enhancement I
t t >,
R � � S r+,. JO'' ..; — �� Enhancement II
t E,y . ♦ / / —Enhancement II (5:1)
t+: ` , , ' Enhancement II (7.5:1)
Enhancement II (10:1)
• I +? yygy `�J ` —Preservation
;� • No Credit
•�"r � \• • - ` Ci -- , „ • Groundwater Well
C=Y_ :' • ir. ,,� 1'• G:y+y•,�:rMCi •
dd 7 • '; i - I1 ;: ai�,'w a� Stage Recorder
Vegetation Condition Assessmen , I + '1'..-y r•., gro41 } +L ' �, .
�_ ? ,< "' '�;_ ,„� . , • Flow Gauge
Target Community , I-.;,', es' ••``-`. y - +iC '• . k-! •, 7 y Ambient
cc° Present Marginal Absent + .> '.-' , •' �+r`� ' , ',
a Absent a f :.,: 'r'. ; ,.. . :.. .`1' '`-•-.i ` '` :f ' +e MC1 B , -r .
No Fill .rx 'i, �- * � `
NPresent J . ' ` / +. .� 9iYY�y( . s

tiI 7
r` rriis
..++ . 1. i} R F, F. ^:'
, .. . .
. . .. .
Ui
.. .
. , . .. .
. 1 _
. .
. ..
.L
•
` .., _.: •_ ., ` ,t N
. fl
. BS1-A •
Y
•F 3C. • fr'
. - W E
JN3B i '' .
` ;ir s
,{ / i p;.....' \ .
0 100 zoo
Il
.. .. ,r .ii, �. / / ' - - - Feet
):, BS1-B
} + Figure 2
i.
'f
, .
` ' :, i' '' to �� . . • . _. Current Conditions
• ',c' ;'• Plan View
a
:, �u' 111E. 11.,s;--1, 1.;444:: \-(''.- 2.- MYO 2021
i,, 4 e
! ':'-. ; rw---k. *' • : 4 1.):,.
: 4 : . i - Little Sebastian
�' 'yn ;= '* 1 i I:', .:' Y, / Mitigation Site
-: . -
ue--� i `. a /
itte
lh.
. .- 1 .;. 1 . {. p " : .( ,, • i Surry County, NC
_ (k T yy '. �. ` �T t '• 5V ,' :. . !. tiff. •i
M1 c- t1 - -, /7 ,, t if f , 1" _ ,�'0- + • 4,. .. • / Date: 10/7/2021 Drawn by:RTM
hip
-,.\ •
',` + a '"" '-�_ - • ?• i Lat:35.937509 Long -81.234876
- T � ' .` LEGEND
•
• • ° { .,+ i7 I O Conservation Easement
(1/4,
'� - t* +}+ w;- ram' (\ Gideon Bank Site
R t �' t.f , — — — o Fixed Veg Plot
�• B 1-D —
,,� fi'- • i Existing Wetland
; .A
t \ is n
— — 1 BS1 E Structure
= 4. I iir i ,,. - Top of Bank
;:. (i10,/ t
tr .. .:
,-tom Cross Section
4E . :' Stream Mitigation
+ d 4r .r �� r+ , ti I ; s.
' ; MC3-B •fit —Restoration
9, , y t� .],..•. 4, f •! '. e .'L fl —Enhancement I
' ,�� MC3-A \ • ,,, `! Enhancement II
= y � � —Enhancement II (5:1)
�' , � ! i Enhancement II (7.5:1)
�, i4U1-.. • . 4, �� !; i —
�►,1k r \ iEnhancement II (10:1)
i • r� © \ *2.: —Preservation
.. .A _' . — • Groundwater Well
No Credit
ti s
is ray jam' r -.P.
Vegetation Condition Assessmen -
\ Stage Recorder
r.
' - . -�' • Flow Gauge
w Target Community �' �' \
Present Marginal Absent -•1 -aw I • Ambient
a Absent No Fill !qf;.►y.. • ■ i.. T 0. _.f: '�1' w. ..yri.'iSigf--k At
MC3-D
N
Present
,fl

Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach JN3 Date Mar-21
Assessed Stream Length 1043
Assessed Bank Length 2086
Number
Stable, Amount of % Stable,
Performing as Total Number Unstable Performing as
Ma'or Channel Cate s or Metric Intended in As-built Footas a Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 0 100%
Bank and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does
Toe Erosion NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable and are 0 100%
providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical-rotational, slumping,calving,or collapse 0 100%
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the 10 10 100%
sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
Bank Protection exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 18 18 100%
guidance document)

Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach MC1-C Date Mar-21
Assessed Stream Length 555
Assessed Bank Length 1110
Number
Stable, Amount of % Stable,
Performing as Total Number Unstable Performing as
Ma'or Channel Cate s or Metric Intended in As-built Foota s e Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 0 100%
Bank and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does
Toe Erosion NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable and are 0 100%
providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical-rotational, slumping,calving,or collapse 0 100%
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the 2 2 100%
sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
Bank Protection exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 7 7 100%
guidance document)

Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach B S 1 Date Mar-21
Assessed Stream Length 1123
Assessed Bank Length 2246
Number
Stable, Amount of % Stable,
Performing as Total Number Unstable Performing as
Ma'or Channel Cate s or Metric Intended in As-built Foota s e Intended
Bank Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 0 100%
Bank and/or surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does
Toe Erosion NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable and are 0 100%
providing habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical-rotational, slumping,calving,or collapse 0 100%
Totals 0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the 8 8 100%
sill.
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
Bank Protection exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 3 3 100%
guidance document)

Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage 10.7 Date Mar-21
Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping CCPV Number of Combined %of Planted
Threshold Depiction Polygons Acreage Acreage
1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.1 acres Red Simple 0 0.00 0.0%
Hatch
2. Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3,4,or 5 stem count criteria. 0.1 acres Orange 0 0.00 0.0%
Simple Hatch
Total 0.0%
3.Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year. 0.25 acres Orange 0 0.00 0.0%
Simple Hatch
Cumulative Total 0.0%
Easement Acreage 25.91
Mapping CCPV Number of Combined %of
Vegetation Category Definitions pp g Easement
Threshold Depiction Polygons Acreage Acreage
4.Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points(if too small to render as polygons at map scale). 1000 SF Yellow 0 0.00 0.0%
Crosshatch
5.Easement Encroachment Areas3 Areas or points(if too small to render as polygons at map scale). none Red ample 0 0.00 0.0%
Hatch
1=Enter the planted acreage within the easement. This number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory,the channel acreage,crossings or
any other elements not directly planted as part of the project effort.
2 =The acreage within the easement boundaries.
3=Encroachment may occur within or outside of planted areas and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1,2 or 3 in the table and is the result of encroachment,the
associated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item(i.e.,item 1,2 or 3)as well as a parallel tally in item 5.
4=Invasives may occur in or out of planted areas,but still within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. Invasives of concern/interest are listed below. The list of high concern spcies are those with
the potential to directly outcompete native,young,woody stems in the short-term(e.g.monitoring period or shortly thereafter)or affect the community structure for existing, more established tree/shrub stands over timeframes that are slightly
longer(e.g. 1-2 decades). The low/moderate concern group are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to be mapped with regularity,but can be mapped, if in the
judgement of the observer their coverage,density or distribution is suppressing the viability,density,or growth of planted woody stems. Decisions as to whether remediation will be needed are based on the integration of risk factors by EEP
such as species present,their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass, and the practicality of treatment. For example, even modest amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the projects history will warrant control, but
potentially large coverages of Microstegium in the herb layer will not likley trigger control because of the limited capacities to impact tree/shrub layers within the timeframes discussed and the potential impacts of treating extensive amounts of
ground cover. Those species with the"watch list"designator in gray shade are of interest as well,but have yet to be observed across the state with any frequency. Those in red italics are of particular interest given their extreme risk/threat level
for mapping as points where isolated specimens are found,particularly ealry in a projects monitoring history. However,areas of discreet,dense patches will of course be mapped as polygons. The symbology scheme below was one that was
found to be helpful for symbolzing invasives polygons, particulalry for situations where the conditon for an area is somewhere between isolated specimens and dense,discreet patches. In any case,the point or polygon/area feature can be
symbolized to describe things like high or low concern and species can be listed as a map inset,in legend items if the number of species are limited or in the narrative section of the executive summary.

Little Sebastian MYO Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
T. k' a �� r .r '� . *, `101r
.I j'C ! n J 1..• .. s
_,tea N� !. °4 6.^""'�''
ram- of t _ � �F .z,....4,
ry,�n � ��.
kUSIIt� M/1 a• -_ -� - " ,ram` '�.x':: *'.`fig'w^" --'^ `�
Vegetation Plot 1 (3/17/2021) Vegetation Plot 2 (3/17/2021)
t _ "Mil
i . d'.cs .
Y
W
'� �4 c.a
mN
-t.f--A,.":a1,,t,'41,'`a."'-a'.7"t,'.,e.,.,",„1r.c"-"'..1°...,Vo-,7W.,.7,_,.--,..,r-,4.10.,-r..,,,3,_,,.,..,„.1;.-.-,,1r,2.t.-,,.-''-'',,.-,,z,1_t''-.t'.-',',-l1 r4s-2V-,---_--41'7,.-.•''.'--,,-.-='....,-V 7=.,--,7_,,--.sI's';.',',-:•,e,A,"',.,'k&'-`
',7..'t-i--.-,-'r,').k---;.7'.'."`,.st-''.*.a.:1'f',,''._„',',-_,--i.,.-,0''-.-,.-f,,.,_=--s:---.'-_-'_..,.:7-
» - _-- [ fS+ -f w-Lc _ _ _ S % X. 'R--k
.,.7-:A'.%4t-:..1,'-;--.-1-.1i,,_,-_l-l-„--7.:_-4-,.:'l1='1-,.4'',,-.''t:.,','
,'-."`:4-7-0,iM...-,'444,,::(,,40.i--`y,'-..,:",,F,T.t4t-.7e,,4-,-g-p"x;t4.,j,!.:eq
ems" g s :
-,-4.--::-4-->-1...:-a,z.-k,1,.-.•.:e.—_,.-,.%!-%t,,',,,,t,:kr;.Z,-,A-f:-4-,,1:,.,,--„,.7.,,.,.'
,*--'h:44',i4:,/:,•;''..,.I,'14.,',t'C.4',.,:1.,,Nt.6-!4;'1'.e,..,.4,,.,'„t4,:4"1t._.,,-.:4_."1 r.--,--,",1ti.=&4.44,..kt'4*.,-•,''7--W-0.',.,"_
gyp' .Se q,F Y ""a,,, @- ✓�.e,Z n. ., z _`:.:`
} t� { `._ J fir - , r -':
Q ,£ s._K tr :'�,."'`-`'` # 7r y1 ,ti 3..k s t6r cs'i° % y _ o4' '`t' -..,n
-f', L emu..':,` l ' o } t._�'` •. _ .. k9`� n"'.'-' x!i "'..x...
Vegetation Plot 3 (3/17/2021) Vegetation Plot 4 (3/17/2021)

li
::--.' --..: ,, , iw.,, _If,.:-' . , 44,,, =, -, -,..
1„L
h�. r S, ' 45y .:
i" a� 0, ,,:7-41', '41.
,
Vegetation Plot 5 (3/17/2021) Vegetation Plot 6 (Photo Unavailable)

Little Sebastian Monitoring Device Photos
f
Wy
,; W a :vc
1 "'rr' ?, !, �,_� Pam: �:� ,,.,,
a ria: # 1' " ,',a
s 1. 9f ) -:4r ' a , • 5:
r `` ��
y:
l 'i
7.
Flow. Gauge JN2-A Stage Recorder JN3
`2�.a hYJ� '� ..'4 �4y'jt ! g r / x., :sl..
'�!b: 2- S- ."ya w _ r :r'b.,.:317:::',.h.4"
: I::
oriffm,
r
4. tt ma
g „1 L'.. F & �'�'? s5r� a ,s q,. " mot P. M 22 ,� t
s .` .. ! 4. I.. 4_e.1"'x v a '-= p. �. t�t3, c � ter�$�
tim �. r� .yam c „A err 4 ! : !W ''t ',
_rs t,dg3. �: n� x ,u�ti-ice,. xx ,1 P .1' �.
,ti rya e'"; .'.� e
Flow Gauge BS1-A Stage Recor der
BS1-E

ttigia
r��'9R ., m-^° ,rti afi 4s - t - " f � ,i tea:. "." `
� '` .; . u t i ' sir ....- '�' y
r0e7-.±
'F � '' x4 -„ors Y 1,- yam .¢�r: S��dc `_d
�rP-r E `"`1'�' - e, w ti `P t. .. e- .4 A
.,..,:-..,:-_,-,.,-7-,,,,-;;.. ,_..:,,.., _00,,,.,..!A ,..,.:,i,.. ,--,-,-. „,..‘T, .._ --...,„---,,„,,-..-
r=� y s
- /',', te,
� �� ,.aq j� s ""`'- � ,> rx r., -te �.� @• � �-I �.� ` s ::�1 ��,e
ttiO
Groundwater Well 1 Groundwater Well 2

Little Sebastian Reach JN7
rivr0. ...4 , - 1, ,.; 14414''' ‘:11,4 7: ' .f
cflipP1111911111111pflirr ' aid ,/fir ♦ ,, aav l � ,
. -;,,i iii:., . Of;ij k. * - --.4e.1 .0.41.titt:,,..0.41,ii,, 1
it 1IIiei1iUi14 , * i
-
n
�A at ..
ti . _{hi� +1 �€ s:i
•
1 ` • ,� 1� ;fie � ,
c+
a •
4
- 1 t' - L''I'l.-.'N' Y ' ' ,'''' '',- . --- - 17;'''- ,1 I. ' ,)•;414.47?' •.V.4..S1-7::. - . . . __
_ . ..._ _
,_
_ _ _ _. .
. _ ._
. _
. .
____ __ _
_ _ ____ _. _
._.. .
_____.,,,,..-„,...„,
___.,...= _ . .
_ _ _
. .
. ,
_ __. _ -e- - - , "-- - - _
- •a
�! Yry
ii.
y. 54 ;ate, ry
— yam;;, S - yY C
_ FTC= '`t -.:.

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C.Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Planted Species Summary
Common Name Scientific Name Mit Plan % As-Built % Total Stems Planted
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 15 15 1,600
River Birch Betula nigra 15 15 1,600
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 10 15 1,600
Water Oak Quercus nigra 15 14 1,600
Northern Red Oak Quercus rubra 10 11 1,200
Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 10 10 1,100
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 5 600
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 5 5 600
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 0 5 600
Sugarberry Celtis laevigata 0 5 600
Elderberry Sambucus canadensis 5 0 0
Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum 5 0 0
Total 11,100
Planted Area 10.7
As-built Planted Stems/Acre 1,037
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Planted Volunteer Total Success Averaged
Plot # Criteria Planted Stem
Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Stems/Acre
Met? Height (ft)
1 931 0 931 Yes 1.5
2 1335 0 1335 Yes 1.3
3 1133 0 1133 Yes 1.8
4 1214 0 1214 Yes 1.8
5 647 0 647 Yes 1.4
6 1052 0 1052 Yes 1.5
R1 1012 0 1012 Yes 1.5
R2 1133 0 1133 Yes 1.6
R3 1538 0 1538 Yes 1.4
Project Avg 1111 0 1111 Yes 1.5

Appendix C.Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Little Sebastian Current Plot Data(MVO 2021) Annual Means
100027-01-0001 100027-01-0002 100027-01-0003 100027-01-0004 100027-01-0005 100027-01-0006 100027-01-R1 100027-01-R2 100027-01-R3 MYO(2021)
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnolS P-all T PnolS P-all T PnolS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Betula nigra river birch Tree 6 6 6 4 4 4MIMI * IIIIII . 5 5 5 1 1 1 2 2 2 18 18 18
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 5 5 5 6 6 6• 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 2 2 2 3 3 3 26 26 26
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 7
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 1 1 1 _ 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 9 9 9
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 =MEN 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 11 11 11
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 4 4 4 6 6 6 15 15 15 8 8 8 2 2 2 6 6 6 3 3 3 5 5 5 4 4 4 53 53 53
Quercus nigra water oak Tree I I 4 4 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 4 4 4 7 7 7 29 29 29
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 8 8 8 4 4 4 14 14 14 3 3 3 2 2 2 7 7 7 5 5 5 9 9 9 53 53 53
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree 4 4 4 6 6 6 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 7 7 7 2 2 2 7 7 7 6 6 6 37 37 37
Stem count 23 23 23 33 33 33 28 28 28 30 30 30 16 16 16 26 26 26 25 25 25 28 28 28 38 38 38 247 247 247
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.22
Species count 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10
Stems per ACRE 931 931 931 1335 1335 1335 1133 1133 1133 1214 1214 1214 647 647 647 1052 1052 1052 1012 1012 1012 1133 1133 1133 1538 1538 1538 1111 1111 1111

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site -Reach JN-3
Parameter Gauge2 Regional Curve Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es)Data Design Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SDb n
Bankfull Width(ft) --- --- --- 14.9 16.4 -- 17.9 --- 2 7.1 12.3 -- 17.5 --- 2 --- 16.0 --- --- --- 15.0 --- --- 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 37.0 48.5 -- 60.0 --- 2 >30 51.3 -- 72.5 --- 2 --- >50 --- --- --- >64.4 --- --- 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) --- --- --- 1.6 1.7 -- 1.6 --- 2 1.0 1.3 -- 1.6 --- 2 --- 2.2 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 2.1 3.0 -- 3.9 --- 2 1.2 1.9 -- 2.6 --- 2 --- 2.9 --- --- --- 2.2 --- --- 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) --- --- --- 26.1 27.3 -- 28.5 --- 2 6.7 17.2 -- 27.7 --- 2 --- 26.9 --- --- --- 22.8 --- --- 1
Width/Depth Ratio 8.5 9.9 -- 11.2 --- 2 7.4 9.3 -- 11.1 --- 2 --- 9.5 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio 2.5 3.0 -- 3.4 --- 2 >4 4.2 -- 4.3 --- 2 --- >2.2 --- --- --- >4.3 --- --- 1
'Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.2 -- 1.3 --- 2 1.0 1.2 -- 1.3 --- 2 --- 1.0 --- --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.6 --- --- 17 --- --- 7 --- 29 14 25 22 48 10 18
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.43 2.605 2.735 5.1 1.23176 18
Pool Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 --- --- 16 --- --- 4 --- 18 19 35 34 55 10 17
Pool Max depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Pool Spacing(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 26 --- --- 68 --- --- 29 --- 75 38 59 59 78 11 15
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 20 --- --- 85 --- --- 39 --- 94 39 --- --- 94 --- ---
Radius of Curvature(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 7 --- --- 54 --- --- 14 --- 60 14 --- --- 60 --- ---
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.9 --- --- 3.7 --- --- 0.9 --- 3.7 0.9 --- --- 3.7 --- ---
Meander Wavelength(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 33 --- --- 105 --- --- 74 --- 116 74 --- --- 116 --- ---
Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.4 --- --- 5.9 --- --- 2.4 --- 5.9 2.4 --- --- 5.9 --- ---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 --- --- ---
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull --
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 --- --
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification E3 E3/E4b E3 E3
Bankfull Velocity(fps) --- --- --- --- --
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) --- --- --- --
Valley length(ft) 602 160 945 945
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 772 189 1088 1088
Sinuosity(ft) 1.225 1.195 1.15 1.15
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) --- --
Channel slope(ft/ft) 0.0125 1.85 0.0085 0.0085
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) --- --- --
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks --- ---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric --- ---
Biological or Other --- ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3

Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site -Reach MC1-C
Parameter Gauge2 Regional Curve Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es)Data Design Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SDb n
Bankfull Width(ft) --- --- --- --- --- 17.4 --- --- 1 7.1 12.3 -- 17.5 --- 2 --- 23.0 --- --- --- 21.3 --- --- 1
Floodprone Width(ft) --- --- 50.0 --- --- 1 >30 51.3 -- 72.5 --- 2 --- >50 --- --- --- >64.9 --- --- 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- 1.8 --- --- 1 1.0 1.3 -- 1.6 --- 2 --- 2.4 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) --- --- 2.9 --- --- 1 1.2 1.9 -- 2.6 --- 2 --- 3.2 --- --- --- 3.2 --- --- 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) --- --- --- --- --- 30.6 --- --- 1 6.7 17.2 -- 27.7 --- 2 --- 54.4 --- --- --- 49.8 --- --- 1
Width/Depth Ratio --- --- 10.0 --- --- 1 7.4 9.3 -- 11.1 --- 2 --- 9.7 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio --- --- 2.9 --- --- 1 >4 4.2 -- 4.3 --- 2 --- >2.2 --- --- --- >3 --- --- 1
'Bank Height Ratio --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1 1.0 1.2 -- 1.3 --- 2 --- 1.0 --- --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.6 --- --- 17 --- --- 10 --- 41 14 25 18 61 17 7
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.19 2.32 1.35 4.8 1.89753 7
Pool Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 --- 16 --- --- 6 --- 25 36 51 48 73 12 6
Pool Max depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Pool Spacing(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 26 --- --- 68 --- --- 41 --- 108 65 81 73 109 19 5
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 20 --- --- 85 --- --- 56 --- 135 56 --- --- 135 --- ---
Radius of Curvature(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 7 --- --- 54 --- --- 21 --- 86 21 --- --- 86 --- ---
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.9 --- --- 3.7 --- --- 1 --- 4 1 --- --- 4 --- ---
Meander Wavelength(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 33 --- --- 105 --- --- 106 --- 167 106 --- --- 167 --- ---
Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.4 --- --- 5.9 --- --- 2 --- 6 2 --- --- 6 --- ---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 --- --- ---
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull --
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 --- --
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification E3 E3/E4b E3 E3
Bankfull Velocity(fps) --- --- --- --- --
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) --- --- --- --
Valley length(ft) 1109 160 478 478
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1288 189 542 542
Sinuosity(ft) 1.16 1.195 1.13 1.13
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) --- --
Channel slope(ft/ft) 0.008 1.85 0.0085 0.0085
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) --- --- --
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks --- ---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric --- ---
Biological or Other --- ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3

Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site -Reach BS-1
Parameter Gauge2 Regional Curve Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es)Data Design Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SDb n
Bankfull Width(ft) --- --- --- --- --- 3.2 --- --- 1 7.1 12.3 -- 17.5 --- 2 --- 4.5 --- 5.7 6.0 --- 6.3 --- 2
Floodprone Width(ft) --- --- 60.0 --- --- 1 >30 51.3 -- 72.5 --- 2 --- --- --- 11.3 17.6 --- 23.8 --- 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- 1.6 --- --- 1 1.0 1.3 -- 1.6 --- 2 --- 0.6 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) --- --- 3.9 --- --- 1 1.2 1.9 -- 2.6 --- 2 --- 0.7 --- 0.7 0.9 --- 1.1 --- 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) --- --- --- --- --- 2.4 --- --- 1 6.7 17.2 -- 27.7 --- 2 --- 2.7 --- 2.6 3.3 --- 4.0 --- 2
Width/Depth Ratio --- --- 4.2 --- --- 1 7.4 9.3 -- 11.1 --- 2 --- 7.4 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio --- --- 3.4 --- --- 1 >4 4.2 -- 4.3 --- 2 --- >1.4 --- 2.0 2.9 --- 3.8 --- 2
'Bank Height Ratio --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1 1.0 1.2 -- 1.3 --- 2 --- 1.0 --- 1.0 1.0 --- 1.0 --- 2
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.6 --- --- 17 --- --- 4.0 --- 11 4 16 16 32 8 19
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.1 5.9 5.0 14.5 3.7 19
Pool Length(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 --- 16 --- --- 2.0 --- 7 11 18 15 43 8 17
Pool Max depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Pool Spacing(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 26 --- --- 68 --- --- 5.0 --- 20 21 34 33 63 10 17
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 20 --- --- 85 --- --- 13.0 --- 19.0 13.0 --- --- 19.0 --- ---
Radius of Curvature(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 7 --- --- 54 --- --- 4.0 --- 10.0 4.0 --- --- 10.0 --- ---
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.9 --- --- 3.7 --- --- 1.0 --- 2.0 1.0 --- --- 2.0 --- ---
Meander Wavelength(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 33 --- --- 105 --- --- 21.0 --- 32.0 21.0 --- --- 32.0 --- ---
Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.4 --- --- 5.9 --- --- 3.0 --- 4.0 3.0 --- --- 4.0 --- ---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 --- --- ---
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull --
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 --- --
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B4a E3/E4b B4/E4 B4/E4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) --- --- --- --- --
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) --- --- --- --
Valley length(ft) 1508 160 1017 1017
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1703 189 1028 1028
Sinuosity(ft) 1.13 1.195 1.01 1.01
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) --- --
Channel slope(ft/ft) 0.049 1.85 0.025-0.035 0.025-0.035
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) --- --- --
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks --- ---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric --- ---
Biological or Other --- ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3

Appendix D. Table 11 -Monitoring Data-Dimensional Morphology Summary(Dimensional Parameters-Cross Sections)
Project Name/Number: Little Sebastian #100027
Cross Section 1(Riffle) Cross Section 2(Riffle) Cross Section 3(Riffle) Cross Section 4(Riffle) Cross Section 5(Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA' 1214.7 1211.2 1170.7 1165.0 1150.6
Bankfull Width(ft)1 5.4 5.4 5.3 9.0 21.3
Floodprone Width(ft)1 13.1 8.7 >34.8 >43.9 >64.9
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 0.7 0.5 1.0 0.9 3.2
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1214.74 1211.2 1170.7 1165.0 1150.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 2.4 2.3 3.5 3.5 49.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios 2.4 1.6 >6.6 >4.9 >3.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Cross Section 6(Pool) Cross Section 7(Riffle) Cross Section 8(Pool) Cross Section 9(Pool) Cross Section 10(Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA' 1150.5 1157.4 1157.2 1188.3 1187.6
Bankfull Width(ft)1 - 15.0 - - 6.3
Floodprone Width(ft)1 - >64.4 - - 23.8
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 4.1 2.2 3.6 1.0 1.1
Low Bank Elevation(ft) - 1157.4 - - 1187.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 56.7 22.8 34.8 3.6 4.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios - >4.3 - - 3.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratios - 1.0 - - 1.0
Cross Section 11(Riffle) Cross Section 12(Pool)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA' 1136.4 1136.1
Bankfull Width(ft)1 5.7 -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 11.3 -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 0.7 1.2
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1136.4 -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 2.6 4.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios 2.0 -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.0 -
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

�1 3 E is S} 1 4 1.L''/.;. y� r'— Y' ,..
µcr
�; wi - .`„,-- - j ire " :a - 4 -' '''-- > er z .,e r S
,= - r;
' `` T nn r
r
s51„ .-
,4- t 'X°4 R i +4: = yap 3 S d _
�y +r illit
,/� ` tie '"' 4 M
g.4,-.4,,,,-,.,,..-.,1*- -ii,7'.,,...-...-""4. .i' - -,_11*--::' 4:t4V"4-''''..1"
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach JN2-B -Cross Section 1 -Riffle-Enhancement I
1219
1218
1217
° 1216
as
d
w 1215
1214
1213
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA 1214.7
Bankfull Width(ft)' 5.4
Floodprone Width(ft)' 13.1
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 0.7
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1214.74
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 2.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio' 2.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio' 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfufl elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankull elevation

-,--,-li :" yi- r.�".i ; ,.. " p_• - •. s - i
T ' �' 7 t- - ;.wr e *'- ram: ,.-
a � � `^�.�, :. �, ♦
a
j.
k
ra `
- = --,....:.-..-1.-:
��5 3 sq d" Y ss
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach JN2-B -Cross Section 2 -Riffle-Enhancement I
1216
1215
1214
c
° 1213
d
w 1212
1210
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Height 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MYS MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA' 1211.2
Bankfull Width(ft)' 5.4
Floodprone Width(ft)' 8.7
BankfullMaxDepth(ft)2 0.5
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1211.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 2.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio' 1.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio' 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

tv a.. yq s kr .9a
.71 "§•
s r v,
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian - Reach JN2-C -Cross Section 3- Riffle-Enhancement II
1175
1174
1173
° 1172
1171
1170
1169
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — -Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 3 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1170.7
Bankfull Width(ft)1 5.3
Floodprone Width(ft)1 >34.8
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.0
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1170.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 3.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t >6.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

F:.-.,mot; ' '�,',_ P u, a
,::',,i:1:::;,,,,':.4„:1;:.'' ..1- ': - -7'7'..;4.,::',...:i.-_.
_ ��•
A
_3 :� J
"� - i v µ, k'^ L: `P`$• ta. .
I x
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach JN2-D -Cross Section 4-Riffle-Enhancement I
1169
1168
1167
c
° 1166
o
w 1165 ,
1164
1163 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
3MY0 2021 — — A rox.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Height Exaggerationx Vertical
pp p 9
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1165.0
Bankfull Width(ft)1 9.0
Floodprone Width(ft)1 >43.9
Bankfull MaxDepth(ft)2 0.9
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1165.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 3.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t >4.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

�.i
-fit. s�"_ -` _ _ -' .- ',-,� Z Y �" ' .1.
i !::.., -' _� • ,tea- ' �t -
t..L >_ _ S� Yam:' _. ��. `5+' - - _
4 ,
Tc,'ne:w.r.d sue:. „.. ..:ems
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian- Reach MC1-C -Cross Section 5- Riffle -Restoration
1155
1154
1153
1152
1151
▪ 1150
o
w 1149
1148
1147
1146
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63
Distance (ft)
3X Vertical
�MYO 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull - —Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation Exaggeration
Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1150.6
Bankfull Width(ft)1 21.3
Floodprone Width(ft)1 >64.9
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 3.2
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1150.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 49.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio i >3.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio i 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

1'. i
-
'
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach MC1-C -Cross Section 6 -Pool -Restoration
1153
1152
1151
1150
I1149
1148
1147
1146
1145
1144
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSAl 1150.5
Bankfull Width(ft)1 -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 -
Bankfull MaxDepth(ft)2 4.1
Low Bank Elevation(ft) -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 56.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t -
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

� r
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach JN3-B -Cross Section 7 -Riffle-Restoration
1162
1161
1160
1159
c 1158
1157
1156
1155
1154
1153
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA' 1157.4
Bankfull Width(fl)1 15.0
Floodprone Width(ft)i >64.4
Bankfull MaxDepth(ft)2 2.2
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1157.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 22.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

•
-
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian - Reach JN3-B -Cross Section 8- Pool -Restoration
1160
1159
1158
1157
c 1156
0
1155
1154
1153
1152
1151
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 8 (Pool)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA 1157.2
Bankfull Width(ft)1 -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 -
Bankfull MaxDepth(ft)2 3.6
Low Bank Elevation(ft) -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 34.8
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t -
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

T _ k� y ., 2 .3 •,yy1 - ��',,M {i :.
•
,. a4
y r'� `.y. §� x r'* ;...tom4:7—.12`"tf ±�s r ;F
..sc..:
* x
,1d
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian - Reach BS1-A -Cross Section 9 -Pool -Restoration
1193
1192
1191
° 1190
w 1189
1188
1187
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull — —Floodprone Area 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1188.3
Bankfull Width(ft)1 -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.0
Low Bank Elevation(ft) -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 3.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t -
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

5 • g (
.N-,. ins ,� �.-;'s,T �M1`si' ,"„� ^� �. 3S $'� .
' "` �'� :'' " - its '". ` fia $
ag .. '* -+:r tom- ,y t i xy • ,_ — -�`� ,7 -:�:
ki-
,"' v -a , '` off, ' a+ i ram' �
fi '.i +1+ ??�! t °r•�-,..: .fi 4,4 b• _
i S5 -mo w -1`y- Af
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach BS1-A -Cross Section 10 -Riffle-Restoration
1192
1191
1190
c
° 1189
w 1188
1187
1186
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
3X Vertical
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation
Exaggeration
Cross Section 10 (Riffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1187.6
Bankfull Width(ft)1 6.3
Floodprone Width(ft)1 23.8
BankfullMaxDepth(ft)2 1.1
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1187.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 4.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t 3.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

- =fsnls_ +J _ ! qq ,"` ",„ r. 3 .ab �.:. �,ai�',,.g(,Y't`:tm =v-
.. ' C yr ? 4 } t, t, . ,01 � -_
.PALS'' * A\ )A ' -A ` . ��d-. _ - --y N CA.. 3ei.�a .,�e
,,&P--..,
- ram'" _ y ;,,. .'J` s _0 4 Ate"
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian - Reach BSI-E -Cross Section 11 -Riffle-Restoration
1141
1140
1139
c
o 1138
cs
w 1137
1136
1135
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0 2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 11 (Riffle)
Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 1136.4
Bankfull Width(ft)i 5.7
Floodprone Width(ft)'2 11.3
BankfullMaxDepth(ft) 0.7
Low Bank Elevation(ft) 1136.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 2.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio i 2.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

'-:.:1r,!"37':.,__"':--'':'*-''.'-',,''.,'':-'-';;1'-..-1,-'-''.-:_-,'A•. '-'-'-' .,--.-.-,7-_-'.-'!''1"-'7''',•.,-,',,-e',',4'.'-. ,. .t* b x,.aY' Sri.,['3 1. - : .
=ram T':* y; = -
"' cam,. ,< _
. °`-fir '� *w ti i *• a.
iliiii:
f - ' zs , :.
Upstream Downstream
Little Sebastian -Reach BSI-E -Cross Section 12 -Pool -Restoration
1140
1139
1138
° 1137
w 1136
1135
1134
0
MYO 2021
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
— — —Approx.Bankfull — —Floodprone Area 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 12 (Pool)
Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull IIevation(ft)-Based on AB-ft
1136.1
Bankfull Width(ft)' -
Floodprone Width(ft)
-
BankfullMaxDepth(ft)2 1.2
Low Bank Elevation(ft)
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft�)� 4.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t -
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t -
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Appendix E
Record Drawings

C 1 r
PROJECT LOCATIONPres
New Hope
l,tr ,,,,, }�]
Safr�,fork PROJECT LOCATION: (36.396724, 80.858382)
- 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
i I LITTLE SEBASTIAN SITE RECORD DRAWINGS
SURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Raleigh, N
Main: 919.829.9909
at��on
www.res.us
a Engineering Services Provided By:
kg
YAD KI N RIVER BASIN . H U C 03040101080020
•
EnvironmentalRES Operating Company, LLC
License: F-1428
7ep''yr AUGUST 2021 SEAL
(if \�\\O\ ti111111/i//
.\\ �H CAR0/l"
union cross ®�\\\\���OFESS/p+ /'1'q'''%
SEAL
"c\
/I�uI Pori RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS LLC ._
031435�
Cross Rands '�, �GINE� ��•
g.
FG;Y:4r 3600 GLENWOOD AVE, SUITE 100
/,,,,IIIIIIII��`�\e 1�l
3Frr:irs
MarshTosanshi RALEIGH, NC 27612
I
e. ._
©2021 Mlcrosof Corporation©2ti211EwTom�c
VICINITY MAP hhh
NTS
F-
F di
Q N
1- N
0
J
o_ ago
\sk
�r
PROJECT DIRECTORY 6,..A;, �•
DESIGNED BY:
`� 7 Sheet List Table
1 , e ,,, ,,,
RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC Sheet Number Sheet Title
3600 GLENWOOD AVE, STE 100 --*L)hhL COVES w
RALEIGH, NC 276 12 Z
ii
\� ��' S I RACK JN2B
DESIGNED FOR: �, �� �� 0
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 52 REACH JN2D 6 z o 0
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES N OK
R rn 53 LEACH JN3 0 Q o
5 RAVENSCROFT DR., # I 02 �� J1 54 LEACH J N 3 S J N 7 w Lu w w
ASHEVILLE, NC 2880I /p, °C °C
�?.;�;E ss J rn 55 RACK JN3 $ JN7
SURVEYED BY: 11110111111Ik`R
ASCENSION LAND SURVEYING, PC � G� c� �—�� _ 1LL, GIDEON MITIGATION SITE J 56 REACH MC
G�/ 3C /T ate-` _is `ter-' � :e 7i
I I 6 WILLIAMS ROAD �� . _-,,, �, , ;�, 57 REACH N C3
MOCKSVILLE, NC 27028 3 �,'��C, O - r'* ''' �' -. rn
m 58 REACH BS
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR:
\-p'
s6 J ; 59 REACH BS
KBS EARTHWORKS, INC.
, rn
56 16 coBLE CHURCH RD. ��� �__� , m 5 I 0 REACH BS
JULIAN, NC 27283 ��)
l'c'E_ ;4 lMONITORING: �� \°�� � c
�1 ( rn
RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC —�� �,,, ,, 's`�
3600 GLENWOOD AVE, STE 100 " �° CE_LCE w `�'
= i
RALEIGH, NC 276 12 L C E
397 ® LCE rn�W
3C7 * �LC�
LCE
3CL
�3C, n
PROJECT TOPOGRAPHY AND AS-BUILT —rn 29 3C,--/
CONDITIONS PLANIMETRICS SURVEY WAS s7
PROVIDED BY ASCENSION LAND SURVEYING, PC
(NC FIRM LICENSE NUMBER C-4288,
CHRISTOPHER L. COLE, NC PLS L-5008)
LITTLE SEBASTIAN MITIGATION SITE PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
DMS PROJECT #: 100027 DESIGNED: AFM
CONTRACT #: 7 187 SITE MAP
DRAWN: TRS
USACE ACTION ID #: SAW-20 I 7-0 I 507 NTS
CHECKED: RTM
RFP #: 16-006993 SHEET NUMBER:
J \ J

1 r 1
LEGEND ores
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50
REACH JN2 B PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —46— —
ENHANCEMENT I AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC 27612
LCE - — _ REACH JN2-C
Main: 919.829.9909
? — ENHANCEMENT II OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — 0 — www.res.us
/ / / / / / / `=X X X Y �c
X —t-ef—x x x X X X Y X Engineering Services Provided By:
/ /// / / / / / / —t x ——---—— PROPERTY LINE — — RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
— X X Y x
/ / / / / / � X- -x—x—x—x—x FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F-1428
/ / / / / / / �+
, � / / / / / / / / / j //� / / AS BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X
SEAL
. -:-i -t-ii\u,
/ / / / / / / ��i / /�/}� ��} \X\�\� LIMITS OF RECORDED ''.' FESS/p y'''
/ X E TI N I / i — — �� `/� /
ECG / /_� k CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE eC by
i / / / / / �� ��I�/'� /} �� � = SEAL
/-- / i r/ /�i / - - - k \k\4- = 031435j r� / / j 7�008� / — j� /,'` \kk PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION %, 9 ENGINE-.,���`�j =S '� / 00 >I �i .._._.__\ -+ 00 9+00_ I.
���J V P I 'k\ Ntssi \,
(( � _ _ ��j��j } / * ////iiiiiim‘o .110\"--
PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
3 )_ T — elm / _ Th �til\
,` 4.+001-00
\� I 1 / �— \ X SECTION 2 /1��
.- \...._
,� _ = _
�` \--- ��__ X SECTION I / ��\\\ — +� �- OX , I
PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE 1111F.
-���\��� ��� _
-- —K\ 4 4 zoo"'
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE V�C
0 FULL SCALE: 1 =3
0
30 60;9
1
XxXxx x \ _
Xxxx— X �J 7W��1Xxxx xX k\x /N / i +0
k (
� xxx—XX 2" = FULL SCALE
xxX_X_ \� X 1" = HALF SCALE xXxX k A-,,,
PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
xx xXX (PROFILE) 8
XxxXx
iii
__ —�`� LOG SILL ADDED A-. ,
'k-\,�
�-x—x X" X DURING CONSTRUCTION 42 " 48" HDPE \x\X�J' PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE o 0
x"— INV IN = I 202.30' 1198. I 7' \x 1 (PROFILE) ~O
up
INV OUT = 120I .40' 1198. 12' \x\
AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
cn
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE // Z
oC Q
O tY
LL 0
AS-BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE 4, O
lai w 0
1240 1240 w w w
CC CC Ct
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
U)
FLOW GAUGE (D
Z
1230 1230 > Q
Z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION 0 0Et
AS-BUILT
TOP OF BANK 0 0
Q
a� Q
U
ug ...... ...._ __ __ /-PROPOSED VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O = COTOP O[ GANK U N
0 1220 1220 z
O
W Z =
d
~ U
NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM Q
O o ' - - _ _cc
THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED Z z W
z " d Q I:
H O
+-�
1210 co
U
w
1210 m
CO w r
°C AS BUILT AS-BUILT U) r m
g CHANNEL BED TOP OF SANK 48" 1DPE
o
0 Q J U) ~
Z i-
cci
I %/i--1 —I
CO
CC CC
1200 - 1200 0_ o
J
00
0
///..
o PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
o
a) DESIGNED: AFM
o_ AS-BUILT DRAWN: TRS
cz
CHANNEL BED CHECKED:
o
o°'c SHEET NUMBER:
L
Lii
4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00 9+50 10+00
Lu
SI
z
SCALE: HOR I "=30'; VERT I "=6'
LT_
J \ I

r / N r 1
/ /
LEGEND
/ PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50
/ / res
+/ i / / PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —46— —
+/ AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50
__ REACH J N 2 D 4/ / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
x x xx `� ENHANCEMENT I / AS BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC 27612
��L x x—x—x— 4�V Main: 919.829.9909
/ / OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — 0 — www.res.us
—X—x—x—LC xXx_X /
E x—X� /} / PROPERTY LINE — — Engineering Services Provided By:
x—X�x� /i RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
� /j FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F 1428
36" HDPE /+ / �/
INV IN = 1165.70' 1165.E I ' + / AS-BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X— SEAL
INV OUT = 1165. I O' 1165.26' } TREELINE ���i)iiiiiuui
/ ( vP 2
��� /v
/V - ,5 )
/\ 2s _ / 5+00 ,/�— x— �/ / \ l �� 4 CONSERVATION EASLIMITS OF EMENT LCE 4roitSS/p y9 %;
�� � --- y/ �v SECTION 4 = SEAL
\ � \i Q 031435k
+ / / // ' / / I I I �/-� Q/ / PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION % .')VGINE�`f
i 6t,,,, 9
o � xXXXXXX I / / I OklA
VI
O �_ — k0 / / ^ \ \ ��_` T: . � ,\ �// PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
O _ O X-5 CTI O N 3 / \ O, \ , c 1 - /*/../ ) ,�\ �1�;s*;� —,/ PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE
/ �us.� =j�'18 �A. �. �' \ REACH MC I_�'00 X SECTION 4 , #
I� '` \ FULL SCALE: 1"=30
x� — \ �
\� / \ PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE �� � 30 60
xx— \3\ �� \ Pow R / I
2" = FULL SCALE
—— 8
—— —— X-S I \ P E / � 1" = HALF SCALE
——_ \ \ \ \, } i J I PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
xx�-- 6
(PROFILE)
diPROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE Q
0 N
(PROFILE) 0
co i
AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
I
I
I i
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE �O Z
O ii
u_ 0
AS BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE P��'� 0 U) rI
I190I
1I I190 CT)
1.11
w 0
CC CC IY
I GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER
0
U)
FLOW GAUGE (D
z_
II80 II80 z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION 0 0r
PROPOSED SG" hDPE Q 0
TOP OF BANK Q i
Q
a AS-BUILT r2 0
ug TOP OF BANK VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O = 0
N
O 1170 1170 z
w — iNrii -
LJJ V
_ 1 =
a _
_ U
o - , NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM Q
0 —
THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED z cc z LLI
wo AS-BUILT " \ \
cc CHANNEL BED �� Q
z — Cr) 0
P
m 1 1 60 II60 U
Q
co PROPOSED _wD
CHANNEL BED I W
cc
co r
o I Q J U) ~
Z I—
IF 0
.� w H z
CO(1) —Ic Q
1150 1150 0_ o
J
00
O
O
o PROJECT NUMBER: ----
o
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
aa)) DESIGNED: AFM
o TRS
o_
DRAWN:
CHECKED: RTM
as
co
cc SHEET NUMBER:
Lii 15+00 15+50 16+00 16+50 1 7+00 1 7+50 18+00 18+50 19+00 19+50 20+00 20+50 2 I +00
S2w SCALE: HOR 1 "=30'; VERT I "=6'
L
J \ I

r 1 r
LEGEND
REAL h J N 3
00 \� PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50Pres
RESTORATION + - / PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —46— —
,
, ,
LL, // AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
/ / 2.. co / / AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC27612
/_ -�x�x�_ / / U / OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — — Maiww�res us909
'— /
�� _ / / / PROPERTY LINE — — Engineering Services Provided By:
/ / , RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
//7
FENCELINE —X X X X X License: F-1428
--xx-x-
\/ / / ---� U , " AS BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X— SEAL
�� � / �
��� ,
•
7 99 „ TREELINE
/ ;//'
\\\ / LIMITS OF RECORDED ``��yci-E.SS/04/X�I _T- 77-----/7-
\ Q A4 / CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE Si-
�� \ Q / = SEAL
031435 Wit
/ j#/,d/ 7 / \ f / PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION FNGINEc�
1
•
7 F
/� � / � _ _ _ - - / o �, L��
// _ae-� O �/ �
/ �� TB--------_ _ A / / / X _ ,P PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
____-7 — — TR2+00 /= ��� �� �V....... _____ ../p ( ,A
""'��,.1 �� fir
tG _ __ _ .e..-T3-2-__- --=:-_-_-__----:-_-----_-;__- .--____p -----'
_ _ _ — BB — — —e� —� / �: .t �� i , •_.... L , tiik )
// 00 0 / PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE
tl NIP°X�� � ' / � �sl — ate ��:i �� � 1�� _�/7 �/�/'/
_ xv ) I I —
� ��x s Zj FULL SCALE: 1"=30
7
_� �` - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE )o2 0 30 60
�� e, /j /may I ,, — o
ti\\_ — _ _ x� '-� --_= ice-
99 / / / x�-.' \ \ ,— 2' FULL SCALE
J \ \M- _ _ 1" = HALF SCALE
— \ \ PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
xa � \ O \ 8
(PROFILE)
_ lit
x- PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE Q
N
OHE (PROFILE) N
OHE O co
OHE o_ o
OH
E
OHE AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION -�
OHE
RELOCATED ONE
UTILITY IHE 0
OHE ,:,, Z
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE /O
oC Q
O tY
LL 0
AS-BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE '�*IP O U)
IP C w
1175 1175 w w w
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
(/)
FLOW GAUGE 0i z_
I
1170 I 1170 > z
Z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION * * < J
AS-BUILT 0 0
TOP OF BANK 0
PROPOSED U
,i TOP OF BANK VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT
>- VP# U CO
coW Z
0 IIG5 1165 O
- I Z U
a �- — — - NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM
F- W
0 - • THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED z z
0
cc
w Q 0
P
CO
m , ' I I GO 116o n � U
m
CO in r2
I\
m \ i� � r
— \ _ 2 w D J
AS-DUI LT J
CHANNEL BED Z J I—
PROPOSED H w ~
w CHANNEL BED 0 J Q
CC
w 1155 1155 0_ 0
J J
O
O
o PROJECT NUMBER: ----
o
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
8DESIGNED: AFM
.o TRS
o_
DRAWN:
ro CHECKED: RTM
0
o°'c SHEET NUMBER:
6E
di
0+00 0+50 I +00 I +50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00
zS3
J SCALE: hOR I "=30'; VERT I "=3'
L
J \ J

I. / / \\\\C\\ v7 \ \ N N_ _ _ //� 1 r
/ / \\ �\ \ N \ _ / / LEGEND ores
, , \ PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50
.13:1
/ N
, / / \ \ \�\ / REAL I1 J N 7 _ �� /
�x-��c� -� 1 III / RESTORATION / PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —4C— —
ff
— / \�II I\I I / (SEE S5 FOR PROFILE) �" DOUBLE GO" HDPE
AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50
, / Im I CHANNEL ADDED BETWEEN — — ,, 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
�' �O / FINAL MITIGATION PLAN INV IN ( I ) = 1150.25 1150.54 — Raleigh, NC27612
I +' INV OUT ( I ) = 1150.00' 1150.25' t-* AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46—
/ — I _ AND CONSTRUCTION — INV IN (2) = 1150.25' 1150.50' ��' Main: 919.829.9909
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — www.res.us
/ O Xx�. W / / INV OUT (2) = 1 1 50.00' 1 1 50.33' t)'
— I
1 / `max
xI/ -- x } I PROPERTY LINE - - Engineering Services Provided By:
'I I \ — t I RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
//� / FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F-1428
.....id, / \ \
.\ -EeE�,� � -e� / IIAS BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X— SEAL
1/ l J
4) \ I I / / / / TREELINE— O� / — 1 � �� / Ilt
�\\•\���H CARp��,,%
X �� "- / /'
LIMITS OF RECORDED �.��4 FESS-6 1'.,
�,; \ , /�` k/ }/'` / / CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE �4 by
c\Ak .i
_ _ SEAL
\ �� X / / / .4 / \/„_ 3 /
/ = 031435
�� / <`o°. ° � \ ,-0 X-SECTION 7/6 /\ Ig. 1/4-il 0 y -\ /T-6`,/- is \ ' 0 / K'
/ i�� -----it"-- - PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION --' c�'N ��
g$�� �\ I 4r°4(tr
/ \ t / \\ C� 0 / / /\ 0 / \/ 12 / �� �\ '///'/� F. MU\'\'`���Zqi — ��• • ,,4ie'. \� \\�� / l'r '`s"" �� !�'.i - - TC ���" /�,//111111111AA��� �►�J �9�1��
1. I,''' OO PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
\—Ay' N _ \ 1
O ��IN��1c ' — //
fillirli
o,, ��--=- ....._1.4 I� \ x S Ec oAN 7 � � �, v o k � //� 410, 116
\ _ = �- T� / / [�JI \ PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE
tea_. o �. __ '` /..�i��"�� _ a - ,/ / ��„,
v . � L . _ , �/ �i ,x . 111
O �. / FULL SCALE: 1 -30
x- -- \ X-SECTION 8 \ \ 'r- ?._- ,,, ,, V-1 Z' J /'` / / \ PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE �O�C 0 30 60
/ \ GW2 ,� ,`� Lx/ \ 2 FULL SCALE
C ' i/ O \ 1" = HALF SCALE
\ N O —\ �X� 0 PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
- \ \ ��X/x + \ \ (PROFILE) 8
O �x x� cV \
HE \ �x�x w
HF_ x x_3 I \ PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE Q N
,HE x�x x Z (!� (PROFILE) N
OHE — J \ O co
OHE REACH JN3 =
OHE OH RESTORATION Q \
E �_ \ AS BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
RELOCATED OHE
UTILITY OHE \
OHE r 0
i
OHE AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE Z
oC Q
O tY
LL 0
IP
AS BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE '�� O w ct
w
I I 70 1170 > J U
w w w
CC fr IY
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
U)
FLOW GAUGE (D
Z
IIG5 11G5 Q
Z
I — MONITORING CROSS SECTION 0 0Et
0 O
0 i
c
r 0 ti
ug PROPOSED VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O = Z
co TOP OF BANK w H
o 06
IIGO � ✓- - 11G0 o
w �,
AS-BUILTLi CO
co z Z
o _ _ r TOE OF BANK _
�• o - _ NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM
O •000000o o o - - - -000 - DOUBLE GO" HDPE THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED z ZH 0
w •'ovovo°o 0 6- . � - - - Q
z _oo°0000000 0° _ Q w
�o
m 1155 - - - _ Ilk, I I55 Q
co
Q "o ��
Z I-
u -\ .,/-1
I— C3
.in / _ 0 H Z
N
u O Q
°' 1150 II 1150 cc
o
J
0 6
c” AS-BUILT
0
o CHANNEL BED PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
o PROPOSED
DESIGNED: AFM
0_ CHANNEL BED -' DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: RTM
as
cc SHEET NUMBER:
d_ 1
w 6+00 6+50 7+00 7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00 9+50 10+00 10+50 11 +00 11 +50 I2+100
z S4
LT_
HOR I =30 , VERT I —3
J \ I

6 \ 1 i V/ // j / 1 r
�0O }/+� /�,•. ,,�o° 2<1
LEGEND
i / + \ q q
` �A, \ +,<+ �\ /,• ' o�/ , -X PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 50
/ I
-\ / / /�� PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR —46—
x '.,+ \ �' *3 /� AS BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50
+-7/ . _ /� i / N. 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
�'r' \ / � �� —L �-= 4GIDON
� AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC27612
� xx +� , / Main: 919.829.9909
/ OVHAD ELCTIC UTILITY LINE — — www.res.us
/ / // MITIGATION SITE
'4 / / / • PROPERTY LINE — — Engineering Services Provided By:
\ \ �\ —BB �— / \ // .�'� / RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
�� `�- -��—� +\71.-7-'7/
� / x �i // +� FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F 1428
\cD1 ��\ \\ no - r x / / / / �� ��� k SEAL
\�� \ \ k � r' . _� - 3 + + �� / \� AS-BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X—
...),"----:.-r- — ,,tsp. -....,...>/7—„,
��
72c'?' z Y 4'� ��� / '/ / / / � �/ �\ LIMITS OF RECORDED ps,rrocises/64:4,,,,,,,s
`/I/ +/ ��" 'y�;' /� CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE �<
N I Atilt
/ /� ...
�� + �. ;��, c� �� /� ��� / (� SEAL
x / I + + �� / , # .� 00 — ,�/ - � 7)\:
�� o• ,f / 031435 •
: j
\xZ + �� =�, �_ _ _. \ �� � �, / �,��� . / PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION %. �GINE-� ...x r /�/ +� .. , —-- E,=—� \ / _ f� ,,,� F. MOB-A�` I
x -__ ��� / i\x� J +/ �/ - \ \ . (\ 4,+ , \ i 5 PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
X o \ A. I %'
Ni 1 0 a �'� j(1 III iii,..
li\,,,
x _ 1 I ,I PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE,k,';,1; 4 /
max,
x \ \ 1 FULL SCALE: 1"=30
I / ^max`. 1 , w\ \\\\\\ ��
REACh JN3 \ \\\\ \ / PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE )��C 3� 60
RESTORATION \ �\ /'W�
\I � — —
I �'` I 1\ 1" = HALF SCALE
w, N
I I I2" = FULL SCALE
PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
// `' SECTION 6 yI I " "� (PROFILE) 8
\ \ I ,�i X-SEC 1 ON 5 /�� w
k0 \ 1 /V O 0 //� .:r PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE ~ N
Q
(PROFILE) cp
I- N
1 / A/r/ .,� . / o CD
\ \ / ,_ /1// /9//
/ ,..,'�''•je�^TZ., //// AS BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
/ '% / REACH MC I
/
.y/,,;e:0,!-:=,-,, —___ :, .
/ 7 / 1
f v//:"<„,-;...„>;,..-
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE / —
iiw
� Q
O
REACH JN3 REACh JN7 0
AS-BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE '���� 0
C w
1160 1160 1170 1170 w5 w w
CC CC Ct
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
PROPOSED I U)
TOP OF BANK FLOW GAUGE 0 0
Z
1155 - 1155 II65 II65 > Q
Z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION ® * < J
AS-BUILT 0
AS-BUILT TOP OF BANK 0
TOP OF BANK
0 Q
r 0 ti
§ - VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O = z
o 05
I150 _ I150 I160 I160
Z— Al° p CO
co W Z Z
r----- , I—
a _ r
O — — i oo�o`'000n �- — IL _ NOTE:
DESIGN I ARE SHOWN IN FROM
O H �VOVO0 0 0 ��
0 0 00 � — Q D w
fY
m
Q \\ 0
m II45 II45 II55 II55 Q
CO
co
c AS-BUILT AS-BUILT w r
CHANNEL BED CHANNEL BED d w D di
J
o PROPOSED
5 CHANNEL BED PROPCSED ~
z J
fn CHANNEL BED U I— Z
w —
cn J O CC Q
CC
°' 1140 1140 1150 I 1150 a- a
J
pp I
O
oO PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
8 DESIGNED: AFM
.o
TRS
0_
DRAWN:
15 ow
CHECKED: RTM
U
cc SHEET NUMBER:
Ed 12+00 12+50 13+00 13+50 14+00 14+50 15+00 0+00 0+50 1 +00 1 +50 2+00
z S5
SCALE: hOR I "=30'; VERT I "=3' SCALE: hOR I "=30'; VERT I "=3'
LI
J \ J

c
/ \ ' ' ,'` REACH JN3 LEGEND
/ /
\ / I( Ill" — — — \ PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 50ores
] ! , / , /\/-
A PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR —46—
..--- _ AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50
\ 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
\� ?c I `% AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC27612
/ :j 7• — Main: 919.829.9909
/ -: \ OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — www.res.us
/
\� - -
O O O �'- = PROPERTY LINE Engineering Services Provided By:
\� �` O O • = • • ' �. RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
4. ��• • o o • ' FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F-1428
�r,�g�; x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—�l�L x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x x—x—x—x—x—x—x—x—xLe�X x x x x x x x x t �X x—x—x—x�`, --r=• `-' / ——x x -x SEAL
��\ �x�x xl--x—x—x� I AS-:::ENCELINE —X X X X X/ `�`•. I x }/ -CETREELINE \������uiiiiu�iiiii�iO �� x —xl / \_ LIMITECORDED LCE S. '7,4E.S
Si0+ 4'..77+Q_ / \ I CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Qi ��L -_ isii
f r X S EC N 5 � \ ?O B 14 I I SEAL
031435 .4
X �i _--=--------__----- � O, i,,0, —88______„,\
O /�/ =��`� \���---$� �� - - - — —— — — — — _ < PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION %� FN �' 'r ,..
IA
/ %fig- - \ \ ; —� / ,, B—\\ \\\\ �J X „.
/ \(.7 ._ �= — - — o 00000 � /.;y�V �,�\.>`
Q � i- — — �a�-' X SECTION _y �\ �/� — — o0000000 1
—� \VII
�' / / \ ' \ —1 //�� \ f _ _ �' r" ]� �� � —fiB—= �_ � PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
X--( I 1 \
'- x X—
///
\\ \ N/a Z /4/
//
\ \ \ —�/� / e \ i PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE
X- TION 5 =— , —
n.
� \ / FULL SCALE: 1"=30
k\Xk \ ` \ \ ECTION 6� / PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE ) 0 30 60
GIDEON MITIGATION SITE 2" — FULL SCALE
Xk \ \ N j 1" = HALF SCALE
�� I �kX \ , _ _ j� PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
�3 I kk \ \ N II (PROFILE)
— x-g x —_ / PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE 8
. N
(PROFILE)
0
I— N
O
REACH MCI o
RESTORATION
AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION -�
FENCE LOCATED WITHIN THE EASEMENT SHALL
BE REMOVED BY MONITORING YEAR I . 1 , w
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE VO
z
oC Q
O tY
0
AS-BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE 401.4. 1 0
w
0
1160 II60 > J v
w w w
CC CC Ct
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
FLOW GAUGE
I I 55 I I 55 Z Q z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION 0 0 §AS-BUILT PROPOSED 0
TOP OF BANK TOP OF BANK 0
Q
ill ___________ _
a
o U
VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# 0 I
II50
w ~ U
0 1150 — fl O
z =
o - I — — NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM Q
O —cc
THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED ZZ z w
wIII D
cc Ar (n O
F —
m 11 45 ` — /— 11 45 m
W
cc
g AS-BUILT ..
_1
O CHANNEL BED 2 J
o z L C/)
as
PROPCSED Z J O
CHANNEL BED 0 Z
as
ID
CD
CC CC
CO
1140 1140 0_ 0
J
00
0
o PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
a) DESIGNED: AFM
0
o_
DRAWN: TRS
CHECKED: RTM
cci
co
cc SHEET NUMBER:
i
di 1 5+00 1 5+50 1 6+00 1 6+50 1 7+00 1 7+50 1 8+00 1 8+50 1 9+00 1 9+50 20+00 20+50 2 1 +00
z S6
SCALE: HOR I "=30'; VERT I "=3'
LT_
J \ I

c 1 r 1
....7 „............._.
Pres
,,. .„...
......, .......
____ _.
REACH MC3
ENHANCEMENT I / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
--J/ i _ _ — — ��n-r Raleigh, NC 27612
= / / Main: 919.829.9909
//rf� — — \ _ _ www.res.us
/// E /
� �_ �� / �/ % // Engineering Services Provided By:
_ _ _ LC=,�_� j j /� _^ —ad _ RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
— o SEAL
__� �\���� / /////��\\ ,/,__j%/f \ _// / / LCE �— — O License: F 1428
— ) 1s — L
- ---___/ 2 /\) </ ,/ ------- -------- __----)
/ I(1( \\>.\,\_.7\,, ___\_:-----------7:______;i----- - ---_____ __:_____:::__------14 10 CII ____: ----_ -----:----------___=-- ------------_____________:;z3=0__\ VP5 7 1 % 4/ //.
\ /�\ / /
I , 1
0 .
\ "; 6 / / \ / _— _ \ \\� �'����R — I �_ '�.,gNNGINE� �.
/ �,I �,� ��J o —1—= i—� �s� _— B �—. / '''.,,N F. Mug-�.���� \ttg\2l
off ' ( �� _���� r
— ,-- 7 \ IIa' ;"
��/ � � 2+oo ___� ��� /jam `� 7 \ _\ \ / � , ` �� 0;�j► -� — / o
On III
: /7 ------ —
- , ,.__,,......
�_ rL
_____ - 7 — ,-„......„
___. �- \\ ( / / \ \ \ :27. \ i FULL SCALE: 1 =30
\\— ) v / / i i� a I
0 30 60
\ '\ \ \\_ / I / \ \ �i�I 1 \ L 7 2" = FULL SCALE
'� \ _ \ f L 1" = HALF SCALE
4
.gbf-i _____ - g3.1 ,.__.\ /--- - n __
,\ \__ \ \ \
\ U Idi
—
0 N
�/ / f \ l \ \ \
,
w
z
6 raw . . ,
___,
... ,,, „, \\ 0 tY
0
7 LI ) j ( \N N.,,..: \
4, ,
,., z
0 w
. .
\v � 1 , , ,� , 7 Y 4. _
0 /\
/ //9 1 I
— ` � \�\�i� X � � � � REACH / / _ l z
� • =� , / \ � \ �
, / / / )
ii
N / / i / *
Qoo : ' \ /g-� oo / / ._ o�
ia-
fY
\ \
"4 { INTA.47,/—
E tIOV __________f___
\ C/ ) /\' \., 0
/ - c\------------- / \ \ \, / ,/(>4 ,,,,,,_.%i;_ -_-: ---- ___________ -"A 0 1 CO
E 6, , , ��\( \ \ ��(, c -�� 0 _
/� z H w
cc F \ ) IICI �\ z
\ /z \ /c
r — . .,
— \ ° x0 l CO\ — — \--------
/
CO
'\
0 \CC
/ --/0 / �° Q w u
,D7 \ \ (
0
.o o w I- z
0 —
O —I <
CC CC
0 �V Jj
o ��� PROJECT NUMBER: ----
0
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
0
w �(� ^`J� DESIGNED: AFM
o DRAWN: TRS
a_ Q
c`z CHECKED: RTM
REACH MC3 SHEET NUMBER:
cc
ENHANCEMENT I
aE
S7
z
w
L_
1 \ J

l 1 r
LEGEND ores
LCE PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 50
LC PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —4C— —
LCE AS BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
LCE AS BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC27612
LCE Main: 919.829.9909
OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — — www.res.us
_ _ _ _ _ LCE � � % / /i
- -
/ _ _ — = _— _ — LCt- //��/ �// j � PROPERTY LINE RES EnEngronmeng Services tal Operating Comprovided any, LLC
/� - - /j//����/� j / /// FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F 1428
I _71-cc _ — — REACH BSI / /��j / / //�
/ _ -_ ___ _ - - _______
RESTORATION ///// �`/ �� / //�/�/ AS BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X— SEAL
r �/ -
�/ / \ / �_��� / //��.." / ���/�/ ��'• TREELINE ��`��\\\`N1CIA'R////,����i
III — — //// / / �j/ �i / / / / /�� .`` �� ��/ '�%
— � \ _ ✓ /% �� ��/�//� ��/� ���/ /�/� , % LIMITS OF RECORDED ®:, E.SS/p� 4/
;2.2// ��_ // �� /ice �� �� %� / i/j G/ /�/ r �/ / // /// CONSERVATION EASEMENT LCE Q/ y
I I / _ _ _ - / /� ��
if
I / //�\ — _��� _ / \\�- i f�i� /� / /// �� _ SEAL
I / //� —� _ �/ X SECTION 9/ I O / \ / �—� /�� i �/ i = 031435 L t\ it,
XO0 -/_ �� �� �I /// /�_ _� / //or.----------- ------
/ PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION \ C-C
___ ______-----__-- ,,,„-i.-,.,-. , -_-_,\_-,01: -.,--______„- - , ,--------------= --- ___/
---____- ' ..\\,, N.,,,, ,_,, _,- - _____ _,------___ ,..,.: ___,...___ z / .
//Z F. MO-\\\\\\\ fr6\42-i
�� � A- / \\ ri. � �I'�, / '�� - =� _/��� -}�= i A_gt� � \ 1 PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
d ____--------_\----A \ \ \ \____ '' •-______- -.,_ --------- .-------- ,..._ t/4/01 1' 1 ,i, 0'ir --:- -------77---j
Nj I(I
IPIP
J - r r ,,_;,� --- —— _ _ \\\ 4lIIt�� � C� \ ` �_ \\��—�- r POPOSD ROCSTUCTU
\1 \ \ 1 \ \ \\\ \ \ \
— \ X SECTION 9 \ N \�---tee — — —_— — — — — _ _ �u 1
\ \ \ � �� \ � _ - - -- - - - - - - Z.
11\11111 Or
I \ \ _ \ \ \A _ _ — - FULL SCALE: 1"=30
\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\� \ \ �\\ _ - — PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE )��C 0 30 60
� \\\ \ N \\\ \ — — 2" = FULL SCALE
\ \\\ \ \\ \\\\ _ _ PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE 1" = HALF SCALE
-1 (PROFILE)
8
.J
di
-131 PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE Q N
-1 1 ��� (PROFILE) 0
AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
cn
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE �O Z
oC Q
O Ct
0
IP
AS BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE �'� 0 rI
w
1200 1200 (w IP w
CC w UJ
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL ®
STAGE RECORDER 0
PROPOSED U)
TOP OF BANK FLOW GAUGE 0
z
1190 - r_ , 1 1 90 z
NI-• T.'',
c -4-� AS-BUILT MONITORING CROSS SECTION ® J
v - ( TOP OF BANK 0
O
fY
AS BUILT ) _ - �
-------------'..------;-----)''
CHANNEL BED WC
0 Q
�,� S
0
L PROPOSED - A" 1 \ VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# I
r CHANNEL BED w H _
0 II80 1180 CO—co
w _
- - `- _ _ H 0
a PROPOSED NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM
O TOP OF BANK THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED ~ in
w Q Z r
zi AS-BUILT D
Q ' TOP OF BANK O
m 1170 119 II70 H U
Q
COco
cc w r2
Qm
U)
r2_ ___ D di- _ —
o w
z J U) 1-
.Q w H
cowO —Iz
°' 1160 II60 cc o
J
6
O
O o AS BUILT
O
CHANNEL BED PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
a�i DESIGNED: AFM
CHAN.ff PRONELL POSED BED
DRAWN: TRS
ro CHECKED: RTM
U
6E SHEET NUMBER:
w 0+00 0+50 1 +00 1 +50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00
z 3 8
Li' SCALE: hOR I "=30'; VERT I "=6'
L
J \ I

1 r 1
LEGEND
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50Pres
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —46— —
�CE AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
LCE - LCE LCE LCE AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR — —46— — Raleigh, NC 27612
LCE Main: 919.829.9909
LCE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — — www.res.us
L4 E
/�/ �- �= LCE
PROPERTY LINE - - Engineering By:
� 1 \ ` RES Environmental Operating Company, LLC
_ �j/j/�f� 1 \
FENCELINE —X X X X X— License: F-1428
/ ��/��/� '� SEAL
�/� j/ `/�/� ��� 7—�= � AS-BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X—
TREELINE
���j �� /� / /�'�� k� -- `�) �/�t _ -r—_ \\_\_�� \� % \o - X-SECTION LIMITS OF RECORDED ����\�� ESS/0 `��'�'''�
/ �' J \� �_\� 7`- —� ---...-:-_-„,-Z..--_,_--.-------__\ \\\ / / / / LCE Q- ti q
i / / / � � ��`�� \�) �� \ ��\ / //� <j / -/ // / CONSERVATION EASEMENT
��/ // / /`/��� '� - . _ __ --\,_ `��,,�� /�� /// .,... - / / /j // / SEAL
- _ ----- ------ // 7 /7- ----z--
/ — / / �/ \ �—� � _ / / // // PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTION % \
_ ___:_-___._____ __---- .>-----_________----j_.-- ----- r' 7 --i--->--___,,..- - -----,______ \ ----_ __:--____----.„---.---...„ *--....7,-."___ -7,..:,„__,... ,,..:.,._‘* '',. .., _ ///1/4 F. MT-\\\\\`• \16\4 A
_---- iiiitiliwo‘ c3 k ,,,,
// / Q� \ \ \ `���� '^�\� --_-=------ �� �� _ — s� �- -����� —/ . E PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
\ \mil \ �� \ —� � \\— -- f // �— �� u J __ i
� , - s �� � -'"a illtith
te / I \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ � o.�� \��� � � _ _ - ---- _ _ �/ � ,, ;�� ��� � � ' r
i —�1� — �/ '� �/ \ \ \ �� \� \\ \ = _ ��ry �// _ �^ / ��_ X SEA091
—�� \\\ 1, / \ \ ✓ \ �� ` -----\
\ \` \� \\ \ QO ��� //� _{_ — ��� — PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE I
\--, -------- '.--... -----. ,•%.„ ----\--, / / c(i/..z-- 111111
\ � \ \ _ \ _\ \ \ \\ \\\ r %_-� __ ___= :_ -
11)
C0 \ \ \\ \ ----_,\..„,„\ `/` �� \�\ \ \ \\�-��\\�\\� \ \ _ _i �� I / FULL SCALE: 1"=30
\ \ \ i PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE 1�/
r \ \\\ �\ _\ \ \ _\- _ - i%i 2" = FULL SCALE
U \\ \ \ —_ \ — �� 1" = HALF SCALE
\_ ��1
8
Q \ ��� —� PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
Z � - - _ (PROFILE)
_ = ;31 w
'1 �� 31 31 31 �� - 31 PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE N
REACH BS I (PROFILE)
o
I- N
O 0
RESTORATION o
AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
U)
/' 0AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE VO Z
oC Q
O tY
0
IP
AS BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE �'� 0 LU
fl
I I80 I I80 'r14 > < 0
w w UJ
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
STAGE RECORDER 0
(/)
FLOW GAUGE (D
Z
1170 1170 > Q
Z_
MONITORING CROSS SECTION * * Et
PROPOSED 0 O
l TOP OF BANK 0 Q
Li TOP OF BANK VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O
ti I IGO W ry (/)
0 I160 _ CO
\� , W ZZ 2
- F- 0
a - _ - - NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM
0 _cc
THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED ~ w
cc Q Z
L1J _ D
I
z
H O
m1150 � 1150 Q 0
w
J AS-BUILT m r
QCHANNEL BED i I (n
w 0 di
oPROPCSED Q J (/) I-
ChANNELBED Z
W —
cz
- z_
—n_
J
1140 1140 cc cc
0_ a
J
O
O
o PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
a�i DESIGNED: AFM
.o
TRS
DRAWN:
15 ro CHECKED: RTM
0
cc , , , , SHEET NUMBER:
aE w 6+00 6+50 7+00 7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00 9+50 10+00 10+50 11 +00 11 +50 12+00
_ S9
w_I
SCALE: NOR I "=30'; VERT I "=6'
L_
J \ J

Y\ \ 1 r 1
, LEGEND
`a 0 ,� PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR - 50ores
r` \
O PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR — —46— —
0
k. AS-BUILT CONTOUR MAJOR 50
\1%\
� — - 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
r� AS-BUILT CONTOUR MINOR —46— Raleigh, NC27612
e'
v\\�`—.- Main: 919.829.9909
\�a 'c / / OVERHEAD ELECTRIC UTILITY LINE — 0 — www.res.us
x
�� \ LOG SILLS NOT INSTALLED PROPERTY LINE — — RES EnvEn i
ronmental peratig Company, LLC
-- DUE TO BEDROCK 1 FENCELINE —X X X X X— Le: F-1428
1,1
_}--
I
`� ��_ LCE \ AS BUILT FENCELINE —X X X X X— SEAL
2+�0 \ ----_-----
I / / 1 6���� TREELINE \\� iiiu�1//1/4/�
\'r.�� — _ SECTION I I — / / / �' \ ARp��%,,%/ �/ / 0. LIMITS OF RECORDED SS/0 �'��`%.-` . - X-SECTION 12 � -' /, /// // / / �` CONSERVATION EASEMENTLCE
9�� 1 Pk-Nk.
• _ —' --�� � �,_____.,: - , \\N\ _ . 1 r' , ---1-E/4------------- --/- ......,..- ----
_—,% �/ / ///�� :--/ .4'7'3 j� v� e ¢ EAL
;---.Pf 4 74>s,'4:' ---\ --.....„:::,, 14/ oc3:35 <c,$., , i--7.
-rr\\ ----.. mditi, ____ id ----- 1-00 '---. --,--- --- ----- .--- 7 V 7_--• ( 6/,/ ,./ ,-.____ __,.......________,:____"„_______
�\ PROPOSED BRUSH TOE PROTECTIONw222222R,
..„,______,___„ ,,....„. ,....,,,,, \ ,,,,...„ -,,,
, ,N,, _i_._ ___,_- __:-=-_ -, , .....„ ....._/
/ Z V _...,-- I \\\V ri\
\ \� \\ \\ \\\ \ TB .r \\ /j��/_ �/ / / / / / � J I PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
-,,, -."--- \ \ .sN\ ------- >Z,V1 -<- / 0 40'''''i, <
\\ \\\ X-SECTION 1 1/ 1 2 \ ` ,.-� — // ( ',__-.<,-,----.-..-_,--...'."-1-_---_--_L- t t - % • / , 1 i
PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE
NN \�\\�\\\\\ \ i , _\ — z� Q. - � le \ \ REACH MC3 /�
\ I4+00 _c ��
\\\\ \\\�\�\ �1��-- _ V- \ \ FULL SCALE: 1"=30
\\\\\\\\\ - ��- \ PROPOSED CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE
�� �1 )Co C 0 30 60
^ �, 2" = FULL SCALE
0L 40 H DPE �� 1\ 1" = HALF SCALE 1\
_ INV IN = 1 1 25.40' 1 1 25.72' PROPOSED LOG STRUCTURE
INV OUT = 1 124.68' 1125. 1 0' (PROFILE) 8
")(j PROPOSED ROCK STRUCTURE Q N
(PROFILE) I- N
O
Q o_
REACH BS 1 /
RESTORATION AS-BUILT BRUSH TOE PROTECTION
MI6
AS-BUILT LOG STRUCTURE �O
oC Q
O tY
0
IP
AS-BUILT ROCK STRUCTURE 'I* O fl
1 150 1 150 '+14 > w O
w w w
CC CC Ct
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL O
PROPOSED STAGE RECORDER 0
TOP OF BANK U)
AS-DUI LT FLOW GAUGE 0 0
I 140 �_ TOP OF BANK I 1 40 z
Z
MONITORING CROSS SECTION 0 O� Et
— p O
Et
\ \
40" h DPE et 0
\— VEGETATION MONITORING PLOT VP# O =
U
CO I 130 I 1 1 30 W ry (n
w
co
W Z =
E AS-BUILT ���_ 0o CHANNEL BED
_ — _ _ — _ NOTE: ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM I
� w
0 PROPOSED — THE DESIGN ARE SHOWN IN RED Zin
CHANNEL BED \1 1, - —8 — D1120 1120 U>-
_r,
r,
fir:
m
-E-
Q
Li,o Q J (n ~
Z i—
ro W Z
ro
-n
J
1110 1110 0
CC CC
0_ o
J
00
O
O
o0 PROJECT NUMBER: ----
PROJECT MANAGER: BPB
o
a) DESIGNED: AFM
o TRS
o_
DRAWN:
CHECKED: RTM
as
cc i , SHEET NUMBER:
w 1 2+00 12+50 13+00 13+50 14+00 14+50 15+00 15+50 1 6+00 1 6+50 17+00 17+50 1 8+00
w SCALE: HOR 1 "=30'; VERT I "=6' S 1 0
J_
L_
1 \ I