20081462 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_20140117

RECEIVED NOV 1 2 2013
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT
UT ROCKY RIVER — HARRIS ROAD MIDDLE
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
EEP IMS No. 92383, Contract No. 004346
Submitted to:
NCDENR- Ecosystem Enhancement Program
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000A
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Construction Completed: August 2010
Morphology Data Collected: March 21, 2013
Vegetation Data Collected: September 24, 2013
Submitted: November 6, 2013

Prepared by:
I
Engineering
ICA Engineering, Inc.
f/k/a Florence & Hutcheson, Inc.
5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
919.851.6066
919.851.6846 (fax)
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN, UT ROCKY RIVER- HARRIS
ROAD MIDDLE YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT WERE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY
DIRECT SUPERVISION.
SIGNED SEALED, AND DATED THIS (9 DAY OF
�rr
Chris L. Smith, PE
2013.
CA
��� \111Pii;� „�
:\4e' •FOSS /p ��2'%
Q SEAL
039.636 —
1�
/ /� /rQpf1�EF'

EEP IMS No. 92383
LIT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabal -l-LIS County. North Carolina
YEAR T\N'O MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................. ............................... 2
1.1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...........................
1.2 BACKGROUND SUMMARY .........................
1.3 VEGETATION .............. ...............................
1.4 STREAM STABILITY .... ...............................
1.5 WETLANDS ................. ...............................
1.6 NOTE .......................... ...............................
............................................ ............................... 2
............................................ ............................... 2
............................................ ............................... 3
............................................ ............................... 3
............................................ ............................... 5
............................................ ............................... 5
2.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... ..............................6
3.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................... ..............................6
APPENDIX A. PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES ............. ............................... 7
APPENDIX B. VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA ................................................. ............................... 14
APPENDIX C. VEGETATION PLOT DATA ..................................................... ............................... 28
APPENDIX D. STREAM SURVEY DATA ........................................................ ............................... 31
APPENDIX E. HYDROLOGIC DATA .............................................................. ............................... 44
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure1. Vicinity Map ..................................................................................... ............................... 8
Figures 2.0 - 2.4. Current Condition Plan View ............................................ ............................... 15
Figures 3.1 - 3.23. Vegetation Plot Photos and Problem Areas ..................... ............................... 22
Figures 4.1 — 4.6. Cross Section Plots ......................................................... ............................... 32
Figures 5.1 — 5.3. Longitudinal Profile Plots ................................................ ............................... 38
Figures 6.1 - 6.4 Crest Gauge Photos ............................................................ ............................... 44
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits ..................... ..............................9
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History ........................... .............................10
Table 3. Project Contacts Table ............................................ ............................... l l
Table 4. Project Information .................................................. .............................12
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment ........................... ............................... 20
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment ................................................... ............................... 21
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary ................................ ............................... 28
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Metadata ............................................................... ............................... 29
Table 9. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species ................ ............................... 30
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary .................................................... ............................... 41
Table 11. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary ............... ............................... 42
Table 12. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary .......................... ............................... 43
Table 13. Verification of Bankfull Events ..................................................... ............................... 44
I C Aa� Page 1
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River— Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following report summarizes the vegetation establishment and stream stability for Year 2
monitoring for the UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site ")
in Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
1.1 Goals and Objectives
The primary goals of the UT Rocky River stream restoration project focus on:
• Improving water quality
• Enhancing aquatic and terrestrial habitat within the Site watershed
• Establishing wildlife corridors within the Site boundaries
• Enhancing riparian wetlands adjacent to UT Rocky River
• Providing educational opportunities for students at grade schools adjacent to the Site
These goals will be achieved through the following objectives:
• Stabilizing UT Rocky River by restoring a more natural pattern, profile, and dimension
that transports its sediment and flow without aggrading (as seen in areas affected by
beavers and erosion control devices), or degrading (as seen in gully reaches on- site).
• Establishing a natural vegetative buffer adjacent to the UT Rocky River that filters runoff
from adjacent development.
• Enhancing semi- aquatic habitat by enhancing existing wetlands with native tree and
shrub plantings.
• Enhancing stream bed variability, providing shading/cover areas within the stream
channel, and introducing woody debris in the form of rootwads, log vanes, and log sills.
• Removing existing invasive vegetative species and planting the buffer (floodplain) with
native trees, shrubs, herbs and grasses.
• Create a wildlife corridor through the Site that connects habitat areas along the Rocky
River with habitat areas at the upstream end of the Site. The corridors provide
connectivity to a diversity of habitats including mature forest, early successional forest,
stream -side forest, riparian wetlands, and uplands.
• Providing an educational benefit to children who can utilize the planned pedestrian
footpath crossing the floodplain, and can view the stream channel from adjacent terraces
where schools are located.
1.2 Background Summary
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) has completed restoration of 2,715
linear feet of stream and enhanced 8.7 acres of riparian wetland at the Site to assist in fulfilling
stream and wetland mitigation goals in the area. The Site is located in northwest Cabarrus
County approximately 6 miles southwest of the town of Kannapolis (Figure 1). The Site has a
latitude and longitude of 035° 25' 34.52" N and 080° 44' 25.53" W. The Site is situated in the
northeast quadrant of the intersection of Harris Road and the Rocky River, between Harris
Middle School and Odell Elementary School, approximately 1.5 miles south of Highway 73.
' C Page 2
Engineering

ELP IMS No. 92383
U I Rock\ River - Harris Road Middle
C'abarruS County. North Carolina
PEAR TWO MONITORINCI REPORT
Nov ember 201 3
The Site is located within United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit (HU) and
Targeted Local Watershed 03040105010010 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality
[NCDWQ] Subbasin 03- 07 -11) of the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin, and will service the USGS
8 -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 03040105. The Site is currently owned by Cabarrus County and
the State of North Carolina holds the conservation easement on the property.
1.3 Vegetation
Bare root and live stake plantings are surviving well across the Site with an average of 364
planted stems per acre surviving after Year 2. Plots 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of 14
vegetation plots are exceeding success criteria of at least 320 stems per acre. All of the plots
contain 242 or greater stems per acre surviving after Year 2. Plot 4, 9 and 10 have greater than
360 stems per acre when including natural recruits. Plot 7 was affected by a beaver dam that was
located immediately adjacent to the plot during Year 1 monitoring; however, the dam has been
removed. APHIS was previously contracted to conduct monthly inspections at the Site to ensure
beaver are controlled throughout the monitoring phase of the project. Due to lack of recent
activity and cost, APHIS site inspections for beaver activity are now quarterly.
Plot 8 is located on a terrace slope along the southern boundary of the Site. This area appears to
be drier than other areas at the Site, which may be contributing to the poor survival of planted
stems in Plot 8. Approximately half of Plot 10 is also located along a terrace side slope and
appears somewhat drier than other areas. Encroachment has occurred within Plot 10. It appears
mowers have entered the easement /plot and taken out a vegetation plot stake. Additional
plantings are not recommended at this time because natural recruitment of character tree species
is anticipated over the course of the monitoring period and the areas exhibiting poor survivability
are relatively small.
A small cluster of Sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) was observed within Plot 9. Plot 9 is
located near Moss Farm Street and a sewer easement that crosses UT Rocky River at the
beginning of the project making this area susceptible to encroachment of invasive species. Plot 9
is currently not exceeding success criteria goals with 283 planted stems per acre surviving after
Year 2; however, the stem count is 567 with natural recruits. EEP does not typically treat
lespedeza during invasive species treatments; however, if the population continues to have a
detrimental effect on the plot and surrounding area in monitoring Year 3, EEP will reassess.
1.4 Stream Stability
UT Rocky River appears to be stable and functioning as designed. The area formerly affected by
the beaver dam is recovering. There is no evidence of trends toward significant change in
channel dimension or pattern. Approximately 140 feet of the profile (Station H +78 — 13 +18)
around Cross Section 1 show evidence of minor deposition most likely due to a slightly lower
slope. Cross - sectional data indicates that the channel has experienced little change in dimension,
with the exception of Cross Section 6. Cross Section 6 has continued to deepen in comparison
with baseline and Year 1 conditions, resulting in a larger cross sectional area and smaller width
to depth ratio. Scour at Cross Section 6 is likely a result of increased shear stress caused by the
Page 3
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
beaver dam formerly located approximately 50 feet upstream. The beaver dam raised the water
surface elevation above bankfull and increased the average water surface slope through this
section. Profile data also depicts scour in the channel bed downstream of the beaver dam. Cross
Section 6 appears to currently function as a pool in the system and will likely continue to
function as a pool in the future.
Profile plots depict minimal shifting and deepening of pools throughout the reach. Some shifting
is expected in sand bed channels, where the bed form is in constant flux and pools adjust their
depths during most storm events. Sediment deposited immediately upstream of the beaver dam
is flushing out now that the beaver dam has been removed. The percentage of riffles and pools
throughout the reach has continued to change slightly from baseline conditions. Year 2 data
depicts riffles to account for 28 percent (compared to 38 and 43 percent at Year 1 and baseline
respectively) and pools to account for 72 percent (compared to 62 and 57 percent at Year 1 and
baseline respectively). The backwater effect upstream of the beaver dam and the scour
downstream of the beaver dam are the primary reasons for the change in riffle /pool percentages
in Year 1. The channel is beginning to show some signs of reforming a riffle and pool sequence
upstream of the old beaver dam; however, the Year 2 survey was taken within a month from the
beaver dam removal and more time is needed to allow the channel to recover. The riffle sections
affected by backwater from the beaver dam are expected to regain function once the stream has
had time to recover from the beaver dam. The section downstream of the beaver dam is designed
to function as a step -pool system to step the invert of UT Rocky River down to the invert of
Rocky River. During Year 1 and 2, the pools between the log steps have enlarged, but the
stream remains stable and is performing as intended. All structures are stable and maintaining
grade control except the structure at station 35 +80 which is showing erosion along the right arm.
Table 5, Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment, details 97 percent of the stream bed as
stable, performing as intended for Year 2 Monitoring. One minor headcut was noted at station
14 +20 (Figure 3.16). Nine areas along the bank are experiencing erosion and are depicted on the
Current Conditions Plan View (CCPV) located in Appendix B. Photos of each problem area are
also included in Appendix B.
Approximately 40 feet of the right bank near station 14 +50 has stabilized since the vertical bank
was observed during Year 1 Monitoring. The right bank at station 14 +90 has little to no
vegetation (Figure 3.17).
Approximately 20 feet of the left bank near station 20 +90 has scoured allowing higher flows to
migrate into the floodplain (Figure 3.18). The erosion occurs just upstream of a log sill, but the
stream has not fully migrated around the log sill at this time. Woody and herbaceous vegetation
in the floodplain is slowing the progression of erosion. This area will be watched closely and if
the stream continues to migrate around the log sill corrective actions will be recommended to
repair the area. The log sill at 20 +90 appears to be piping at low flow but is still holding grade.
Immediately downstream of the log sill near station 20 +90, the right bank has scoured for
approximately 15 feet (Figure 3.19). A rootwad was placed in this bank to stabilize the log sill
Ai Page 4
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River— Barris Road Middle
Cabai'rLIS County, North Carolina
YEAR TNVO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
and it appears that the erosion has occurred along the trunk of the rootwad. Due to the relatively
small size of this eroded area and the stability of the bank behind the rootwad, corrective actions
are not recommended at this time.
The double step log cross vane at 22 +30 has eroded on the right bank of the structure and is
piping around the side of the header log (Figure 3.20). Corrective actions are not recommended
at this time.
The beaver dam observed near station 33 +30 during Year 1 monitoring was removed during
January and February of 2013. Backwater from the beaver dam was observed as far upstream as
station 30 +00. The beaver dam has not had a significant impact on the stability of the stream
(Figure 3.21). EEP had previously contracted APHIS to conduct monthly inspections to prevent
re- colonization through the monitoring period. Due to the lack of recent activity and cost,
APHIS site inspections for beaver activity are now quarterly on the site.
Minor bank erosion has occurred at station 34 +25 near vegetation plot 13 (Figure 3.22). Major
bank erosion has been noted around the meander bend at station 35 +80 upstream of the log cross
vane's right arm (Figure 3.24). This area will be watched closely. EEP plans to plant additional
live stakes in these areas during the upcoming dormant season.
The site has experienced several bankfull flows throughout the first and second monitoring years.
Crest gauges installed on -site were inspected on March 8, 2012; October 4, 2012; March 20,
2013 and September 24, 2013. The crest gauges revealed that a bankfull event occurred at least
four times during Year 1 and 2 monitoring. (Table 13). Additional overbank evidence includes
debris lines and vegetation bent in the downstream direction. Evidence of bankfull events can be
found in Appendix E.
1.5 Wetlands
Existing wetlands at the Site were enhanced by removing exotic vegetation and planting native
species. All vegetation plots located within wetland areas are exceeding success criteria, with
the exception of Plot 7 which was affected by the beaver dam during Year 1 monitoring and Plot
9 which is affected by the dominance of lespedeza in the upland portion of the plot. Section 1.3
provides more details concerning vegetation at the Site.
1.6 Note
A vehicular path was noted within the easement break around station 20 +00 during vegetation
monitoring field work in August, 2013. EEP was immediately notified of the field observation.
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items and statistics related to
performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and figures in
the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in these
reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly Mitigation Plan) and in the
' CAAI;� Page 5
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle
Cabanas County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Mitigation Plan (formerly the Restoration Plan) documents available on EEP's website. All raw
data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from EEP upon request.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The Year 1 and 2 monitoring surveys were completed using a Total Station. Each cross section
was marked with two rebar monuments at their beginning and ending points. The rebar has been
located vertically and horizontally in NAD 83 -State Plane. Surveying these monuments
throughout the Site ensured proper orientation. The survey data was imported into MicroStation
for verification. The longitudinal stationing was developed from total station data and compared
with previous years' data to ensure consistent beginning and ending points. RIVERMorph and
the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' "The Reference Reach Spreadsheet Version 4.3L"
were used to analyze the profile and cross section data (Mecklenburg 2006). Tables and figures
were created using Microsoft Excel.
The channel is entirely a sand bed system; therefore, a pebble count was not conducted.
Vegetation monitoring was completed using CVS level II methods, for 14, 100 square meter
vegetation plots (Lee et al. 2006). The taxonomic standard for vegetation used for this document
was Flora of the Southern and Mid - Atlantic States ( Weakley 2011).
3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., R. K. Peet, S. D. Roberts, and T. R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Version 4.0 ( hllp :Hcvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm).
Mecklenburg, Dan. 2006. The Reference Reach Spreadsheet Version 4.3L. 2006. Ohio
Department of Natural Resources. Division of Soil and Water.
(http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/tabid/9188/default.aspx)
Weakley, Alan S. 2011. Flora of the Southern and Mid- Atlantic States (online). Available:
http: / /www. herbarium. unc .edu /FloraArchives/WeakleyFlora 2011- May- nay.pdf [May
15, 2011 ]. University of North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
'C0%
� Page 6
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
10% AA� Page 7
Engineering

Cabarrus County
Vicinity Map
North Carolina
UT Rocky River —Harris Road Middle
Baseline Monitoring Document
PROJECT
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
AREA
�
Date: 1",M3
121 Kingdom Way,
I Suite 100
1
Figure: 1
0 1000 2000
Raleigh, NC 27607
� kos Steill
Y
Engineering NC License No F-0258
, , , ,
FAA Flo-- & Mad--, T—
rvu�,cn.,
FEET
1833 1602 1865
1834
73 1864
2942 <i>
A
2 41 ,o
'1451
2943
PROJECT 1442
AREA -
1449
J�
1394
—o T- 2882
1543 '
2822
1524 2820
2904 2821
1524
i' 1
1449 1394
2906
"Tile subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) and is encompassed by a recorded conservation
easement, but is bordered by land under private ownership.
Accessing the site may require traversing areas near or
along the easement boundary and therefore access by the
general public is not permitted. Access by authorized
personnel of state and federal agencies or their designees!
contractors involved in the development, oversight and
stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the
terms and timeframes of their defined roles. Any intended
site visitation or activity by any person outside of these
previously sanctioned roles and activities requires prior
coordination with EEP."

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rock\ River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus Cbunl , North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No. 92383)
Mitigation Credits
Restoration
Stream*
Riparian Wetland **
Type
R
R
Total
2,615
4.1
Project Components
Restoration
Restoration Level Stream
Riparian Wetland
(linear feet)
Restoration
Riverine
Segment/ Reach
Station
Existing
Approach
or
Restored LF /AC
Mitigation
ID
Range
LF /AC
Restoration
Ratio
Equivalent
UT to Rocky
10+00—
River
34 +50
2,020
PI
R
2,450
1:1
UT to Rocky
34+50—
River
37 +15
330
PII
R
265
1:1
Invasive
Wetland
-
8.7
Removal &
R
8.2
2:1
Planting
Component Summation
Restoration Level Stream
Riparian Wetland
(linear feet)
(acres)
Riverine
Restoration 2,715
Enhancement
8.2
*Stream credits are less than the linear feet restored because 100 feet of the restored stream flows through sewer line easements
and was not included as part of the stream credit calculations.
* *Wetlands located within the sewer line easements were not planted during the construction phase of this project and are not
included as part of the enhanced wetland acreage or Wetland Mitigation Credits
Page 9
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
11-1 Rock\ Riper Harris Road Middle
('abMTUS County. North Carolina
YEAR TWO N40NITOIZING REPORT
Nov ember 2013
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No. 92383)
Activity or Report
Data
Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
Aril 2008
September 2008
Final Design — Construction Plans
September 2008
October 2008
Construction
June 11, 2010
March 23, 2011
Temporary S &E Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
August 30, 2010
March 23, 2011
Permanent Seed Mix Applied to Entire Project Area
August 30, 2010
March 23, 2011
Bare Root, Containerized, and B &B plantings for
Entire Project Area
February 14, 2011
February 15, 2011
Mitigation Plan/As -built (Year 0 Monitoring-
Baseline
April 11, 2012
June 27, 2012
Year 1 Monitoring
October 4, 2012
January 3, 2013
Beaver removal
January ebruary 2013
January/February January/February 2013
Year 2 Monitoring
September 24, 2013
November 6, 2013
Structural maintenance (bench expansion, vane,
etc.
Year 3 Monitoring
Supplemental planting of containerized material
Year 4 Monitoring
1CPage 10
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rock\, River - Harris Road Middle
CabalTnS County. North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No. 92383
Designer
Florence & Hutcheson
5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Primary project design POC
Kevin Williams (919) 851 -6066
Vaughn Contracting, Inc.
Construction Contractor
Tommy Vaughn
P.O. Box 796
Construction Contractor POC
Wadesboro, NC 28170
704 694 -6450
Bruton Natural Systems
Planting Contractor
Charlie Bruton
PO Box 1197
Planting Contractor POC
Fremont, NC 27830
919 242 -6555
Vaughn Contracting, Inc.
Seeding Contractor
Tommy Vaughn
P.O. Box 796
Seeding Contractor POC
Wadesboro, NC 28170
704 694 -6450
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resources - Triad Office
1) ArborGen - South Carolina SuperTree
Nursery
Nursery Stock Suppliers
2) Dykes & Son Nursery
3) NC Division of Forest Resources
4 Carolina Wetland Services
ICA Engineering
f/k/a Florence & Hutcheson
Monitoring Performers
5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Ben Fun 919 851 -6066
ICA Engineering
f/k/a Florence & Hutcheson
Stream Monitoring POC
5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Ben Fun 919 851 -6066
ICA Engineering
f/k/a Florence & Hutcheson
Vegetation Monitoring POC
5121 Kingdom Way, Suite 100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Ben Furr 919 851 -6066
'AM� Page 11
Engineering

EIT IMS No. 9238;
t'-1 Rocl:\ Riper Barris Road Middle
Cabarrns C<wnt\. North Carolina
1'1=;1R TWO MONITORING RI-PORT
Nov ember 2013
Table 4. Project Information
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No. 92383
Project Information
Project Name
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Project County
Cabarrus
Project Area acres
20
Project Coordinates
350 25' 34.52" N, 800 44' 25.53" W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Southern Piedmont
Ecore ion
Southern Outer Piedmont
Project River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS 8-digit HUC
03040105
USGS 14-digit HUC
03040105010010
NCDWQ Subbasin
03 -07 -11
Project Drainage Area
0.77 s . mi at end of restoration reach
Watershed Land Use
Forested = 15%
Residential/Commerical = 85%
Reach Summa Information
Parameters
UT Rocky River
Restored length
2,715
Drainage Area
0.77 s . mi.
NCDWQ Index Number
14-(7)
NCDWQ Classification
C
Valle Type/Morphological Descri tion
VIII /C5
Dominant Soil Series
Chewacla
Drainage Class
Somewhat poorly drained
Soil H dric Status
H dric
Sloe
0.0060
FEMA Classification
AE & X
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasives
0.1%
Wetland Summa r Information
Parameters
Wetland 1
Size of Wetland acres
8.2
Wetland Type
Riparian Riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Chewacla
Drainage Class
Somewhat poorly drained
Soil H dric Status
H dric
Source of Hyrdrology
Groundwater and Floodwater
Hydrologic Im airment
No
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Veg.
0%
' �� Page 12
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River- Harris Road Middle
Caba1TUS County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Table 4. Proiect Information (continued)
Regulatory Considerations
Supporting
Regulation
Applicable
Resolved
Documentation
Waters of the U.S. — Sections 404 and 401
Restoration
Yes
Yes
Plan
Endangered Species Act
Restoration
Yes
Yes
Plan
Historic Preservation Act
Restoration
Yes
Yes
Plan
CZMA/CAMA
No
--
--
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Restoration
Yes
Yes
Plan
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
--
--
CAAI;� Page 13
Engineering

Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Page 14
Engineering
EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 201

Q
>
Z
O
HO
Z
5
v
V1
Z
O
Z
0
Z
t
o
v
CL
N
u uz
075
L)Z
0-
Q
00Z
� o
lox C>
�3
>
Q�>
r -
N C,
w z0 Q
Z w W g
LU J V' 0
MV) z< J LL oZ 3
O U' W Q Q Lu O LL— U�
Z N N N 0 W Q Z 3 W
00 ce OOC �O Q = O 1 N
�U U u�d m m r r LL. X
W
V
V
3
A
a�ql
qx�
h
Z
V
3
N
a W
�s
�00
U
z z
� z o
o�z
ao rn a
U
M
U
� O
ti
N
N_
pf '
9
�i e, M
NI '
Z
O �-
zz a
O
v W
r
r a
O
a
z
O
f
Z
a
r
v
V Fil
i! ff�4
q
I:U
I0080LOLO #ODE IRWIN (TVOY SIhWVH - ZGAIY ANDOU If] :,ID���0�
eiemi60 Dui •U0Sayo nH 'S a0uaJO j
UbD'7- UStl "A,4 )')- JOAI )4[ADOH \SUDI,I- A.4)) \(OJ�I \WDa J1S \ :H
£IOZ/ZZ /01
Z
V1
Z
O
Z
0
Z
t
o
v
ec0
a0
W
�O
ccO
< W
O
oc0 Z
<Z_<O U
< W ce
j
ol
N
N
Q
o
LL m
�
ru
w
>
Z N
O
> t9
Z vi
O =
— r
�y
Z
Z
O �-
zz a
O
v W
r
r a
O
a
z
O
f
Z
a
r
v
V Fil
i! ff�4
q
I:U
I0080LOLO #ODE IRWIN (TVOY SIhWVH - ZGAIY ANDOU If] :,ID���0�
eiemi60 Dui •U0Sayo nH 'S a0uaJO j
UbD'7- UStl "A,4 )')- JOAI )4[ADOH \SUDI,I- A.4)) \(OJ�I \WDa J1S \ :H
£IOZ/ZZ /01

N
Q)
2
Z
4Y
AMON
C
LEGEND
ol
N
MONITORING
ROCK L -VANE
r
CROSS SECTION
a
CREST GAUGE
VANE CROSS
(�
EXISTING
m
PROPERTY LINE
LOG VANE
— E
EASEMENT
v
W /SILL
BOUNDARY
o
LOG CROSS
BANKFULL
VANE
0
a
THALWEG
c
DOUBLE STEP
- - - - --
TOE OF SLOPE
LOG CROSS
VANE
oa
®
FPI - FLOODPLAIN
a
INTERCEPTOR
TRANSPLANTS
�E
70
EXISTING
LOG SILL
WETLANDS
/
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW (CCPV)
NW.T
YEAR 2 CONDITIONS
BANKBED CONDITION
— MAJOR
EROSION
►����j MODERATE
EROSION
MINOR
EROSION
IN- STREAM STRUCTURE CONDITION
FAILED
VEGETATION PLOT CONDITIONS
(PLANTED STEMS ONLY)
CRITERIA MET
CRITERIA UNMET
VEG 10
t +-
A
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. I FIGURE NO.
UT ROCKY RIVER - HARRIS ROAD MIDDLE 1 2.2
'121 Kingdom Way
Suitc 100
Raleigh, NC 27607
Engineering rCJZoKNo. J-0158
pt/a Flwr,�v R: IIuHlrcwn, L...
25 0 50
SCALE
.�Tc
tiF
Ow sF�
n
FOR SITE OVERVIEW SEE FIGURE 2.0
FOR CCPV PLANS SEE FIGURES 2.1 THRU 2.4
CCPV
UT ROCKY RIVER -
HAMS ROAD MIDDLE
070708001 — CABARRUS
RV$
RKW - 0513

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle Stream Restoration Project, 92383
UT Rocky River - 2,715 feet assessed
Major
J
Channel
Category
Channel Sub-
Category
Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As -built
Number of Amount of
Unstable Unstable
Segments Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with Footage with Adjusted % for
Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Why Woody Woody
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1 Bed
1 Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
l Aegradation - Bar forination/growth sufficient to sgmficantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0 0
100%
2 Degradation - Evidence of downcumng
1 27
99%
2 Riffle Condition*
1 TexmretSubstrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
N/A
N/A
100%
3 Meander Pool
Condition
I Deoth Suffinent
36
36
100%
2 Length appropriate
36
36
100%
4 Thalweg Position
1 Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
32
32
100%
2 Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
32
32
100%
2 Bank
I Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetanve cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
9 148
97%
0 N/A N/A
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2 Undercut
likely Does NOT included undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0 0
100%
N/A N/A N/A
and are providing habitat.
3 Mass Wasting
1 15
997%
N/A N/A N/A
Bank slumping, calving or collaps
10 163
97%
N/A N/A N/A
100%
erall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
27
27
72a
ade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
27
27
100%
ping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
25
27
93%
Bank erosion within the strictures extent of influence does 191 exceed
3 Bank Protection
IS °/a (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance
25
27
93%
document)
Pool forting structures maintamg — Max Pool Depth Mean Bankfull
4 Habitat
Depth ratio > 16 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow
27
27
100%
btream is a sana lied system, rimes are not expected to coarsen

_j
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle, 92383
UP Rocky River 2,715 feet
Planted Acreage = 15 0
Number of
Combined
% of Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
1 Bare Areas
Very limited ground cover (grass)
All populations were
Thin grass
1
008
053%
mapped
2 Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria
Vegetabon Plots
VEG 4, 7, 8, 9, 10
500 1
012
1 082%
3 Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year
None
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Easement Acreage= 67 85
Number of
Combined
o o of Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
4 Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
All populations were
See legend on
1
001
009%
mapped
CCPV
15 Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
Noted on map
See note on CCPV
1
0 006
004%
_j

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Figures 3.1 - 3.23. Vegetation Plot Photos and Problem Areas
3.1 Vegetation Plot 1
3.2 Vegetation Plot 2
3.3 Vegetation Plot 3
'�� Page 22
Engineering
3.4 Vegetation Plot 4

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
3.5 Vegetation Plot 5
3.6 Vegetation Plot 6
3.7 Vegetation Plot 7
Page 23
Engineering
3.8 Vegetation Plot 8

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
3.9 Vegetation Plot 9
3.10 Vegetation Plot 10
3.11 Vegetation Plot 11
��� Page 24
Engineering
3.12 Vegetation Plot 12

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River— Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
No% ember 2013
3.13 Vegetation Plot 13
3.14 Vegetation Plot 14
3.15 Lespedeza population near
Vegetation Plot 9
C � Page 25
Engineering
3.16 Small headcut at Station 14 +20
facing downstream

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River- Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
3.17 Minor bank erosion at Station 15+00 3.18 Minor bank erosion at Station 20 +90
facing downstream facing left bank
3.19 Erosion and piping at Station
20 +90 facing downstream
Engineering
3.20 Piping of structure at Station
22 +30 facing downstream
Page 26

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
3.21 Beaver damage Station 33 +30
facing upstream
3.23 Eroded bank Station 35 +80
facing downstream
,C� Page 27
Engineering
3.22 Moderate bank erosion
at Station 34 +25 facing downstream

EEP [MS No. 92353
UI- Roc],v River— I lams Road diddle
Cabal -rUti County . North Carolina
YEAR TWO NIONII OR1NG RI_1'OR*1
No\embcr 2013
Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
(EEP IMS
No. 92383)
Stems
Survival
Plot
CVS
Planted
Per
Threshold
ID
Community Type
Level
Stems
Acre
Met?
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
1
(non - wetland area)
II
9
364
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
2
(supplemental planting)
II
8
323
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
3
(riverine wetland area)
II
11
445
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
4
(non - wetland area)
II
7
283
No
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
5
(riverine wetland area)
II
10
405
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
6
(riverine wetland area)
II
11
445
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
7
(riverine wetland area)
II
6
242
No
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
8
(non - wetland area)
II
7
283
No
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
9
(riverine wetland area &
II
7
283
No
non - wetland area)
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
10
(non - wetland area)
II
6
242
No
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
11
(non - wetland area)
II
12
485
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
12
(riverine wetland area)
II
9
364
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
13
(riverine wetland area)
II
13
526
Yes
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
14
(non - wetland area)
II
11
445
Yes
Average Stems Per Acre
364
�AM� Page 28
Engineering

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rock\ River Harris Road Middle
Caba1TUS County. North Carolina
YEAR J WO MONITORING REPORT
Nov ember 2013
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Metadata
Report Prepared By
Ben Furr
Date Prepared
10/7/2013 15:27
database name
cvs- eep- entrytool- v2.2.7.mdb
database location
S:\ LIT _Rocky_River \Dots \Monitoring \CVS Data
computer name
NC10465
file size
49401856
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a
summary of project(s) and project data.
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each
Proj, planted
year. This excludes live stakes.
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each
Proj, total stems
year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live
stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
List of most frequent damage classes with number of
Damage
occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species
for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
(planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead
and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Project Code
RR
project Name
UT Rocky River
Description
Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
length(ft)
2715
stream -to -edge width (ft)
50
area (sq m)
25220.62
Required Plots (calculated)
14
Sampled Plots
14
CAAI;� Page 29
Engineering

Table 9 Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
UT Rocky River— Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No 92383) (Year 2 Monitoring 2013)
Annual Means
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Plot 6
Plot 7
Plot 8
Plot 9
Plot 10
Plot 11
Plot 12
Plot 13
Plot 14
YR2 (2 13)
YR1(2012)
AB (2011/201
Scientific Name
Common Name
Type
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P I
T
P
Tj
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P I
T
Acer negundo
Boxelder
Tree
2
00
20
00
00
00
00
Acer rubrum
Red maple
Tree
6
1
00
35
00 1110
00
219
Alnus serrulata
Tag alder
Shrub
1
3
10
30
10
10
10
10
Asimma tnloba
Paw -paw
Shrub
1
1
1
1
10
10
17
17
20
20
Bacchans halimifolia
Eastern bacchans
Shrub
3
2
1 1
00
20
00
40
00
35
Betula mgra
River birch
Tree
1
1
2
2
1
15
15
15
15
15
15
Carya sp
Hickory
Tree
00
00
00
00
00
10
Carya ovata
Shagbark hickory
Tree
1
1
2
2
15
15
15
IS
25
2 5
Celtis laewgata
Hackberry
Tree
2
2
20
20 1
20
20
101
10
Cinnamomum
Cmnamomum
Tree
9
1
00
90
00
00
00
00
Cornus amomum
Silky dogwood
Shrub
1
4
4
9
1
2
2
1
1
14
1
30
38
2 7
47
2 31
2 8
Cornus florida
Flowering dogwood
Tree
1 1
1 1
1
1
10
10
2 0
2 0
201
20
Diospyros virgmiana
Common persimmon
Tree
1 6
2
2
00
3 3
00
3 3
00
10
Fraxmus pennsylvamca
Green ash
Tree
4
4
3
3
5
5
7
7
1
1
1
1
5
5
1
1
5
5
3 6
36
3 5
3 3
3 6
45
Uquidambar styraciflua
Sweetgum
Tree
11
21
1
4
1
00
9 3
00
98
00
100
linodendron tulpifera
Yellow poplar
Tree
1
1
10
10
1 10
10
10
10
Morelia cenfera
Wax Myrtle
Shrub
1
1
00
10
00
00
00
00
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
5
5
1
1
5
5
5
6
3
4
6
6
1
1
1
1
1
34
33
34
34
43
41,
Quercus sp
Oak
Tree
1
1
1 1
1
1
10
10
15
15
15
15
Quercus falcata
Southern red oak
Tree
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
26
26
34
34
35
3 5
Quercus michauxu
Swamp chesnut oak
Tree
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
25
23
28
28
30
30
Quercus phellos
Willow oak
Tree
3
3
4
4
3
3
5
5
38
38
38
38
38
38
Rosa multiflora
Multiflora rose
Shrub
1
1
3
1
2
00
18
1 00
15
00
00
Salix mgra
Black willow
Tree
1
00
10
00
3 5
00
30
Sambucus canadensis
Common elderberry
Shrub
2
6
1
9
00
45
00
57
00
00
Ulmus sp
Elm
Tree
3
3
30
30
30
30
2 5
5 3
Ulmus alata
Winged elm
Tree
00
00
00
15
00
00
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
3
1
1
1
1
4
7
20
30
20
5 5
20
20
Ulmus rubra
Slippery elm
Tree
1
1
10
10
00
0 0
00
00
Plot Area (acres)
0 0247
00247
00247
00247
00247
0 0247
0 0247
0 0247
00247
00247
0 0247
0 0247
0 0247
00247
Species Count
4
10
4
10
4
4
3
4
3
7
4
5
3
3
2
2
3
8
4
9
3
4
3
7
5
8
3
3
3 4
6 0
3 6
6 2
41
61
Stem Count
9
36
8
27
11
11
7
9
10
28
11
15
6
6
7
7
7
14
6
34
12
14
9
34
13
20
11
11
91
190
101
24 6
114
305
Stems per Acre
364
1457
324
1093
445
445
283
364
405
1134
445
607
243
243
283
283
283
567
Z43
1377
486
567
364
1377
526
810
445
445
367
769
411
995
463
1235

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River— Harris Road Middle
Cabairus County. North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
I c6v� Page 31
Engineering

O
ll1
M
N
2
_N
X
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
0.00
622.50
0.00
622.49
0.00
622.47
4.66
622.55
11.29
622.52
6.96
622.65
12.17
622.19
13.30
622.16
16.51
622.17
14.34
622.00
15.92
622.02
18.21
621.57
16.56
622.02
16.91
622.01
19.34
1621.07
18.81
621.12
18.13
621.43
19.85
620.71
19.28
620.93
18.97
621.05
20.76
620.76
19.76
620.78
19.79
620.81
21.29
620.74
20.16
620.31
19.94
620.47
22.90
620.70
21.49
620.47
20.89
620.52
23.54
621.49
22.46
620.41
22.97"'620.66
24.90
621.50
23.07
620.47
23.97
621.12
25.92
621.92
24.02
621.09
24.58
621.33
34.51
622.35
26.83
621.95
25.77
621.82
42.49
622.26
30.75
621.98
27.38
622.05
36.99
622.25
31.09
622.07
42.53
622.24
35.19
622.34
42.46
622.25
Figure 4.1, XS -1 Riffle, Sta. 12 +73.50
Baseline - 3/22/11 --Year 1 -Year 2
623.0 - - - -- - -
x 622.0 - - �71
c
O
m
d 621.0 - -
W
620.0 - -
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Distance (ft)

O
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
0.00
620.70
0.00
620.71
0.00
620.74
7.86
620.39
5.80
620.49
7.92
620.51
U�
IJ1
+
00
r-I
C6
4-'
DC
N
X
12.63
620.39
12.62
620.45
14.84
13.37
620.19
15.74
620.18
15.82
15.68
620.25
15.90
620.15
17.27
L19.
17.78
619.42
18.20
619.43
18.77
19.50
619.06
19.27
618.88
19.31
19.86
618.75
19.85
618.63
19.66
618.70
20.85
618.60
20.36
618.40
20.43
618.62
21.67
618.87
21.46
618.47
20.86
618.40
23.40
619.70
21.97
619.19
21.34
618.40
25.18
620.33
23.05
619.51
22.17
619.29
32.54
620.06
25.46
620.31
23.28
619.54
39.94
620.041
33.11
620.07
25.45
620.36
39.86
1620.021
40.00
1620.06
Figure 4.2, XS -2 Riffle, Sta. 18 +55.09
- Baseline - 3/22/11 (Year 1 Year 2
621.0 -
x 620.0
L
O
2 619.0 - - -- - -- - - -- - -
W
618.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Distance (ft)

fV
O
1-0
fY1
N
M
c!
:
p
Q-
fYl
X
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
0.00
615.27
0.0
615.28
0.0
615.31
7.90
615.10
7.7
615.18
10.7
615.15
14.63
615.08
14.6
615.12
16.7
615.05
17.53
614.99
17.8
615.00
19.5
614.64
19.75
614.41
19.7
614.47
21.4
1614.04
20.53
614.04
20.7
614.16
21.8
613.52
21.39
613.65
21.3
613.76
22.6
613.15
21.92
613.43
22.0
613.33
23.8
612.85
23.93
612.99
22.5
613.15
24.9
613.44
25.03
613.49
23.6
612.96
26.2
614.37
27.66
614.87
25.0
613.54
27.8
615.00
30.14
615.22
26.7
614.41
42.4
615.77
36.75
615.54
27.8
614.86
42.56
615.79
30.5
615.31
36.6
615.53
1615.811
42.5
Figure 4.3, XS -3 Pool, Sta. 23 +64.02
y Baseline 3/22/11 -49--Year 1 -Year 2
616.0 - -- - - - --
g 615.0 - -
c
m
614.0 --
W 613.0 - -
612.0 -
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Distance (ft)

C1
N
4
111
Ob
rI4 .
cC
N
(A
X
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
I Elev.
0.00
612.65
0.00
612.68
0.00
612.68
5.91
612.56
6.65
612.52
7.32
612.59
11.74
612.18
10.45
612.38
14.15
612.36
14.13
612.33
14.31
612.35
15.63
611.78
15.57
611.70
15.49
611.66
16.59
611.49
16.14
611.43
16.36
611.45
17.18
611.31
16.84
611.00
17.43
611.20
17.74
611.03
17.79
610.91
18.58
611.12
18.68
611.28
18.55
611.13
20.12
611.62
19.68
611.52
19.04
611.36
21.46
611.86
20.93
1611.74
19.67
611.30
21.31
611.81
22.22
612.12
20.73
611.65
23.56
612.64
23.53
612.58
21.59
611.95
31.05
612.63
29.80
612.57
22.43
612.29
36.67
612.76
36.49
612.73
23.24
612.55
27.82
612.33
32.72
612.73
36.27
612.75
Figure 4.4, XS -4 Riffle, Sta. 28 +54.29
Baseline - 3/23/11 -Year 1 -*--Year 2
613.0 - - -
$ 612.0 ; - -
c
0
A
w 611.0 - - -
W
610.0 - --
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Distance (ft)

01
DO
Cyj
U)
rl
fY1
M
Ln
O
p
d
x
X
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
Elev.
0.00
611.81
0.00
611.79
0.00
611.81
4.96
611.92
5.69
611.95
9.05
611.82
8.92
611.81
8.84
611.79
12.54
611.11
12.17
611.25
11.17
611.40
15.05
610.64
13.60
611.02
13.18
610.97
16.46
609.90
14.48
610.90
14.92
610.50
17.20
609.42
15.40
610.33
16.43
610.07
17.87
609.42
16.19
610.05
17.35
609.43
18.74
609.49
18.00
609.75
18.40
609.43
19.03
609.82
18.81
610.06
18.57
609.50
20.17
611.08
19.50
610.68
20.05
610.88
22.46
611.71
21.19
611.56
21.30
611.54
31.76
611.53
22.79
611.94
22.87
611.97
39.10
611.45
26.94
611.65
31.64
611.47
33.80
611.56
1611.511
39.11
611.49
38.93
Figure 4.5, XS -5 Pool, Sta. 31 +53.85
Baseline - 3/23/11 -w-Year 1 di Year 2
613.0 -
612.0 - -- - - -
x
CT
611.0 -- -- --
d
w 610.0
609.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Distance (ft)

ct
06
`+
M
.
c0
Q)
OC
c/)
X
Baseline
MYl
MY2
Sta.
Elev.
Sta.
I Elev.
Sta.
I Elev.
0.00
611.00
0.00
610.98
0.00
611.00
7.89
610.75
6.68
610.74
6.68
610.96
11.38
610.58
11.23
610.66
11.19
610.64
14.26
609.95
15.51
609.59
14.29
609.95
16.03
609.43
16.26
609.03
15.91
609.59
16.60
609.08
17.51
607.99
16.65
608.59
16.95
608.81
18.07
607.99
17.93
607.45
18.13
608.72
18.85
608.36
19.38
607.46
19.09
609.00
19.25
608.85
20.78
609.67
20.26
609.47
20.05
609.05
22.71
610.56
22.68
610.61
22.66
610.56
29.46
610.67
28.83
610.59
28.59
610.56
35.85
611.08
33.03
1610.92
35.81
611.16
35.68
1611.181
Figure 4.6, XS -6 Riffle, Sta. 33 +18.49
--*-Baseline - 3/23/11 -0-Year 1 - Year 2
612.0
611.0 - -�
x
610.0 - - --
.2
609.0
_v
608.0
607.0 - -
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Distance (ft)

Figure 5.1 UT Rocky River - Longitudinal Profile
Baseline Thalweg - 3/23/11 • Baseline Bankfull - 3/23/11 —w--YR1 Thalweg ■ YR 1 Bankfull YR 2 Thalweg YR 2 Water Surface YR 2 Bankfull
624.0 —
■, ■ Rock L -Vane Log Sill
623.0 -� A — 4- -
i
622.0
x +
621.0_.{ -- - - -
n
W 620.0
619.0
618.0
10+00.00 11+00.00 12+00.00
Log Vane w /Sill
Log Vane w /Sill Log Vane w /Sill
4- + • ■ • + ' ■
13+00.00 14+00.00 15+00.00 16+00.00
Sta. (ft)
Cross Vane
+�T 8F• ■A+� ■
• + ■
17+00.00 18+00.00

Figure 5.2 UT Rocky River - Longitudinal Profile
—«- Baseline Thalweg- 3/23/11 Baseline Bankfull - 3/23/11 —0-YR 1 Thalweg ■ YR 1 Bankfull YR 2 Thalweg YR 2 Water Surface
Log Sill
621.0
��111r••�i ■+• ■ l
A+ +� • ■ +■ y Double Step Log Cross Vane
619.0 t■ •
■• WA Log Sill Log Vane w /Sill
j +�• { ■ §+&
617.0 '
/Double Step Log Cross Vane
■�
Log Vane w /Sill
•
615.0 •
v
W
611.0 -- - -
609.0 --
18 +00.00 19 +00.00 20 +00.00 21 +00.00 22+00.00 23+00.00
Sta. (R)
YR 2 Bankfull
Log Vane
.og Sill Log Sill
%L + ■�
24+00.00 25+00.00 26+00.00

Figure 5.3 LIT Rocky River - Longitudinal Profile
-�- Baseline Thalweg - 3/23/11 • Baseline Bankfull - 3/23/11 -AYR 1 Thalweg ■ YR 1 Bankfull --*--YR 2 Thalweg —YR 2 Water Surface YR 2 Bankfull
615.0
613.0
611.0
x
c j
°- 609.0 1
d
W
607.0
605.0
603.0
26 +00.00
28+00.00
■■ XS-4 XS -5 ` Log
A .0\- A AM
30+00.00 32+00.00
sta. (h)
Log Sill j3eaver Dam (2012)
Log Sill Rock Cross Vane
XST6
Log Sill Log Sill
-- i/ane--
• • Log Sill Double Step
• -_ _ _. _ Log Cross Vane
- T i
34+00.00
36+00.00

Table 10 Baseline Stream Data Summary
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle, EEP IMS No 92383
UT Rock, River 2,715 If
Parameter
Pre - Existing
Regional Curve Condition (Beaver
Influence Reach)
Pre- Existing
Condition (Gully
Reach)
Reference - UT
Ledge Creek
Reference Reach
UT Wildcat
Branch
Reference Reach -
Mill Creek
Design
As- built/Baseline
D_Imensli andj
Eq Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width (ft)
910 510
470
1470
820
113
950
850 988 970 1160 132 4
Flood prone Width (ft)
27000
970
6300
13000
300
30000
17500 22550 21750 29200 5542 4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
116 020
089
125
103
185
095
080 088 090 090 005 4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
040
106
175
157
258
143
140 164 163 190 021 4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftz)
1068 090
420
1830
850
21
900
670 865 860 1070 171 4
Width /Depth Ratio
2980
530
1170
800
61
1000
1070 1130 1095 1260 088 4
Entrenchment Ratio
5330
200
430
1590
265
3160
1830 2325 2020 1 3430 751 4
Bank Height Ratio
100
212
154
109
109
100
100 100 100 100 000 4
d50 (mm)
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
-
P,roHle
Riffle Length (ft)
905 4588 4641 8846 2423 32
Riffle Slope (ft/ft
) 00184
00553
00010
00022
00037
00033
00006 00038 00033 023 32
Pool Length (ft)
_ - - -
-
-
-
394 1598 14 75 40 46
Pool Max depth (ft)
138
2 32
2 67
175
3 12
190
A32847
148 2 23 2 07 56 46
Pool Spacing (ft)
- _ _ 7 1642 49
1143 -54 09
12 0-72 0
14 0.16 6
114 -610
9 5 -57 0
13 31 45 43 37 86 40 45
Pool Cross Sectional Area (ftz)
_ _ _ -
-
-
-
-
-
10 68 1149 1149 15 2
P.attem
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
a 4100
4100
48 0-55 0 138194
15 1 -27 0
190-5 0
- -
Radius of Curvature (ft)
-- 60150
6 0 -15 0
149222
109153 9 7 -29 8
28 5 -38 0
--
Rc Bankfull Width ( ft/ft
- =- 1 2 -2 9
1 3 -3 1
1015
1 3 -1 9 0926
3 0-4 0
_ - - - -_
Meander Wavelength (ft)
_ _ _ 8300
8300
134 140
22 5 -29 0 37 7 -72 6
57 0 -133 0
Meander Width Ratio
-__ 809
870
3338
17 -24 13 -24
204 60
-
SUtistrahMZbe =and transport parameters
Ri% / Ru% / P% / G%/ S%
-�
-
-
-
-
- --
- --
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95/ df / di`P(mm)
0164
2 499
0 033
-
0122 0 230
0 126
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib /ftz
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankful
Stream Power (transport capacity) W /mz
-
-
21416
-
0 700
- -
1 300 5 000
-
2 450
"dklonallReach�, _am_eters
Drainage Area SM
064
064
377
044 192
077
Impervious cover estimate ( %)
-
C5 /05
-
G5
-
C5
- -
ES ES
-
C5 /E5
C5
Rosgen Classificatio
Bankfull Velocity (fps
3 80
120
100 150
190
208
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
- - _ ®
1570
2230
850 3060
1800
1800
Valley length (ft)
2238
2238
-
-
-
218000
218000
Channel Thalweg length (ft
2350
2350
-
-
-
270300
271500
Sinuosity (ft
) 105
1 105
126
115
118
124
125
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft
00066
00219
00005
00024
00026
00022
00060
BF slope ( ft/ft ) - - 00022 00060
Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres - - - - _
Proportion over wide ( %)
Entrenchment Class (ER Range - - - - -
Incision Class (BHR Range
BEHI VL %/ L %/ M %/ H %/ VH %/ E% - - -
Channel Stability or Habitat Metri - - - - - -
Biological or Other- - - - - -

Table 11 Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Section)
UT Rocky River - Harris Road Middle (EEP IMS No 92383)
UT Rocky River 2,7151f
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Dimension and substrate
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Bankfull Width (ft)
1010
1030
87
930
1006
934
Floodprone Width (ft)
185
185
185
175
175
175
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
090
087
073
090
083
088
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
160
156
121
165
183
185
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ( )
920
893
631
800
833
8 18
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11 10
1185
1199
1080
1212
1067
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
1830
1794
2126
1880
1740
1874
Bankf ill Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
I
1
1
Cross Section 3 (Pool)
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
Dimension and substrate'
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Bankfull Width (ft)
1102
10 13
1073
850
888
875
Floodprone Width (ft)
132
132
132
292
292
292
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
097
096
092
080
085
069
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
200
197
215
140
138
133
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ( )
1068
975
984
670
750
601
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
1136
1055
1171
10 70
10 45
1273
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
1200
1303
1230
3430
3288
3338
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cross Section 5 (Pool)
Cross Section o0 ormer y
e
Dimension and substrate'
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Bankfull Width (ft)
1330
1371
1284
1160
1124
1117
Floodprone Width (ft)
300
300
300
250
250
250
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
090
109
099
090
1 18
131
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
205
245
229
190
262
3 11
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (W)
1230
1495
1272
1070
1327
1464
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
1450
1258
1295
1260
953
852
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
2260
2188
2337
2160
2224
2238
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 = Based on current bankfull elevation, determined by field indicators of bankfull
2 = Cross Section 6 is no longer included in the Table 12 dimension and substrate averages
-3 -- -- - - -- ,

1� Jam- L
11 1711, lTr-
7r 1L
- ,ter - -�-
i�

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River— Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
Appendix E. Hydrologic Data
Table 13. Verification of Bankfull Events
Figures 6.1 - 6.4 Crest Gauge Photos
6.1 Crest Gauge 1 (3/8/2012)
C� Page 44
Engineering
6.2 Crest Gauge 1 (10/4/2012)
Crest Gauge
Height
Gauge
Gauge
Crest
Bankfull
Info
above
Reading
Elevation
Elevation
Elevation
Bankfull
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
Date
Site
Sta.
(ft)
Photo
3/8/2012
1
16 +85
0.75
620.65
621.40
1 621.05
0.35
6.1
10/4/2012
1
16 +85
1.13
620.65
621.78
621.05
0.73
6.2
3/20/2013
1
16 +85
1.75
620.65
622.40
621.05
1.35
6.3
9/24/2013
2
29 +70
1.30
611.80
613.10
612.33
0.77
6.4
Figures 6.1 - 6.4 Crest Gauge Photos
6.1 Crest Gauge 1 (3/8/2012)
C� Page 44
Engineering
6.2 Crest Gauge 1 (10/4/2012)

EEP IMS No. 92383
UT Rocky River — Harris Road Middle
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
YEAR TWO MONITORING REPORT
November 2013
6.3 Crest Gauge 1 (3/12/2013)
I C� Page 45
Engineering
6.4 Crest Gauge 2 (9/24/2013)