20180785 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report (S&W)_2021_20220217

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20180785 Version* 1
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 02/17/2022
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/17/2022
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* 0 Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jeremiah Dow [e-mail]
Project Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20180785 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
County: Chatham
Document Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: HipBoneCreek_100059_MY1_2021.pdf 10.07MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:*

MY01 MONITORING REPORT
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Chatham County
Cape Fear River Basin - 03040101
DMS Project#100059
DMS Contract #7528
DMS RFP #16-007331
USACE AID #: SAW 2017-0016160 DWR#: 2018-0785
Monitoring Data Collected: 2021
Y .-
,mow _
ski { f =.y -
r' /
a
,4.'
y y
r ,.
,i r r #
# t,
Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699
Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAl.Ql1ALITY

Monitoring and Design Firm
Prepared by:
4111
-111141
K C I
ASSOCIATES OF NC
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh,NC 27609
[phone]
Project Contact: Tim Morris
Email: tim.morris(a,kci.com
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 MY-01 Monitoring Report

KC I ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, Yh 4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh,NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 2,2022
To: Jeremiah Dow,DMS Project Manager
From: Tim Morris,Project Manager
KCI Associates of North Carolina,PA
Subject: MY-01 Monitoring Report Comments
Hip Bone Creek DMS#100059,Contract 007528
Cape Fear River Basin CU 03040101
Chatham County,North Carolina
Please find below our responses in italics to the MY-01 Monitoring Report comments from NCDMS
received on January 21,2022,for the Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site.
1. CCPV maps' satellite imagery did not render.
KCI Response: This issue has been corrected.
2. Please verify that no invasive vegetation was treated or identified.
KCI Response:Invasive species were treated during construction but have not been treated since
construction was completed. Scattered clumps of Chines privet are present in the wetland
enhancement areas but below the mapping threshold. These will be treated again in future
monitoring years.
3. We recommend adding a line to the cross section graphs that identifies the low top of bank
(LTOB)in addition to the existing Bankfull(based on MYO cross sectional area)line.
KCI Response:A LTOB line has been added to the cross-section graphs.
4. You may discontinue future pebble counts if you wish on this project.Per the memo distributed
on Oct. 19, 2021,"The absence of pebble count data in future monitoring reports where pebble
count data was listed as part of monitoring in the mitigation plan must be documented in the
monitoring report. The September 29,2021 Technical Work Group meeting may be cited as the
source of the new policy."
KCI Response:Future pebble counts will be discontinued.
5. Table 9—All LTOB Cross Sectional Areas are identical between MYO and MY1 yet there are
changes in BHR and LTOB Max Depth which would imply a change in cross sectional area.
Please clarify.
KCI Response: The value for the bankfull cross-sectional area was accidentally used in this table.
This error has been corrected.
6. Please address the IRT's MYO comments and do a comment response letter. Please include the
letter in an Appendix of the MY1 report.
KCI Response:A response to comments letter has been prepared and included in Appendix F
Other Data.
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988

7. Please do not alter the output of the veg table tool. The color coding is intended to communicate
performance and the date of current survey,planted acreage,etc. is required information.In the
resubmittal,please include the input and output from the tool and update the tables in the report.
KCI Response:Initially we were unable to get the veg table tool to output any tables for any of
our projects and so an attempt was made to copy the formatting of the example tables provided.
Since submitting the draft version of this report, whatever was causing the error appears to have
been corrected and the tool is generating the output tables. The tables in the report have been
updated and the input and output files have been added to the digital deliverable.
8. Note that the submitted vegetation data includes conflicting performance standard approval
designations.For example,Betula nigra is listed as"Approved Post Mit Plan"in the Random Plot
2 sheet but is described as"Approved Mit Plan"in other sheets and in Table 6.
KCI Response: This error has been corrected.
Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these responses.
Sincerely,
Tim Morris
Project Manager
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com
Employee-Owned Since 1988

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project Summary 1
Table 1. Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits 1
Current Conditions Planview 2
Table 2. Goals,Performance,and Results 5
Table 3. Project Attributes Table 6
Monitoring Results 7
References 7
Appendix A—Visual Assessment Data
Table 4.Visual Stream Stability Assesment 9
Table 5.Visual Vegetation Assessment 10
Photo Reference Points 11
Vegetation Plot Photos 15
Appendix B —Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6.Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table 21
Table 7.Vegetation Plot Data 22
Appendix C — Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross-section Plots 26
Pebble Counts 42
Table 8.Baseline Stream Data Summary 50
Table 9. Cross-section Morphology Monitoring Summary 52
Appendix D — Hydrologic Data
30th/70th Percentile Graph 55
Table 10. Rainfall Summary 56
Table 11. Overbank Events 56
Table 12. Stream Flow Success Criteria Attainment 56
Table 13. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment 56
Surface Water Hydrographs 57
Stream Flow Hydrographs 59
Wetland Hydrographs 61
Appendix E — Project Timeline and Contact Info
Table 14. Project Activity and Reporting History 70
Table 15. Project Contacts 70
Appendix E — Project Timeline and Contact Info
Response to 11/2/2021 IRT MY00 Comments 72
Monitoring Well Soil Profiles 75
Redline Proposed Crossing Size Table 83
Culvert Photos 84
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 MY-01 Monitoring Report

PROJECT SUMMARY
The Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(HBCRS)is a full delivery project for the North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services(DMS).The site restored and enhanced a total of 4,026 linear feet of stream and 6.023
acres of riparian wetland.The HBCRS is a riparian system in the Cape Fear River Basin(03030003 8-digit
cataloging unit) in Chatham County, North Carolina. The site's natural hydrologic regime had been
substantially modified by relocation and straightening,impacts from cattle,installation of field ditches,and
other anthropogenic impacts. This site restored impacted agricultural lands to a stable stream and wetland
ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer, floodplain access,and riparian wetlands. Project planting and
construction were completed in April 2021 and the monitoring components were installed in May 2021.
Table 1.Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits
As- Original
Original Built Original Original Mitigation
Mitigation Ft/ Mitigation Restoration Ratio
Project Segment Plan Ft/Ac Ac Category Level X:1) Credits Comments i
Stream
T1 Reach 1 780 745 Warm R 1.00000 750.000 30'exception STA
13+12 to 13+42
T1 Reach 2 906 890 Warm R 1.00000 906.000
T1 Reach 3 269 208 Warm R 1.00000 209.000 60'exception STA
27+77 to 28+37
T1 Reach 4 295 295 Warm EII 2.50000 118.000
T1 Reach 5 452 447 Warm R 1.00000 452.000
T3 Reach 1 310 280 Warm EII 2.50000 112.000 30'exception STA
301+57 to 301+87
T3 Reach 2 591 590 Warm EII 2.50000 236.400
T3 Reach 3 573 545 Warm R 1.00000 543.000 30'exception STA
317+98 to 318+28
_ Total: 3,326.400
Wetland
Riparian Enhancement 1.495 1.473 R E 2.50000 0.598
Riparian Re-establishment 3.040 3.04 R REE 1.00000 3.040
Riparian Rehabilitation 1.488 1.471 R RH 1.50000 0.992
Total: 4.630
Project Credits
Stream Riparian Non-Riparian Coastal
Restoration Level Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh
Restoration 2,860.000
Re-establishment 3.040
Rehabilitation 0.992
Enhancement 0.598
Enhancement I
Enhancement II 466.400
Creation
Preservation
Total 3,326.400 4.630
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 1 MY-01 Monitoring Report

I
I I .
T1 Reach 5 I •
I I 'f. . ,.
f
I T1 Reach 4 .
I Page 2 r • T1 Reach 3 I .-
i i ,.
•
I I •
J
•
I T3 Reach 3 - - - , I '
i i
- --- - - - T1 Reach • -- - - ' -�- ---
I )
Project Easement(18.68 acres) I i
Stream Mitigation i I 7.• •'I
--- -�- - -- -- --- --- --- T3 Reach I
•Restoration (2,860 If/2,860 SMC) I - I _
Enhancement II (1,166 If/466 SMC) I , -_ I -
No Credit I • -
I I
Riparian Wetland Mitigation I - I •
- Re-establishment (3-040acres/3.040 WMC) I I
I
Rehabilitation (1-473acre/0.981 WMC) I - I •
Enhancement (1-473acre/0-59WMC) I '.g --.s..y,. - I .
I I
Photo Points I s T1 Reach 1
I Page Q I _.. ..
Cross-sections
I I
• Bankfull Gauge I - I 1
• Flow Gauge I I'
I I
Flow Camera I
Wetland Gauges I ! _ `I
' Successful
I 4" "• I. .1,-
sir Not Successful I • I
i Vegetation Plots I `
1 Successful I T3 Reach 1 ..-i,-:.--4., • . _
r .
Not Successful I ,
I l
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLANVIEW PAGE N Image Source:Esri,Maxar,
0 200 400 EarthstarGeographics,
Feet HIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITE USDA FSA,USGS,Aerogrid,
CHATHAM COUNTY, GIS User
Co d NC Co me
IS Community

• 8 • 1
18+00•.....,..,—T1 Reach 2 R8
lili�)•.3Aekp0
17+0p-
Reach 1 10 \4.
M 00
•
00 `VX T3 Reach 2
x x
NcD • .`0 2 • PP8
V,00
PP1 -3�
di WM2 74.,i.06;-
• •.310k0
13+0p- •
0 ul�l�il�
72x0;XS2
ks i kp0 10
• 1 WM1 -
11
• 07+00
r
•
Project Easement(18.68 acres)
Stream Mitigation T1 Reach 1
-306+00
Restoration (2,8601f/2,860 SMC) •
Enhancement II (1,1661f/466SMC) 0
No Credit p5k0
Riparian Wetland Mitigation •
- Re-establishment (3.040 acres/3.040 WMC)
Rehabilitation (1.473acre/0.981 WMC) -304+00
Enhancement (1.473 acre/0.59 WMC)
Photo Points
•
Cross-sections -303+00
• Bankfull Gauge
• Flow Gauge
Flow Camera _
Wetland Gauges ; 2
`r Successful - vC, •014--
S Not Successful
Vegetation Plots '—
Successful •300+0�3 Reach 1 -
Not Successful
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLANVIEW PAGE N Image Source:Esri,Maxar,
0 100 200 EarthstarGeographics,
Feet HIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITE USDAFSA,USGS,Aerogrid,
IGNCHATHAM COUNTY, GIS User Comanmunity
NCIGP the
GIS

00
. w
+ -
•
. 4 / i
A 5
I 4 r l 1 V
.. .A
fr R5 PP6 0
J
'12X o
00
�
WM5# • Ti Reach 5
�!r` • 'x0
liii. ,
P P 5 -"'• O
5,4\O
I. 30 V �,9 T1 Reach 4
1 �h- �O 00
111 ppPP4 x00 i - f
Project Easement(18.68 acres)
Stream Mitigation 6x
- OO• - �
Restoration (2,8601f/2,860SMC) T1 Reach 3
Enhancement II (1,1661f/466SMC) ` '""'^'2S.X • • 322+00 ir r
No Credit R4 0
Riparian Wetland Mitigation WM3 k,
to- Re-establishment (3.040 acres/3.040 WMC) 24+00-r .,,,20 �7XOO
Rehabilitation (1.473acre/0.981 WMC) 23• -
2CSEnhancement (1.473 acre/0.59 WMC) _
•
. ],
Photo Points '2+00, • CA6
Cross-sections �• p PP10
•
• Bankfull Gauge 00.R3
• Flow Gauge 1x '=51$00 p� T3 Reach 3
•
Flow Camera i+0t - - c�1 x
Wetland Gauges ^
•
ti Successful QO
S Not Successful 10 3 ' s6x
Vegetation Plots 8 •
n�1�x00
11 Successful . i0•�T1 Reach 2 •1`8
M Not Successful P119 -,
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLANVIEW PAGE N Image Source:Esri,Maxar,
0 100 200 EarthstarGeographics,
Feet HIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITE USDAFSA,USGS,Aerogrid,
CHATHAM COUNTY, NC IGN,IGP,and the
GIS User Community

Table 2.Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)Goals,Performance and Results
Likely Cumulative
Goal Objective/Treatment Functional Performance Measurement Monitoring
Uplift Criteria Results
-Relocate channelized Dispersion of high BHR<1.2,ER>2.2, 16 cross-section
Restore a All 16 XS have
channelized streams to historic flows on the and no change surveys,4 pressure BHR<1.2 and
landscapepositions floodplain, >10%in BHR or transducer stream
stream to a p ER>2.2;no BKF
increase in ER between gauges(measuring
meandering -Install a bankfull-sized biogeochemical monitoring events; bankfull events on events in 2021;
C-type channel cross-section cycling within the 4 bankfull events; T1-5 and T3-3 and T1-1 flow for 105
channel -Install bedform diversity system,and continuous flow for stream flow on Ti- consecutive days,
with a T3-1 flow for 205
with pools,riffles,and recharging of at least 30 days 1 and T3-1),annual
floodplain habitat strucures riparian wetlands. each year visual inspection consecutive days
Buffer and Fencing
Fence intact around
reduce Reduction in installation
sediment Demarcate the project sediment, entire easement, Annual visual completed
impacts to easement boundaries and nutrient,and fecal adequate signage inspection 10/4/21,fence and
the project fence out livestock coliform inputs to. present around signs are in good
stream easement boundary condition
Reduction in
floodplain Survival rate of
sediment inputs 320 stems per acre
Restorea from runoff,
Plant the site with native at MY3,260
forested increased bank All veg plots
riparian trees and shrubs and a stability, planted stems per 18 vegetation plots >320 stems/acre
community herbaceous seed mix increased LWD acre at MY5,and
and organic 210 stems per acre
material in at MY7.
streams.
Restore a Increase in
wetland
wetland Reconnect streams to Continuous
hydroperiod and
hydroperiod floodplain;redevelop saturation within a
to drained wetland microtopography biogeochemical 12"of the soil 8 pressure 3/8 gauges>12/o
cycling within the a continuous
and/or to slow the flow of system,decrease surface for 12%of transducer gauges saturation in 2021
livestock- surface and subsurface in sediment and the growing season
impacted drainage (26 days)
land nutrient inputs to
streams.
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 5 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 3.Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)Project Attribute Table
Project Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
County Chatham County
Project Area(acres) 18.68
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude decimal degrees) 35.6804 N,-79.4018 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
River Basin Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 3030003
DWR Sub-basin 3/6/2012
Project Drainage Area(acres) 158
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 1%
Land Use Classification Pasture/Farmland(85%),Forest(9%),Open Water
(5%),and Rural Development(1%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach 1 Reach 3
Pre-project length(feet) 2,439 1,403
Post-project(feet) 2,702 1,474
Valley confinement(Confined,moderately confined, Unconfined Unconfined
unconfined)
Drainage area(acres) 158 43
Perennial,Intermittent,Ephemeral Intermittent Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C C
Dominant Stream Classification(existing) G4 G4
Dominant Stream Classification(proposed) C4/C4b C4
Dominant Evolutionary class(Simon)if applicable Channelized,Stage III Channelized,Stage III
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters WA and WE WB,WC,WD,WF,and WG
Pre-project(acres) 2.52 0.99
Post-project(acres) 2.78 2.67
Wetland Type(non-riparian,riparian) Riparian Riparian
Mapped Soil Series Georgeville Chewacla/Wehadkee
Soil Hydric Status Non-hydric Hydric
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Docs?
Water of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes SAW-2018-01160
Water of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes DWR# 18-0785
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes USFWS
Historic Preservation Act No N/A NCSHPO
Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA or CAMA) No N/A N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 6 MY-01 Monitoring Report

MONITORING RESULTS
The first year of vegetation monitoring was conducted November 15 and November 17, 2021. During the
site's first growing season all 18 vegetation monitoring plots achieved the success criteria of 320 stems/acre.
Across all of the plots the site averaged 933 planted stems/acre.Including volunteers the site averaged 1,021
stems/acre. Overall the site is well vegetated with many planted and volunteer woody stems throughout the
whole project and a robust and diverse herbaceous layer.
The MY01 cross-section survey was completed on December 13, 2021. The MY01 survey found that the
stream was functioning as designed with no problem areas identified.All 16 cross-sections had bank height
ratios less than 1.2 and entrenchment ratios greater than 2.2.
The daily rainfall data was obtained from a local weather station in Siler City, NC, provided by the NC
State Climate Office. In 2021,the months of January, June,August, September, and October experienced
average rainfall. March, April, May,November, and December experienced below average rainfall while
February and July recorded above average rainfall. Overall the site experienced average rainfall during
2021.Although the overall rainfall total for the site was average for the year,the months of March,April,
and May were extremely dry. The water table is typically at its peak for the growing season during these
months since evapotranspiration rates are not yet as high as they are later in the growing season, and the
water table is still recharged from the typically wetter winter months.Because of this period of drought,the
water table was not able to recharge to its typical level by the time that the growing season and
evapotranspiration rates were at their peak.
During the site's first growing season, 3 of the 8 gauges achieved the success criteria of 12% continuous
saturation (26 days). This low rate of success is likely due to the extremely dry beginning of the growing
season mentioned above, and KCI does not believe that it is reflective of the typical hydrology of the site.
Both of the stream flow gauges recorded greater than 30 consecutive day of flow. This data was further
backed up by the flow cameras which also both showed greater than 30 consecutive days of flow despite
being obscured by vegetation for a large portion of the summer.No bankfull events were recorded in 2021.
REFERENCES
NCDENR,Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009.Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities
2009. Raleigh,NC.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed Planning/Cape Fear Riv
er Basin/RBRP%20CapeFear%202009%20Revised%20032013.pdf
NCDEQ,Division of Mitigation Services. June 2017. "As-built Baseline Monitoring Report
Format,Data and Content Requirement."
https://file s.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Libra
ry/Guidance%20and%20Template%20Documents/6_AB_Baseline Rep_Templ_June
%202017.pdf
NCIRT. October 24,2016. "Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update."https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington-District-Mitigation-
Update.pdf
USACE, Sprecher, S. W.;Warne,A. G. 2000. "Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to
Evaluate Wetland Hydrology."
https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/ADA3 78910.xhtml
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 7 MY-01 Monitoring Report

APPENDIX A
Visual Assessment Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 8 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 4.Hip Bone Creek Resotration Site(1D-100059)Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach T1
Assessed Stream Length 2702
Assessed Bank Length 5404
Number Stable, Amount of %Stable,
Performing as Total Number Unstable Performing as
Major Channel Category Metric Intended in As-built Footage Intended
Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or 0 100%
Bank surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT
Bank Toe Erosion include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable and are providing 0 100%
habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical-rotational,slumping,calving,or collapse 0 100%
i Totals 0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 16 16 100%
Structure Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%.
Bank Protection 16 16 100%
(See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Reach T3
Assessed Stream Length 1,474
Assessed Bank Length 2,948
Number Stable, Amount of %Stable,
Performing as Total Number Unstable Performing as
Major Channel Category Metric Intended in As-built Footage Intended
M.
Surface Scour/Bare Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or 0 100%
Bank surface scour
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT
Bank Toe Erosion include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable and are providing 0 100%
habitat.
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical-rotational,slumping,calving,or collapse 0 100%
Totals 0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 7 7 100%
Structure Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%.
Bank Protection 21(See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document) 7 7 100%
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 9 MP-01 Monitoring Report

Table 5.Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)Visual Vegetation Assessment
Planted acreage 17.4
%of
Mapping Combined Planted
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Acreage Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria. 0.10acres 0.00 0.0%
•
Total 0.00 0.0%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
Cumulative Total 0.00 0.0%
Easement Acreage 18.7
%of
Mapping Combined Easement
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Acreage Acreage
Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the
total easement acreage.-Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native,young,woody stems in the
Invasive Areas of Concern 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
short-term or community structure for existing communities. Species included in summation above should be
identified in re.ort summa .
Encroachment may be point,line,or polygon.Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation of restrictions
Easement Encroachment Areas specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. none 0
Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area.
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 10 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Photo Reference Photos
. '.. ' - ,r, . i
, __, _ .,......__ „ .
. .,.. ... _,
. . .
r V ` , _ _
K %._
,,
_____ „, . .„,.-e.* _ .
_
i . _
, ,,,:,, :.,:.....,t.,.
,.
, .
z.„.• .. ,
. ..„.„...,.::
,, „.,„..,,,...„. ..... ._,..„......„..;.t
ki..„0„.,.,,,t...„„:_._,0„..
K � ,e�. . .._ ,,...:i..c..,.._ , • '''. . .
..,i..:„ ......,:.
,.. ,, .
.._ , , ., . .•.... ,...... .
...„:„._&„::..;..„,44...„4„,:„.„....„:„
Z"S,___*..___:_:,...-.„‘„,,_:„..1....„,..„,...,„:, ,. : :„...„...._.... .4_,„4„.4:1:4._.e,..„„...,..„...„.„:„...,.. .
t S
�A yts ry
_ 4X?f.P'_:. _ _ Y d -u' .s6'k_•fa'o'ha`-�
PP 1 -MY -5/24/21 PP 1 -MY-01 -9/29/21IPL-n-j7iMMI1111111111.111. ,:„,..',,-.-ratm-W..:*-1,1..''17 ---6, 7:•_:_lt - "-r-''''',Zr.;••.'
ti.'''1.''''
. + . �a r =z ! ' V.'t 1. Y W'..F ?•- ?A‘..- .. -9/29/21P ...3_ PP2-MY-01r a M1 ,.1 s..:v• .;`m . -00-5/24/21PP2-M ,� -„A
+► '
f@.. .. t
•
'cad -~� _. .--z
•
•
•
��.
PPS -MY-00-5/24/21 PP3—MY-01-9/29/21
Hip Bone CreekI6storation Site KCIAssociates ofNC,PA
DMSProject#100059 11 MY-01 Monitoring Report

•
._: :. il
�`c a3'fiW yF y�S <i
r �.7� i a:
f P
+ " 4' ' aye ' r i+` 4�f
pp z,,- ,� ,.�`` �sym,. As ��il ��4, e t �i
✓ i �... w * i +'- •�'49 �f �k,rS
PP4—MY-00—5/24/21 PP4—MY-01 —9/29/21
fir �r- > �'a a 5�. �t`,�*,i^, "C' a � 8' s � °3 !y:�"'^��
" . ''--.'., ..:::.!'..4,43W11,,,it:',"itt 40.. ki;;.1.,"414,;;'"
•
"-¢ x: `-ia�f ` �3'�a�.4, _>" !s�_P4.a✓YFI ie'akt�;n42 c`d �6:t�4r'
PPS —MY-00—5/24/21 PPS—MY-01 —9/29/21
is
Ire 4-- L F
tR J
4
1
;i'k LI �, i., el ` ° � k,y �4r r 7t�dt r- .
PP6—MY-00—5/24/21 PP6—MY-01 —9/29/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 12 MP-01 Monitoring Report

. .:
� , i .
_ ,
r h I Ia -
•
•
•
"` y �x ' --- _I - - - t •1l
x
rifi•''+'•••':,0.s%•,••-^ ilot• •-,:-..,'•%.,,,-..•-•?...i....,,-,',!••,.10:,•:•.:." —. ...,•*•-,•
PP7—MY-00—5/24/21 PP7—MY-01 —9/29/21
,
iti $i§
� ..;'. ,� tr � `-.-
`wo -
- a'", y�h F *b . p t'+ . moo;, ' am _
,.,-'''.'-. ' ite.441,._4:,;';'''',. N.
,...:. •
+� �� 1I
e �+ �.., .._.•...,... .:•• .
_ gad "t�� Ni. �"'�.,.{ '4iy rf
.._ , ...'.._.:,:..,..,„:_: „. ..
...., ....tv,.,„....4 ,..•;,„_.,..7-p..k..,,..:-.._!„. • . _•„
,„„,,,,,,, , 7:• ..r 2
•
Y ; 5 A o ,,
t t N a • • yt � � S l z Yam{ sh, . ..••,.....„„.._.„..,....•_,.....,:,r...;•,... .... , ..__.-.4„. 's
H✓°" •• A 9` F. t�p a��.�'S°�3J' •C!, -tip. YV '" Est _::'•' $'�-° ,
PP8—MY-00—5/24/21 PP8 —MY—01 —9/29/21
IMIIIIIII
�;
a
Ate{ ae
•
F "fit Sf
1•':,:.''''.1.,`4 f, r
•
# r .R ` , tit s ''�k $^
t 1 y
PP9—MY-00—5/24/21 PP9—my-01 —9/29/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 13 MP-01 Monitoring Report

UPI".
. • .P.• I i,...i. •,i....,.-.. ._ __,- --;.'-.,5 -- -:.' ''''.'''.'*--
$ 4. „... _ �' r
•
'ax. :41" a� "✓ ,Fx- ~ F * )fL f _� AST SF /\y 4l Ss3 ,(. _ _ •i'
w- � �� „ # 4w � ��..i,4'�(� .6:-, . � � Amy -fir '"7`"'�r:>�a<- {f�y _
PP 10-MY-00- 5/24/21 PP 10-MY-01 -9/29/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 14 MP-01 Monitoring Report

Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Air
, E ri� ' " r v-"tom?;;" %`4',, .(; - d ,� �z' , N
F
C _ -q,,-7� s z ,, , aR'1/ 1✓ ; * ': P -;.'' del �r'
/ " - ., n u - "` . f tb�ye.1 p r +1�;�,'{.ar % ri j T•: C
rc Y 'C� I P4 1 ! IF, .-
vw .�"c.. - ,�C. .`" dK r _,v...c.
- ts L 'sn ai4 i.< r9.',k Vegetation Plot 1 —MY-00—5/14/21 Vegetation Plot 1 —MY-01 — 11/17/21
11111111011TI
' -
am
tE,..'4;7'''r;'' '. ,, 'k,"41'.:%7"4'.'W:V:<4,*P.''.r3,1-1'(dt„i..,,-:1('440,9),'-',1,,, ,,
tr..,:.,,,b4 -. .-4".'„,..,1-1'.`,,,‘,W:-.CA,.':k.t"-:,''','''" ;tt.fgEfi;-..,-.?..,-,..p...V.,,,?1.3,,-„
-''',..4-‘44±,t...4.1,4,,,A,J-q0-0,i•-••_. .„1:‘, t..4,;11*.-,944e,--t 7:-:, -.0.,!.?
2 �'`'�- 4Y p� F',! 5 � k �y
}4 ? * 11
M� S 3 Ex5Pi.:'
e, �A,.e 4 Jam`, /. �� �� j g1'" \
yys+ ., � 1 F ��11 ' Eplx � '-'' ' . i W} 7)- /x�
to �. F � a4. flt 1� ':F.� 1�
Vegetation Plot 2—'MY-00—5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 2—MY-01— 11/17/21
IR' g L3 k3
,Ali
�' fi; F lC ,� . pl;:
'7,,,. "01
'
i�� '�M� �� 'a�l r�•f�,. umsrx.: �.�,,..s,fa .. § "�.,,,,,,,,A-",. }.,:5 ; :'iZal.. i..: �. .._F-
Vegetation Plot 3 —MY-00—5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 3 —MY-01 - 11/17/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 15 MP-01 Monitoring Report

•
YeF
W -
!
{ a li;i'ii _,�,` 1 •"t'_•
.�'°` .7 .1ei 7 L _
Vegetation Plot 4—MY-00—5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 4—MY-01 — 11/17/21
"R!
h u a �,
s; 2�!
.F� ar,� * r ' "tc-` " y"g La% *f',k ,y (:
.� w!� � fiC try: +�. �� i� � }ice - ta- 19 -.x1
$` a. 'g} „'., "� r r� ,••-'1w .7 RS' '��'i Ip'':cv- r
F�3x`�'r �.+ m_.� azi, ./ tt ` ;r P.',r. j�rr j[r'�
2.- €- �' V, TR' eg: r t'x ,er �
Sri '" 'c? -n f° a _.1. 1 ... :.a� ;1 n � d r * �5d 4 � fit a.3.. r
Vegetation Plot 5—MY-00— 5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 5—MY-01 — 11/17/21
aS .74..,
1aq- r
rr r yr n# f " , , i r : -t,+1'.
t -m . .. "E '' 4 ^K �V d ;:F�"'Y , -=`,
ys `+-ram_ Br ti'i r,° ` rY' G 4t;. 44 n�
"aa• f� :a i"`�I'$t'r 5 ^, �r W ',�" i a ��' � . ' `,4 1 lye` 1'
� �. z' ,sty �r-. 4 :f' �,�)1 )yr a}" Tr7 f xi $ --till',
�$ '3 Q 6 -L a Y�y ��� ,y y s -( o c�<���� -�� �I's,by °'�M�'� ay� a��a'�+`�"��t �
d n „ R 1..} -t f,�- ".4 • -,,. fld i, • �. ,�rf464\ .
i F ''' i`a "- t i & i s%�d uiea � f 1 M1 L S'1� a (�&{ reya�
4�4 , : ,,.',y� ' ova ,.�- °� G ,. :. =w, C' '; ` '.y -.-.' :5,�; .=' + �.�»n .,.5. *�sf� �F . ;:x�.�-.
Vegetation Plot 6 - MY-00—5/14/21 Vegetation Plot 6—MY-01— 11/17/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 16 MP-01 Monitoring Report

1kf
r
• ttt
.. � =�
h [ 1 11 ' F 4 f h
�C i r .Y"+'.i ,,y e, ..f) „ _,� 7: ,p, ixr 1 ii h.r h.''
," sx tMw'^t' 'i gr'r a ° } 8 iz 1 r °�
>i `�''{'' axy :. fA� S � + " x + 5 P i},+C ` I NO r Q- h��
P k •k •
" --: ':q 'f 5-•i ce: 14�� Qi+•�4� . _
r �.a� tb �� y��l � hr `4'' x 6, tt, i i �n�3 i S �4 �i r�� ' T* r
• r. t �� r 3 � } - �� *f k +"` -0 Pr �! y f jbz
w I. f M x `t sci. s "tf. d �/� 4`'
Yv r ffi . ..e+ • . o-% ,..e. M '.. ,'b'i- .� s
Vegetation Plot 7-MY-00-5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 7-MY-01 - 11/17/21
T.._
•
F •
q� h �>) ^. fly 1. �� 9z S
Fes.
•
�. a c Via.-.: %; E
�..` .'
Vegetation Plot 8-MY-00-5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 8-MY-01 - 11/17/21
11.-71_11=7:, _ ,.
-_- - - ._
to1. ,� .
i 4 J l 4 C" mt FFs;e5 t-
,a". r .�z§_ ",.. ..s�h `kg48�.st Zn s.:'!, i�.'nlii:g5i � '_ 'AK',. w `fir z '� \' ry.r v -ry.
Vegetation Plot 9-MY-00-5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 9-MY-01 - 11/17/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 17 MP-01 Monitoring Report

.l':sue )k' "[.'Mai ..4i i•_ ' ''
M ,7' d.. ?. vkfr ,:-_ � s ,F ,+p M4F yti2 fl€ a rs
•
-,y. °1,:4.i s�"x, im'` cs, ! i ='4, -x. 'µ,T —.. K x f § .,""" '� xsu "
•
�,* A r r x 4'r` "R' •rs- mow `z
K-.ri,. "" i�o s y�'' y,.. 4 fin. -e., a--- .f v s ' ,. **. x` ;�f
17.
�� ,fix .�'�'� °' -, ,.; t'!. r -- �`,� y3, t {, `;t�, Yy-� ; a �'`'r �
•
• ,, ,. a6" , . 4•14 r' ,y3 • cr -i1' "� " sn!,:....7....7r.,....;:,*-i;i1.4.,0•0:4,.!- *„.01..i,-•`" k,,t ft e
^,. ' �''-s :, r n'wt -,'4r xr • 3'. y -yr+ �, .,
,Ik i d' S F. -f 1� -� � 4M^ '4 '�'> g3"k k o in , -,.
14 � -1 t .� ..k�' as : .h 1•1 'S �' 4 K� 'a-7:1. • zsl y'.shd
•
.�,. f t x ,,fah, P� s � '� S'� y 'N•jc ' "' . ? "'+y sett$.. .. ".'
4•h � •• F :x.�✓ } ,y t t� afi 7' rr_1,7,1.v.1.„.4..,: . .„:.:, ,.,,j. d - Mo, z.A.
....
E
,,
t
-7,
t t n { ry
•
.kuM r ;
Vegetation Plot 10—MY-00—5/13/21 Vegetation Plot 10—MY-01 — 11/15/21
.. •
'y, 1rs( •
jam..
•
�� •' . � ��' JS��"J{ 5 � A.'4 ,y a � ,� , '.
s •• �� ° • �k
'E 'er it! ' •'. il, k.- ' • 1+ r: '}^t t\ ''" �.,
, •4
a!Q 9 �' �. {- c4a { - h•. r 'S r✓•:.•,--`''','s1'�4, ' " <vFf • �c ,
ri.. e,:•.-tL...';‘,...ett,`.;;.,'.....,...4k.4.4.--..7,:•",;.•:•in `.,1...--:.',. lik*4•1!,,,' •'.'''.."A. :',75!"'"4-S•
Vegetation Plot R1 —MY-01 — 11/15/21 Vegetation Plot R2—MY-01°— 11/15/21
P ke , is n ,i Y `Y A 4
u'
•
t.
if-
• •
n"a:,•'n "'i,. F'. •
�. - -. � Rr �k' �
t, r�s4.F A yh Yv f1- tyE # , tC i:, A
• sOr 4 -d ai K - h -iii1 � 3 ,
•• .r t i Dr, A> } 1M s- . R : �h Cs4• f , --. J. 't., �9, 1;, ir y T Z ,_yC 4 ail: 1': ', T �iM W.E .�: -„• A 4 Yf x „ 4 •
•
•
'-':,:,•,. .i-,-,-,/.,;- ..,.-Q;m7-.,,..,K .,:,,;„..,,,,,,......?iti,Y,'',,_-7i-As,,j1,.k',4,1-'.l'
tP�, , 3 ,' x- rq ,a,�rape F,rfi" � v .,�. ^s s � r-5 - .. _ 'h '" �.
x .��4 ' i 4 t'r °'4t' `w,se k'z 7 , •,,'x' ; •x",1 4 ti '; rw '' "Alt T rt Y' h�fs
a g ° r „w v i- y ie r • ii
1 aft' _ ,{ w -�': r ,�1 '.b''ef"` '�+� �p�t: 'R3�,+ 3'"^ w .s S,+ •
?IY k, .. s. ,. '9. .4,n)y y �-�"a'o--.. c. 4x,C
y,A � Si ,qa -a i ., - [ ",• �' •„ ;} fin' �E's=•�," F`:�c`b i,� „" -. ix' �..Y - '
Vegetation Plot R3 —MY-01 — 11/15/21 Vegetation Plot R4—MY-01 — 11/15/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 18 MP-01 Monitoring Report

j
`b
•.. s V.t
� 4 -
r � d�
b ," p; s '4' r8v !. Yg '- ty s �, Ih Yd�'hh �+ ,6; q �, "'a �.
r.
of:,.-:.;7,ii...'1,-tr'''''''''754i
•
d1 z"s a3x �, t .' a r rams:''�� s te , s �Sr# 4 ; . , na' :° p � b .n � > �?r �µ � � a pia � �p� ' E
:Aj
.,.....4..., ;44.A..,t,4,;',..4St'''',.. .'''.f.Z/7:
Fy�� �Ff e $ce - n ' k, %11 . � � IAA,.s 4 -t . '? c t.,a L mm. n a k F ice,, , ,
„, ,!
,,,,,..4s.... . 1
'IT
Vegetation Plot R5—MY-01 — 11/15/21 Vegetation Plot R6—MY-01 — 11/15/21
� y s ,y w.'r
•
-,,-—...._,..,41,.,,,,,-...:_--:-.-....04.,,,,,,,.-11.,,,e,:,,,,L.:',.+,-,-77.,„ '!'
s 4P c5a� T'eyh� '42'.- � � 10T.�` 4 , ° !k::_ ' tS 'F ;am,� l4" i} : S. � � �
.;r �:ty 41 A y
-.-;ayi,.ter �°s
Vegetation Plot R7—MY-01 — 11/15/21 Vegetation Plot R8—MY-01 — 11/15/21
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 19 MP-01 Monitoring Report

APPENDIX B
Vegetation Plot Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 20 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 6.Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 1093 2 7 0 972 2 5 0 729 2 6 0
Monitoring Year 0 1093 1 7 0 1174 2 6 0 688 2 1 6 0
Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 850 2 5 0 972 2 5 0 972 2 5 0
Monitoring Year 0 769 1 4 0 1052 1 5 0 931 2 5 0
Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7 I.
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 1133 1 3 0 1174 2 5 0 1174 2 5 0
Monitoring Year 0 1214 2 3 0 1174 1 5 0 1255 1 6 0
Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 1255 2 8 0 324 2 4 0 1052 2 5 0
Monitoring Year 0 1498 2 8 0 1052 1 5 0 1052 2 5 0
Veg Plot Group 3 R Veg Plot Group 4 R Veg Plot Group 5 R
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 1052 2 4 0 688 3 4 0 1093 2 5 0
Monitoring Year 0 1052 2 6 0 364 2 4 0 850 1 6 0
Veg Plot Group 6 R Veg Plot Group 7 R Veg Plot Group 8 R
Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives Stems/Ac. Av.Ht.(ft) #Species %Invasives
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1 1174 2 6 0 1336 2 7 0 688 2 6 0
Monitoring Year 0 1093 1 5 0 810 1 6 Oi 972 1 4 0
Planted Acreage 17.4
Date of Initial Plant 2021-04-30
Date(s)of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey 2021-11-17
Plot size(ACRES) 0.0247
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 21 MP-01 Monitoring Report

Table 6.Vegetation Plot Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Indicator Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F
Status Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 11 11 6 6 3 3 5 5 14 14
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1 2 2
Species other
Included in Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 7 7 12 12 4 4 7 7 6 6
Approved Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU 2 2 2 2 1 1
Mitigation Plan Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 2 2 1 1
Quercus palustris pin oak Tree FACW 3 3 1 1 5 5 3 3 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 1 1 3 3 2 2 5 5 2 2
Quercus sp.
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 1 2
Sum Performance Standard 26 27 24 24 18 18 21 21 24 24
Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC 2
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Tree FACW
Callicarpa americana American beautyberry Shrub FACU
Post Mitigation Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU
Plan Species Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree FAC 13 2
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree FAC 1
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree FACU 6 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW
Sum Proposed Standard 26 27 24 24 18 18 21 21 24 24
. 1
Current Year Stem Count 27 24 18 21 24
Stems/Acre 1093 972 729 850 972
Mitigation Plan Species Count 7 5 6 5 5
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 41 50 32 29 58
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 2 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
Current Year Stem Count 27 24 18 21 24
Post Mitigation Stems/Acre 1093 972 729 850 972
Plan Species Count 7 5 6 5 5
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 41 50 2 29 58
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 2 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
1).Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year,italicized species are not approved,and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2).The"Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan"section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan.The"Post Mitigation Plan Species"section includes species that are
being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year(bolded),species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum(regular font),and species that are
not approved(italicized).
3).The"Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan,whereas the'Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"includes data from mitigation plan
approved,post mitigation plan approved,and proposed stems.
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 22 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 6.Vegetation Plot Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Indicator Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot 10 F
Status Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 6 6 1 1 22 22 17 17
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 1 1
Species other 1 1
Included in Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 14 15 11 11 2 2 4 4 10 10
Approved Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU 4 4
Mitigation Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 1 1 1 1
Plan Quercus palustris pin oak Tree FACW 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 1 1 16 16 1 1 6 6 12 12
Quercus sp. 1 1
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL
Sum Performance Standard 23 24 28 28 29 29 29 29 31 31
Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Tree FACW
Callicarpa americana American beautyberry Shrub FACU
Post Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU
Mitigation Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree FAC
Plan Species Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree FAC
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree FACU
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW
Sum Proposed Standard 23 24 28 28 29 29 29 29 31 31
r MEI
Current Year Stem Count 24 28 29 29 31
Mitigation Stems/Acre 972 1133 1174 1174 1255
Plan Species Count 5 3 5 5 8
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 62 57 76 59 39
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 1 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
■
Current Year Stem Count 24 28 29 29 31
Post Stems/Acre 972 1133 1174 1174 1255
Mitigation Species Count 5 3 5 5 8
Plan
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 62 57 76 39
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 1 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 0
1).Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year,italicized species are not approved,and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2).The"Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan"section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan.The'Post Mitigation Plan Species"section includes species that are
being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year(bolded),species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum(regular font),and species that are
not approved(italicized).
3).The"Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan,whereas the'Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"includes data from mitigation plan
approved,post mitigation plan approved,and proposed stems.
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 23 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 6.Vegetation Plot Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Indicator Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R Veg Plot 6 R Veg Plot 7 R Veg Plot 8 R
Status Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1 4 12 2 18 8 2 4
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 3
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 1
Species other
Included in Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 3 12 7 8 5 6 10 8
Approved Quercus falcata southern red oak Tree FACU 1 5 1 2
Mitigation Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 1
Plan Quercus palustris pin oak Tree FACW 2 1 2 3 1 2 4 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 2 8 5 2 6 1
Quercus sp.
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 4 12 1
Sum Performance Standard 8 26 26 17 27 29 33 17
Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC
Baccharis halimifolia eastern baccharis Tree FACW 1
Callicarpa americana American beautyberry Shrub FACU 1
Post Juglans nigra black walnut Tree FACU 1 1
Mitigation Liquidambar styracii lua sweetgum Tree FAC
Plan Species Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree FAC
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU 1
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree FACU 11 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1
Sum Proposed Standard 8 26 26 17 27 29 33 17
I
Current Year Stem Count 8 26 26 17 27 29 33 17
Mitigation Stems/Acre 324 1052 1052 688 1093 1174 1336 688
Plan Species Count 4 5 4 4 5 6 7 6
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 25 46 32 47 67 28 36 40
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Current Year Stem Count 8 26 26 17 27 29 33 17
Post Stems/Acre 324 1052 1052 688 1093 1174 1336 688
Mitigation Species Count 4 5 4 4 5 6 7
Plan MI
Performance Dominant Species Composition(%) 25 46 32 47 67 28 36
Standard Average Plot Height(ft.) 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2
%Invasives 0 0 0 0 IIIMII 411111_ 31111111_1111
1).Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year,italicized species are not approved,and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2).The"Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan"section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan.The"Post Mitigation Plan Species"section includes species that are
being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year(bolded),species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum(regular font),and species that are
not approved(italicized).
3).The"Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan,whereas the"Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard"includes data from mitigation plan
approved,post mitigation plan approved,and proposed stems.
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 24 MY-01 Monitoring Report

APPENDIX C
Stream Geomorphology Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 25 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS1 r. 'F
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.06
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew: TS,KB
, _ 4t 1 3 i ., 9 ,,a ,'
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA a - , •-•
�- -- - !d „d, z i it
0.0 566.63 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 566.37 �„ o s ,, W ` t
0.0 566.22 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 2.141%, % 4 � : "�:
5.5 566.06 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 2.0 "� °,`` .;
10.2 565.86 Bankfull Width(ft): 5.6 e"y ,s rs a a . , •- r ,0. 9 ° '
14.9 565.85 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 567.06 �� + � e� �,: 11 ' ,
19.9 566.29 Flood Prone Width(ft): 54 �' �' �� •�� i ". 4 " v� ��
23.1 566.34 Max Depth at Bankfull ft 0.7 �� � ,, • 0 ` -- ' l' • ,' .. �� �,.. ,
dyx
25.1 566.35 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.4 • '��' ��.•'� E �'� 1 '�
26.3 566.49 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): 14.9 .. ��` 4 "� � t��y�� a ° �
27.0 566.20 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 9.6 ,E : 1� �� �; 'a _ i_
28.0 566.19 Bank Hei ht Ratio(ft/ft): 1.0 II. . '. V� �
g 4/
28.7 565.87 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 565.68 • �'�' � �� �" �� ;9_s ` "
29.1 565.87
29.6 565.68
30.3 565.73 569 -
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS1, Riffle,T1-1
30.8 565.73
31.4 566.08 -
32.0 566.30
:::
-
32.7 566.55
,_ ., Pj
33.4 566.55
34.7 566.54
36.8 566.40
39.1 566.43
42.7 566.54 0
47.0 566.53
53.6 567.03 el.)
56.2 567.52 :zj 566
58.8 567.81
59.8 567.91 -
59.9 568.37 565 ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station(feet)
--- LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS2 x
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.06
Date: 12/13/2021 -
Field Crew: TS,KB
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA ,na
0.0 566.52 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 565.62 ,r ',
w W) 3- .1 ,
0.1 565.98 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 10.9 f r ti �k
4.7 565.74 LTOB Cross-Sectional Areas ft : 10.5 , y�� ' '
10.9 565.61 Bankfull Width(ft): 10.7 k �, �
15.7 565.65 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --- 1 ? :
•
20.7 565.54 Flood Prone Width(ft): --- •
� � " V '
23.4 565.56 Max : 1.8 • � �
25.5 565.57 Mean DepthDepthat at BankfullBankfull(ft)(ft): 1.0
{
26.6 565.30 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): --- 1 }
28.0 564.93 Entrenchment f --- r , i, .�
28.8 564.76 Bank Height RatioRatio(ft(ft//ft):t):
1.0 �'
29.7 564.31 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 563.84
30.7 563.91
32.2 563.84 33.3 563.85 568 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS2, Pool,T1-1
33.8 564.25 =
34.3 564.57 568 -
fti
34.9 565.02
35.5 565.16 567 -_
36.5 565.82 567
37.4 565.80 566
39.8 565.29 _
42.8 565.43 566 +sssr
44.5 565.72 0 565
1,4
46.8 566.05 '
ti
48.5 566.60 565 _
50.4 566.81 W 564 _ /
54.3 566.77
564 _
56.4 566.46
57.5 566.95 563 I I '
57.5 567.20 0 10 20 30 40 50
Station(feet)
--- LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS3 ,..
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.08
Date: 12/13/2021 �'} �,� , e
z
Field Crew: TS,KB « fi: va`i #
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA �''y`� ��f` f i �"`
0.0 557.63 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 555.69 «A . _ �
0.0 557.14 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 3.9d� • ._ 'foe
--
Station 557.24 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 3.6 5�, y _
4.2 556.73 Bankfull Width(ft): 6.8 y �1'�M • _
7.3 556.08 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 556.66 • il� y � : �' 11 +£ e r
9.9 555.65 Flood Prone Width(ft): 54414 -It 5 � raTg a
12.2 555.34 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.0 .A "3- • �,o�� 1 - ' �"'f"•`
14.8 555.49 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.6 `"° 4 }f, �; • ` ' g ,f ., ' , .
18.2 555.54 W/DRatio(ft/ft): 11.9 '`�',°t•1, �� 9wh• < 1 ���' •t�" qi _ _ �_;"' iI
22.3 555.66 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 8 0 Y { FAQ w� i,- `' - t:r' s a � a -. -1
25.0 555.60 BankHei htRatio ft/ft : 1.0 �� ^� � �� ,� �� '. - .
27.4 555.65 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 554.71 _'-� -!'� e -
28.0 555.61
29.0 555.21 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site, XS3, Riffle,T1-1
29.5 554.86
29.7 554.88 559 _
30.3 554.71 559 -
30.9 554.75
31.4 554.78 558
558 -
31.8 554.80
32.4 555.06 557
33.3 555.26 __ _
34.6 555.86 � 557
-
35.2 555.90 0 556
=37.8 555.69 l
ems •T- \ / ��s ass is:��
41.8 555.74 el.)
- � /
47.7 555.66 W 555 -_
54.4 556.09 = L.
57.9 556.41 555 -_
61.3 557.18 554 - I
66.3 558.01 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station(feet)
68.8 558.15
68.9 558.58
LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS4 '`�
li
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.08
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew: TS,KB
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA
'r: ---','
'
. :, 'kTM..r FYI`- ,� ',"-•.4:-.1,•:: ,I:. � ` �!
0.0 557.64 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 554.99 4 }
0.3 557.04 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 8.1 e 2.4 556.82 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 8.7
�
4.3 556.23 Bankfull Width(ft): 10.0 '" .�a -... ' -'
7.5 555.53 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --- 1- , , „
9.6 555.06 Flood Prone Width(ft): R
12.3 554.95 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.3 -
16.4 554.87 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.8 � 3 -
20.7 555.12 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): --
23.1 555.18 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): --- � -_ A . '\
26.0 555.20 Bank Hei ht Ratio ft/ft : 1.0 _ � ,
g ) ;,1 i
28.3 555.35 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 553.65 � - ._ -.
29.2 555.07
30.8 554.71
32.2 554.22 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site, XS4, Pool,T1-1
32.9 554.08 559 -_
34.0 553.78
34.9 553.65 558 _
36.2 553.71
37.1 553.76
37.6 554.04 557
38.1 554.25 -. -
38.6 554.52 556
39.6 555.04 z°
-
41.1 555.00 ��
Zi
43.0 555.10 555 - /
44.5 555.36 W
46.0 555.78 554
48.7 556.55
50.8 556.96 553
52.9 557.19 0 10 20 30 40 50
56.4 557.16
56.4 557.68 Station(feet)
LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS5 _ • _-
Drains a Area(sqmi 0.13 -�
Date: 12/13/2021 " �x � ;�,
Field Crew: TS,KB 1'
��c;3y1 ,{, 4akn J
s F ; , �r'tY d K I ;,4 4 f �,.Y4 , -F/ x - ' '.. - 414 F :4`..
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA as d��� a � k
S.� fig' 1 ai '4F ih r � bA �tix y ,� e
0.0 551.94 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 550.21 � u � � `��
u�,y F " �,. .ray,,i ¢ ray da 1,'4r ' l� :'., -.7 €' .
0.1 551.51 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 5.4 � � P� e. ,, n
2.6 551.44 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 6.2 s �, a s a `� �
4.8 551.28 Bankfull Width(ft): 8.9 • ,J�' ��
5.7 550.61 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 551.19 ��Ir-I + � }
7.1 550.36 Flood Prone Width(ftv: 52 �� `v'•`�` ¢' �
9.0 550.10 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.0 r .� .
11.1 549.68 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.6 (
13.7 549.82 D Ratio f f 14 7 ' '
18.5 550.08 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 5.8
21.4 550.01 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 1.1
23.7 550.38 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 549.22 - :�` �� V•;'n--= /
25.0 550.09
26.0 549.95
27.4 549.54 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS5, Riffle,T1-2
27.8 549.56 554
28.3 549.33
28.9 549.35 553
29.3 549.23 _
30.2 549.22
30.8 549.24 552 -
31.5 549.28
-
32.2 549.69 /
33.5 550.14 0 551
34.4 550.30 _
35.8 550.38 ? ___ __
37.9 550.43 W 550 -el
'
42.1 550.40 A
-
44.4 550.52 -
51.0 550.86
549 , I
56.4 551.17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
58.7 551.29
64.0 552.28 Station(feet)
67.1 552.87
70.9 552.98 LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
71.0 553.49

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
1
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS6
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.13
.,k
qY 'iii,
Date: 12/13/2021 `
Field Crew: TS,KB K '
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA
0.0 551.35 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 549.69 ,F
0.0 550.91 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 14.0 '°" - "' � � �y
2.3 551.02 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 13.6 ` ti °� � nx - `
3.9 550.49 Bankfull Width(ft): 10.8 q ` 'Vt K 7 h
6.1 549.90 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): ---
s
9.4 549.71 Flood Prone Width(ft): --- 1 y
`"4 ,4 l :y }
14.0 549.70 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 2.1 p .'. `
19.2 549.62 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.3
23.1 549.82 W I D Ratio(ft/ft): --- �� � a ��-� � \� ��� y�
26.8 549.76 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft):
--- � ��
29.0 549.88 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 1.0 „ _ < .
30.0 549.65 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 547.56 :1k
30.9 549.17
32.1 548.80
32.5 548.34 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS6, Pool,T1-2
33.4 548.17 553
34.3 547.77 -
35.4 547.59 552
36.2 547.56
,.....--•ill'Y'sf/s dij
37.2 547.67 551 -
38.1 548.21
38.7 548.46 -
39.6 549.07 550 -
41.1 549.85 'Tr " T"T ""
•o \43.3 549.72 ti549
45.6 550.01
47.9 550.17 W -
548
49.3 550.21
50.9 550.81
53.4 551.53 547 , I I
55.9 552.18 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
58.2 552.48
60.5 552.34 Station(feet)
60.6 552.68
--- LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS7
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.14 `4. sa r7 b .
Date: 12/13/2021 -
•
Field Crew: TS,KB � g � ^1 '* xiti'¢
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA
0.0 542.74 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 542.63 • E � �;
0.1 542.44 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 4.6 _ 3, `,10c1v • r
5.1 542.44 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 4.4 "� ? . - 1f
12.4 542.39 Bankfull Width(ft): 6.5 � � ' -1� ?4
17.5 542.61 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 543.74 s
20.3 542.74 Flood Prone Width(ft): 56 � + 1 !„1 ; 1 " ri
•
•
21.6 542.68 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.1 • '� �� `_
22.4 542.40 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.7 � '�, •`� 7 u �" ; �
23.4 541.97 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): 9.1 ry
24.0 542.00 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 8.7
24.3 541.58 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft). 1.0tiI;': �.
25.1 541.61 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 541.51 I - L
25.7 541.51
26.6 541.56
27.1 541.77 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS7, Riffle,T1-2
28.2 542.54 547
29.2 542.59
30.2 542.63 546
33.0 542.76
545
37.5 542.62
41.8 542.82
45.9 543.00 -
51.3 542.91 544 -
55.8 543.55
IUNENNENENENNIENEr
59.9 544.64
543
65.5 546.09 _
67.2 546.17 W _
67.2 546.65 542
541 ,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station(feet)
LTOB ---•Bankfull --- Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS8
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.14
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew:
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA ,,' s a, ��
F �n
0.0 542.85 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 542.42 �?
0.0 542.40 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 16.7 ` == `-,- F.-
5.5 542.30 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 15.3 „,- ` Y° ��� '<,�i
Titt.* ..q.,,,,;-* ,.: .7..-,---,.. ...,
12.2 542.47 Bankfull Width(ft): 13.2 a& `ter , a
, . .ei ;:;
18.4 542.30 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): ---
22.9 542.27 Flood Prone Width(ft): --- Kt
24.8 542.31 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 2.1 • �� �
25.4 542.32 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.3
26.8 542.01 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): --- 9
29.1 541.64 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): --- � i
29.9 541.23 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 0.9 �
30.2 541.23 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 540.31 :it:t'
31.6 540.75
32.5 540.31
33.8 540.32 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS8, Pool,T1-2
34.9 540.34 546
35.6 540.34 -
36.2 540.35 545
36.7 541.10
37.0 541.10 544
38.0 541.84
38.6 542.46 -
39.5 542.47 543
42.5 542.54 z
o
•44.6 542.59 542
47.2 543.38 0)
50.7 544.24 W
541
52.7 544.51
54.2 544.55
54.2 544.98 540
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station(feet)
LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site ,,,if
,.,--till.
ID XS9 r "
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.19 �m �
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew: TS,KB „
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA `a
0.0 540.42 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 536.58
0.2 540.12 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 7.2 R= :
4.1 539.95 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 5.5 • �
7.8 538.78 Bankfull Width(ft): 105 �� , a � > ' "� ..
12.5 537.04 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 537.87 ter, ;
1
14.9 536.80 Flood Prone Width(ft): 47 , t r �� � wr� b .
20.8 536.61 Max De th at Bankfull ft : 1.3 ,�
26.1 536.77 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.7 '
29.8 536.46 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): 14.7 • �� I ,4. -4 f .
31.6 536.51 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 4.6 _ '' f• >��
32.2 536.53 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 0.9 ` i = '� ���
33.2 536.57 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 535.28
34.2 536.03
35.4 535.92
35.5 535.33 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS9, Riffle,T1-3
36.1 535.33 541
36.5 535.31
37.1 535.34 540
37.5 Hil
539
38.3
fl........11\1\\\........._
38.7
39.1 538 _o� 537 �-"�- - ugioir/
43.8 536.45 536
46.8 536.53
52.0 536.65 535
53.9 536.72 -
57.3 537.65 534 , I
59.3 538.62 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
62.1 539.53
66.0 539.59 Station(feet)
66.3 539.62
LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS10 t ,7
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.19 7 ' " 1-' ' s
Date: 12/13/2021 v� ' :." ,r c.. �v.,•i',."
Field Crew: TS,KB
�
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA �'�
0.0 539.97 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 536.27
0.1 539.67 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 20.0 , , " -�k '' a .
3.7 539.36 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 18.1 VZ �
6.8 538.10 Bankfull Width(ft): 14.4 # r� •' 4 a
11.8 536.33 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --- . ` '
14.4 536.41 Flood Prone Width ft : _
17.3 536.47 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 2.5 _ ., `� ;
21.3 536.57 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.441
° k �" °`=11 0
26.2 536.19 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): --- ., r ` :
31.4 536.32 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): --- "�r ,y' '� `
33.1 536.36 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 0.9 �% . .r�
35.1 536.10 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 533.73 * '
36.4 535.40
37.0 534.85
38.2 534.48 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS10, Pool,T1-3
38.6 534.06 540
39.7 533.98 ''IN40.7 533.83 539
42.5 533.94
43.3 533.73 538 _
43.9 534.26
44.3 534.49 537 _ N
44.9 535.16 of '45.9 535.44 0 536
47.2 536.13 ',
48.2 536.16el 535
51.5 536.21 W =
53.2 536.22 534
55.2 536.57
56.8 537.19 533 , I I I I I '
58.0 537.98 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
61.3 539.58
63.7 539.62 Station(feet)
63.8 539.61
--- LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 4 .MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River �'. ti` ,
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site l `� A. N
XS ID XS11 n f R ' �. f f#, 1 "% } '' llII
�b� ' E ''' q�,' Y V} Yf
Drainage Area(sgmi): 0.25 ,,_� ��i, P '1 a "d �ro� � a
Date: 12/13/2021 '�� 'i ..n�,4mr 1a r • '1," 3
Field Crew: TS,KB P h,
a
' - :
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA ° z �4
0.0 534.85 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 531.42 �,
0.0 534.65 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 7.3 � 3 ' ' ,,::, 4,„+ � '
..t4..4t4t.. -
2.6 534.07 LTOB Cross-Sectional Areas ft : 7.1 ; �'�41.,
; ° `�
6.4 532.81 Bankfull Width(ft): 9.2 m�'i ' � C'*; "' �
i a 'u�r•'� C»� a ,9 . ;fir l 9iE tY , a -ea . `ke
. ,..;;;„i„,..6
10.7 532.07 Flood Prone Area Elevation ft : 532.58 *,.,,,,;.,4' �' ' `
17.6 531.51 Flood Prone Width(ft): 78 � �R �� � � �' �'
25 ,C w, y r p: f,. E /� a r F e
24.5 531.66 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.2 i' . x it,,„ - . x _ � .
30.6 531.79 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.8 ,� I � N,' ,., . k ii � . '*t ;. 0 , .
37.2 531.56 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): 11.5 e '�'�; +. ,r4..�1 ` ;
40.9 531.58 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 8.5 - � � ' `s, ri >1° �'�y ,\o ; t��kkt.47;":42.5 531.61 BankHei htRatio ft/ft : 1.0 ` y'. '4, �� �x :. r ,
,,, s .4� a_.„, ? � "fit
43.1 531.62 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 530.26 y . - .� �` _' ; `"�
< J° . Fr, fir ' `�
43.1 531.49
44.6 530.96
45.4 530.49 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS11, Riffle,T1-5
45.6 530.48 535
46.1 530.48
46.5 530.50 534
47.1 530.52 -
47.8 530.50
48.2 530.51 533
49.0 530.52
49.7 530.70 -
51.3 531.44 0 532
52.1 531.45 '6 _
52.5 531.92 ? - - -
53.6 531.93 el
w 531 - ,
57.9 531.73
63.3 531.82
69.7 531.98 530 -I I
77.9 532.15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
80.3 532.23
83.3 532.68 Station(feet)
87.0 533.30
88.6 534.37 LTOB ---••Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01
90.4 534.38

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River
F g3 r
Site: HipBone Creek Restoration Site a t 4 ,' z ,"'
XS ID XS12 y�, Mrr{, k"'u 'D,:
s �
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.25 �4 0.�: � �
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew: TS,KB
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA
0.0 534.97 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 531.29
0.1 534.55 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 20.8
r
1.1 534.57 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 19.3
3.3 533.86 Bankfull Width(ft): 14.3 r �
7.8 532.51 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --- ` E $
12.0 531.62 Flood Prone Width(ft): --- AN
17.5 531.71 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 2.4 - < rt
23.1 531.79 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.5 � µ g
28.9 531.41 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): ---
34.5 531.51 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): ---
40.4 531.60 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 1.0 �'
44.7 531.66 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 528.87
46.3 531.48
47.9 531.48
49.5 530.89 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS12, Pool,T1-5
50.9 530.55 535
52.3 530.13
53.1 530.15 534
54.6 529.38 = is
55.7 529.36 533
56.8 529.33
58.1 529.09 532
o)
59.1 529.15 -_- _
59.0 529.14 z 531
0
59.0 529.14 Zi
59.2 529.69 530
59.9 529.71 W
60.9 530.38 529
61.5 530.94
61.5 530.97 528 - I I I I I I '
62.2 531.40 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
63.9 531.46
67.6 531.42 Station(feet)
70.6 531.50
87.1 532.22 --- LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01
87.1 532.67

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River -
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS13
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.05
Date: 12/13/2021
4--p,'„,„,fits$,Ati -,-;---4,..?,eti,o-.. 441010i'::;..,,,- , ' ,-,' -‘.-. -' ' , 0--r,, ,- , ,
t 3 y
Field Crew: TS,KB t ,
A+ i ( 4 t R 3 age
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA • yr "�" ,.; F . aw. O.��
0.0 551.07 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 548.84 �� � :4 �� a �� �t '` ,
0.0 550.48 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Areas ft : 3.4 � � �x a� � �^ � �- �
2.3 550.39 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): ) 2.9 W-t �� � �Q, � ''` �
4.7 549.94 Bankfull Width(ft): 6.0 ' , , `e4 4 " a x ;F 1 k4r ." .�«. ,, 1� ✓r u� � x
5� :3:
� }' v y k , st ---r � # ' y
7.4 549.25 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): 549.75 �, ''
11.3 548.60 Flood Prone Width(ft): 47 � P , � `�
14.1 548.69 Max De th at Bankfull ft : 0.9 � 41�, �
.r 'k R 1 - NYC y € i,i - ' „7
19.6 548.74 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.6 �� y .ar
22.1 548.64 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): 10.5 e;tv-- It ��
24.1 548.83 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 7.8 �f ,e , ` Vic,$ x
24.8 548.82 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 0.9 ! r ,"
26.0 548.76 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 547.93 !® 'g �,.': ��
26.6 548.40
27.0 548.05 27.2 548.02 552 -
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS13, Riffle,T3-3
27.7 547.96 -
28.1 547.93
28.8 548.00 551
29.4 547.98
29.6 547.98 _ /
30.2 548.51 550
31.3 548.59
32.2 548.95
33.3 548.91 0 549 /
35.3 548.82 r ---� \ / -
39.5 548.94 ti r
43.7 548.95 W 548 -48.6 549.19
52.0 549.77 -
55.3 550.19 547
57.2 550.65 0 10 20 30 40 50
Station(feet)
58.7 550.79
58.8 551.23
LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River �.: ��� :
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS14 + 1 ,
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.05 a yx
Date: 12/13/2021t" � �� '
Field Crew: TS,KB4
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA14,If 'q , W "0 r k't e7.2j,;%,\$:::,\.:'-..;-:4:::-47;ttjkl' " `' :
':::;
0.0 550.48 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 548.36 i` v d'.
0.2 549.93 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 4.3 " {, y`
2.8 549.89 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 3.2 ':'lli.1"--t. '`ti,047.-:,Ii.,:_,'-'- '':,:::',1;:'' � '
4.9 549.78 Bankfull Width(ft): 6.3y " `� � � � '�
6.3 549.01 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --_ 'Yw► �➢ � ��
9.6 548.53 Flood Prone Width(ft): [� w` �� �_ `1
12.7 548.37 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.2 jFi �
15.1 548.25 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.7 � � + "
18.3 548.37 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): ---
21.5 548.20 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): --- �, ry i a � _i�: \.
/�1
25.7 548.28 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 0.9 1, ;; -
29.1 548.20 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 547.20
31.5 548.42
33.3 548.32 548.28 551
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site, XS14, Pool,T3-3
34.1
34.9 547.91 -
35.2 547.77
550
36.0 547.39
_______„ ..."'"#"/
36.8 547.20
37.8 547.34
38.5 547.54 549
38.6 547.68
39.0 547.85 _ - - -°°4""641\40sq
39.5 548.06 0 548 -
40.3 548.19
41.1 548.15 -
ti
42.6 548.27 W 547
45.3 548.40
47.8 548.91 -
49.4 549.63 546 , I
51.1 549.68 0 10 20 30 40 50
54.6 549.74
54.6 550.08 Station(feet)
LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River -- )1 40c. r , a a .-j
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site ��, x;, �� .s --_ �� wt,,. ,; ,
XS ID XS15 .
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.06
Date: 12/13/2021 _
Field Crew: TS,KB
7
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA(ft)
.
0.0 546.50 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 544.71
0.0 546.18 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 3.9wilPc 4 ,f
it
0.8 546.17 LTOB Cross-Sectional Areas ft : 3.6
,,�` e-- „�,� �' ? a i'9r"^ 5 fix: �,
.-,,,,- N,,4301i* 4..'•-',.7. ,v -r-rs , , '..": r ite '',, -.,,,,.,._
3.1 545.96 Bankfull Width(ft): 1/ `1 6.6 ��' �� _ �� i � �� � ����� k , `„
5.3 545.11 Flood Prone Area Elevation ft : 545.60
9.3 544.97 Flood Prone Width(ft) 49 ���° i g
V
13.1 544.84 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.9li: �T a
18.1 544.93 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.6 ��
22.1 544.78 W/D Ratio ft/ft 11.4 ��ti ", � � � ._� r ,r
23.5 544.71 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): 7.4 � w �� 4
- 5 f y ,
24.1 544.69 Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 1.0 r,',Lr ' � °� � `` ` d c y `d�Y. �� � 9 r - {
r `
25.0 544.23 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 543.82
25.5 544.07
26.0 543.97 547 -
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site,XS15, Riffle,T3-3
26.5 543.95
27.2 543.93 -
27.5 543.88 -
27.9 543.86
28.9 543.82 546
29.5 544.15
30.0 544.45
............ j-
30.3 544.67
31.8 544.54 545
34.5 544.45 o sss-e wir.WsMmon" swir�ss \ �s:sswir�
38.5 544.40 .Zi
43.0 544.22 )
46.2 544.41 Rj 544
49.5 545.09 -
52.2 545.35 -
53.8 545.92 543I
56.5 545.82 0 10 20 30 40 50
56.6 546.44
Station(feet)
-- LTOB ---•Bankfull ---•Flood Prone Area MY00 MY01

Cross-Section Plots
River Basin: Cape Fear River I
Site: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
XS ID XS16
Drainage Area(sq mi): 0.06
Date: 12/13/2021
Field Crew: TS,KB
Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA r
0.0 545.72 Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull Area 544.11 a r -.„ ` ,
0.1 545.36 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 8.6 ' � =
2.1 545.40 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area(sq ft): 9.5 '
7.0 545.39 Bankfull Width(ft): 10.2 �'
Aiii
11.9 545.13 Flood Prone Area Elevation(ft): --- �� : D :
l D ..n �
13.0 545.14 Flood Prone Width(ft): � �"`
14.0 545.20 Max Depth at Bankfull(ft): 1.4 � :( '� �
15.5 545.20 Mean Depth at Bankfull(ft): 0.8 � � \ I 0 � 1. -.x0 '
17.8 544.79 W/D Ratio(ft/ft): --- �
19.9 544.31 Entrenchment Ratio (ft/ft): --- `'��'
21.6 544.30 n= ry .:Ainic if
Bank Height Ratio(ft/ft): 1.1 �
22.8 544.28 Thalweg Elevation(ft): 542.66
22.9 544.27
23.8 543.98 24.1 543.97 547 Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site, XS16, Pool,T3-3
24.8 543.57 -
25.5 543.39
26.4 542.96 546 -
27.0 542.66
28.3 542.67
29.0 542.67 545
30.2 543.13
31.4 543.34 -
I
, MD MD MD MD MMIM .°I.g.11.1111111111a/
N -mimb\yilti=pe
543
36.7 544.37
39.7 544.38 -
43.0 544.36 542 - I I I I I I '
47.0 544.34 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
51.3 544.22
55.6 544.27 Station(feet)
64.9 545.53
66.4 545.71 --- LTOB ---•Bankfull MY00 MY01
66.4 546.25

Cross-Section 1 Riffle-MY-01
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 12 XS 1 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N
Coarse .50- 1 D 100% ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S .
Very Fine 2-4 Q 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 1
As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R �? 6o°�a MY01
Medium 8- 11.3 A 3 a
a
Medium 11.3- 16 V E.
Coarse 16-22.6 E a 40%
Coarse 22.6-32 L 4 0
Very Coarse 32-45 S 12 20%
Very Coarse 45-64 29
Small 64-90 C 26 0% ,
Small 90- 128 0 11 o.oi o.1 1 to too moo loom
Large 128- 180 B 4 Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution ffil
Small 362-512 L D16 23 mean 45.0 silt/clay 12%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 47 dispersion 2.0 sand 0%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 57 skewness -0.13 gravel 48%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 69 cobble 40%
Total 102 D84 88 boulder 0%
Note: D95 120 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 3 Riffle-MY-01
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 4 XS 3 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A 2
Medium .25- .50 N 1
Coarse .50- 1 D t00% ■ ■ ■ ■ . .
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 3
Very Fine 2-4 9 I 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 6
T As Built
-ftiii
Fine 5.7-8 R 4 a 60% Mcol
Medium 8- 11.3 A 5 a
Medium 11.3- 16 V 2 6
9 40%
Coarse 16-22.6 E 5 w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 5 e
Very Coarse 32-45 S 13 20% /
Very Coarse 45-64 31 _ —
Small 64-90 C 13 0%
Small 90- 128 O 3 o.oi o.i 1 io ioo moo loom
Large 128- 180 B 1 Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) I Size Distribution ffill
Small 362-512 L D16 3.2 mean 14.4 silt/clay 4%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 23 dispersion 7.3 sand 6%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 42 skewness -0.41 gravel 73%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 52 cobble 17%
Total 101 D84 65 boulder 0%
Note: D95 88 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 5 Riffle-MY-01
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 1 XS 5 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N
Coarse .50- 1 D loo°%° . . . . ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 2
Very Fine 2-4 1 . 80%°
Fine 4-5.7 G
Fine 5.7-8 R 3 - As Hilt
60%
Medium 8- 11.3 A 7 0 Y°'
Medium 11.3- 16 V 12 E.
Coarse 16-22.6 E 4 5 40%
w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 7 e
Very Coarse 32-45 S 16 20% •
•Very Coarse 45-64 38 ' .
Small 64-90 C 13 o°%u - ' .. ' ' ?---' •
Small 90- 128 0 2 0.01 0.1 1 to 100 moo loom
Large 128- 180 B I Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution ffill
Small 362-512 L D16 12 mean 27.5 silt/clay 1%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 32 dispersion 2.6 sand 2%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 45 skewness -0.25 gravel 83%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 52 cobble 14%
Total 106 D84 63 boulder 0%
Note: D95 83 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 7 Riffle-MY-01
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 8 XS 7 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S 4
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N 2
Coarse .50- 1 D 3 t00% . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 4
Very Fine 2-4 3 I 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 6 —4.—As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R I a 60% fMY01
Medium 8- 11.3 A 5 a
Medium 11.3- 16 V 9 6
9 40%
Coarse 16-22.6 E 7 w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 8 e . ,_'
Very Coarse 32-45 S 9 20%
Very Coarse 45-64 20
Small 64-90 C 21 o°%u -
Small 90- 128 O 7 o.ot o.1 1 to too moo loom
Large 128- 180 B Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution ffill
Small 362-512 L D16 1.1 mean 9.1 silt/clay 7%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 16 dispersion 17.0 sand 12%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 35 skewness -0.43 gravel 55%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 53 cobble 25%
Total 110 D84 76 boulder 0%
Note: D95 97 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 9 Riffle-MY-01
Particle Size Distribution
Particle Millimeter , Count Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 1 XS 9 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N 1
Coarse .50- 1 D 100°i°
Very Coarse 1 -2 S
Very Fine 2-4 4 a 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 2 6
As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R 1 a 60% —.—MY01
Medium 8- 11.3 A 5 4
Medium 11.3- 16 V 2 6
9 40%
Coarse 16- 2 8 6,.2 -3 L
Coarse 2.6 2 L 6
Very Coarse 32-45 S 11 20% . . . .
Very Coarse 45-64 22
Small 64-90 C 33 0% - 'f� .
Small 90- 128 0 2 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 loom
Large 128- 180 B 4 Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 BI
Size(mm) Size Distribution T pe
Small 362-512 L D16 16 mean 36.0 silt/clay 1%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 38 dispersion 2.4 sand 1%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 53 skewness -0.20 gravel 60%
Bedrock i >2048 BDRK D65 66 cobble 38%
Total 102 D84 81 boulder 0%
Note: D95 110 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 11 Riffle-MY-Ol
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 7 XS 11 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S 6
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25- .50 N 5
Coarse .50- 1 D 1 100% . . . . ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 3
Very Fine 2-4 6 a 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 1 6
Fine 5.7-8 R 3 a 60% As Built
Medium 8- 11.3 A 6 f MY01
Medium 11.3- 16 V 5 6
9 40%
Coarse 16-22.6 E 8 w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 7
Very Coarse 32-45 S 11 20%
Very Coarse 45-64 22
Small 64-90 C 6 0%
Small 90- 128 0 1 0.01 0.1 1 to lo0 1000 loom
Large 128- 180 B Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution T pe
Small 362-512 L D16 0.32 mean 4.2 silt/clay 7%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 8.7 dispersion 32.7 sand 16%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 20 skewness -0.45 gravel 70%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 38 cobble 7%
Total 99 D84 56 boulder 0%
Note: D95 72 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 13 Riffle-MY-Ol
Particle Millimeter Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C 4 XS 13 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S 3
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N 3
Coarse .50- 1 D 4 100% . . . . ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S
Very Fine 2-4 2 a 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 1 6
Fine 5.7-8 R Mk= a T
60% As Built
Medium 8- 11.3 A MY01
Medium 11.3- 16 V 2 6
9 40%
Coarse 16-22.6 E 1 w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 7
Very Coarse 32-45 S 9 20%
Very Coarse 45-64 36
Small 64-90 C 18 0% ,
Small 90- 128 0 10 0.01 0.1 1 10 lo0 1000 loom
Large 128- 180 B Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution T pe
Small 362-512 L D16 4 mean 17.9 silt/clay 4%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 43 dispersion 7.3 sand 10%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 52 skewness -0.41 gravel 58%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 60 cobble 28%
Total 100 D84 80 boulder 0%
Note: D95 110 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Cross-Section 15 Riffle-MY-Ol
Particle Millimeter J Count Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Silt/Clay <0.062 S/C XS 15 Riffle
Very Fine .062- .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25- .50 N 2
Coarse .50- 1 D t00% ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Very Coarse 1 -2 S 4
Very Fine 2-4 3 a 80%
Fine 4-5.7 G 1 6
T As Built
Fine 5.7-8 R 1 a 60% —.1—MY01
Medium 8- 11.3 A 1 4
Medium 11.3- 16 V 2 6
°� 40%
Coarse 16-22.6 E 5 w
Coarse 22.6-32 L 5
Very Coarse 32-45 S 20 20%
Very Coarse 45-64 44 ' • ZA---. . .
Small 64-90 C 11 0% • r■
Small 90- 128 O 3 0.01 0.1 1 to loo woo loom
Large 128- 180 B 2 Particle Size-Millimeters
Large 180-256 L
Small 256-362 B Size(mm) Size Distribution T pe
Small 362-512 L D16 19 mean 34.9 silt/clay 0%
Medium 512- 1024 D D35 40 dispersion 1.9 sand 6%
Lrg-Very Lrg 1024-2048 R D50 48 skewness -0.19 gravel 79%
Bedrock • >2048 BDRK D65 54 cobble 15%
Total 104 D84 64 boulder 0%
Note: D95 89 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%

Table 8a.Baseline Stream Data Summary, Hip Bone Creek(ID-100059),Reach T1-1
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Design Monitoring Baseline(MYO)
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width(ft) 5.2 6.3 6.3 7.3 2 5.4 5.5 6.4 2
Floodprone Width(ft) 12 13.4 13.4 14.8 2 35 42 54.8 54.9 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 2 0.4 0.4 0.6 2
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.3 2 0.7 0.8 1.1 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5 2 2.2 2.1 3.9 2
Width/Depth Ratio 11 16.4 16.4 21.8 2 13 10.7 14.5 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 2.3 2.3 2.9 2 6.5 7.8 8.5 9.9 2
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.1 1.1 1.2 2 1 1 1 2
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 30 29 42
Rosgen Classification G4c/G4 C4b C4b
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 8.1-8.6 8 5.6-13.5
Sinuosity(ft) 1 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.003-0.025 0.024 0.0249
Other
Table 8b.Baseline Stream Data Summary, Hip Bone Creek(ID-100059),Reach T1-2
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Design Monitoring Baseline(MYO)
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width(ft) 4.4 7.3 7.3 10.2 2 7 6.5 7.9 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 12.6 20.4 20.4 28.2 2 42 56 56.7 57.2 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.4 0.7 0.7 1 2 0.6 0.7 0.7 1
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5 2 0.9 1.1 1.1 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 2 4 4.6 5.4 1
Width/Depth Ratio 4.5 14.7 14.7 24.8 2 12.2 9.3 11.7 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.9 2 6 8 7.1 8.7 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 33 25 29
Rosgen Classification G4c/G4 C4 C4
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 14.1-14.6 13.6 13.7-15.6
Sinuosity(ft) 1 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.003-0.025 0.015 0.014
Other
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 50 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 8c.Baseline Stream Data Summary, Hip Bone Creek(ID-100059),Reach T1-3 and 5
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Design Monitoring Baseline(MYO)
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width(ft) 4.6 11.8 11.6 19.3 4 8.6 9.3 9.4 1
Floodprone Width(ft) 12.5 28.3 25.4 49.9 4 30 58 47.8 77.5 1
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.4 0.7 0.6 1.3 4 0.7 0.8 0.8 1
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.9 4 1.1 1.2 1.4 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 5.8 6.6 6 8.8 4 6 7.2 7.3 1
Width/Depth Ratio 3.6 24.2 25.6 42.1 4 12.4 11.8 12.3 1
Entrenchment Ratio 2 2.5 2.6 2.7 4 3.5 6.7 5.1 8.3 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.1 1 1.5 4 1 1 1 1
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 18 17 23
Rosgen Classification G4c/G4 C4 C4
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 15.3-22.7 19.8 19.3-20.0
Sinuosity(ft) 1 1.14 1.14
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.003-0.025 0.0082 0.0101
Other
Table 8d.Baseline Stream Data Summary, Hip Bone Creek(ID-100059),Reach T3
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Design Monitoring Baseline(MYO)
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width(ft) 4.6 11.8 11.6 19.3 3 5.8 6.5 7.2 2
Floodprone Width(ft) 12.5 28.3 25.4 49.9 3 30 40 45.2 50.3 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.4 0.7 0.6 1.3 3 0.5 0.5 0.5 2
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.9 3 0.7 0.8 0.9 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 5.8 6.6 6 8.8 3 2.7 3.4 3.9 2
Width/Depth Ratio 3.6 24.2 25.6 42.1 3 12.7 12.3 13.3 2
Entrenchment Ratio 2 2.5 2.6 2.7 3 5.2 6.9 7 7 2
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.1 1 1.5 3 1 1 1 2
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull 39 23 29
Rosgen Classification G4 C4 C4
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 2.7-9.0 8.7 9.7-11.1
Sinuosity(ft) 1 1.13 1.13
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.02-0.039 0.017 0.0183
Other
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 51 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 9. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Cross-Section 1(Riffle) Cross-Section 2(Pool) Cross-Section 3(Riffle)
Dimension and Substrate Station 12+00,T1-1 Station 12+25,T1-1 Station 16+25,T1-1
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 566.3 566.4 565.6 565.6 555.7 555.7
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 565.5 565.7 563.7 563.8 554.6 554.7
LTOB Elevation 566.3 566.3 565.6 565.6 555.7 555.6
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 0.8 0.7 1.9 1.7 1.1 0.9
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 2.1 2.0 Jill 10.9 10.5 .. 3.9 3.6
Cross-Section 4(Pool) Cross-Section 5(Riffle) Cross-Section 6(Pool)
Station 16+37,T1-1 19+37 Station,T1-2 Station 19+62,T1-2
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 555.0 555.0 550.3 550.2 549.7 549.7
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 553.5 553.7 549.1 549.2 547.6 547.6
LTOB Elevation 555.0 555.0 550.3 550.3 549.7 549.6
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 1.5 1.4 1.1 1.1 2.1 2.1
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 8.1 8.7 5.4 6.2 14.0 13.6
Cross-Section 7(Riffle) Cross-Section 8(Pool) Cross-Section 9 Riffle)
Station 24+62,T1-2 Sation 25+00,T1-2 Station 28+75,T1-4
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 542.6 542.6 542.5 542.4 536.6 536.6
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9
Thalweg Elevation 541.6 541.5 540.2 540.3 535.3 535.3
LTOB Elevation 542.6 542.6 542.5 542.3 536.6 536.4
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 1.1 1.1 2.2 2.0 1.4 1.1
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 4.6 4.4 16.7 15.3 7.2 5.5
Cross-Section 10 (Pool) Cross-Section 11(Riffle) Cross-Section 12(Pool)
Station 29+00,T1-4 Station 34+00,T1-4 Station 34+37,T1-4
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 536.3 536.3 531.5 531.4 531.3 531.3
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 533.7 533.7 530.2 530.3 529.0 528.9
LTOB Elevation 536.3 536.1 531.5 531.4 531.3 531.2
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 2.6 2.4 1.2 1.1 2.4 2.3
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 20.0 18.1 7.3 7.1 20.8 19.3
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 52 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 9. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Cross-Section 13(Riffle) Cross-Section 14(Pool) Cross-Section 15(Riffle)
Dimension and Substrate Station 317+37,T3-3 Station 317+50,T3-3 Station 319+62,T3-3
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 548.8 548.8 548.3 548.4 544.7 544.7
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 548 547.9 547.2 547.2 544 543.8
LTOB Elevation 548.8 548.8 548.3 548.2 544.7 544.7
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 3.4 2.9 Anni 4.3 3.2 3.9 3.6
Cross-Section 16 (Pool)
Station 319+87,T3-3
MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfulll Area 544.2 544.1
Bank Height Ratio Based on AB Bankfulll Area 1.0 1.1
Thalweg Elevation 542.7 542.7
LTOB Elevation 544.2 544.2
LTOB Max Depth(ft) 1.4 1.5
LTOB Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 8.6 9.5
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 53 MY-01 Monitoring Report

APPENDIX D
Hydrologic Data
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 54 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
30-70 Percentile Graph
WETS Station Name: Siler City 2N
7.0
II
6.0 -
5.0 -
hi
III
ct
'Z' 4.0 -- — r ./I\ M--___
a 3.0 - I 1 Pq ,Ilk.2.0 -
I I bi
1.0
0.0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 .
z Q ti w d ti d cn O Z Q
Date
2020 Rainfall 2021 Rainfall f 30%Less Than f 30%Greater Than

Table 10.Rainfall Summary,Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Annual Precip Total 38.49
WETS 30th Percentile 29.73
WETS 70th Percentile 53.88
Normal Y
Table 11.Overbank Events,Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Gage ID
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
T 1-5 none
T3-3 none
Table 12.Stream Flow Criteria Attainment,Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Greater than 30 Days of Flow/Max Consecutive Days
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Reach
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
T1-1
Yes/105
(Gauge)
T1-1(Camera) Yes/90
T3-1
Yes/205
(Gauge)
T3-1
Yes/39
(Camera)
Table 12.Stream Flow Criteria Attainment,Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Performance Standard: 12%
WETS Station: Siler City 2N
Growing Season: 4/2 to 11/5(217 days)
Max.Consecutive Hydroperiod(%)
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Monitoring Gauge 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
WM-1 5.5%
WM-2 6.0%
WM-3 30.9%
WM-4 5.1%
WM-5 3.2%
WM-6 19.8%
WM-7 28.1%
WM-8 2.3%
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#100059 56 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Stream Gauge T1-5
533 - - 3.0
532 -
Gauge installed
5/24/21 - 2.0
o �
531 - E.
j1 1 I� I1 1 1 LIJ I I III 1.0
530 -
N N N N N W N W N N N b W N W N
o �o 0o v, � � w o �o 00 0� v, t� � o 0o J � w o �o 00 0� v, t� � o 0o
w w w coo coo a a a a 6 a a a (U', (U', (U', O O o Z Z Z d d d
N N 7 7 vc c o 0 0 2
D ate
Rainfall —Stream Bed Elevation Stream Stage Elevation Bankfull Elevation — Sensor Depth

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Stream Gauge T3-3
546 - 3.0
Gauge installed
5/24/21
w 545 - J7 ] 2.0
o I
ct
1
W
\ :.41141111411411111111"544 1.0
I
5431-[11-11111111
h � � l � � � � I � I � 1 11
II
0.0
— . 0 oN oCv J - N , o �o0No vN W N ,o 0o - c o � o N � N Wo ,o 0oNJ G GN rn n ddco 71 P '-a a a a P P c4 c4 c4 OOo ZZZ
7c N . " " N N NN NU(GO(G "a "a . N 'ce"' 'ce"' C C C - -N aa i i N N N
Date
Rainfall Sensor Depth Stream Bed Elevation Stream Stage Elevation Bankfull Elevation

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T1-1 Stream Flow Gauge
569 Camera obscured Camera malfuncton 3.0
Gauge installed
5/24/21
_rl.l 1L.
I' 55 Da s 105 Days
_
568 - A111111, . "--" M - 2.0
� I �
an
C.1)
5
567 - • 1.0
l I it 1 J IA I . . iI . I Ij 1566 0.0
N N N J N W N w N N N J N W N W N
o C ocN / - - w o C 00 o v t� — c oo J - L) o C 00 o v t� — o 0o J
ii o c a O O Z Z Z id idN N N Nva va N � NNN ,
Date
Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Sensor Depth Flow Elevation Stream Flow(Camera)

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
T3-1 Stream Flow Gauge
593 - 3.0
Camera obscured
41
Gauge installed
592 5/24/21 - 2.0
205 Drays
awn
5
591 - 1.0
N c N N N N W N W N N N b W N W YD N
0 0 0o v - - w o C 00 o v t� — o 0o J - w o C 00 o v t� — o 0o J
w w w coo coo a a a a a a coo coo coo 0 0 0 o Z Z Z d d d
N 'Tt a a a w w N �, vc t:Jc o 0 0 2 2
Date
Rainfall Sensor Depth Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Flow Elevation Stream Flow(Camera)

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 1
3 — — - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5
- 5.5
2 -
- 5.0
- 4.5
1 -
Gauge installed
-
w 5/24/21 12 Days 4.0
0 0 - 3.5
•ct l I
E.
iStit
-1 E.
I ili\ 1 3.0
410
2.5
c - 2.0
s,
k j\..................),„
C7 -2 -
CI? - 1.5
ct
Cr? 1.0
-3 -
< iJiI II . 4] Ii0.5
MI II
0.0
N N N N N W N w N N N N W N W N
c o C v - - w o C 00 o v t� — o 0o J - w o C 00 o v t� — o 0o J
' E ti Le rn '4 4 k a a a a 4 L ti ti G ti ti d a rn ° O O o Z Z Z d d d
N 5r N N a a a N Y Y Y N N N N via via 'a 'a 'a N 7' 7' N °a °a °a N i° i°
Date
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface — Sensor Depth

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 2
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5
5.5
2 -
5.0
4.5
1 -
Gauge installed
w 5/24/21 4.0
13 Days
0 - 3.5
ct
W N\t\ t\ \ I\ \ 411 3.0
-1 v
`I 2.5I.
0 2.0
s,
\I \
C7 -2 - �J"�
�" i 1.5
ct
g 1.0
-3 -
II II � 11.1111 J II LMIi . I i. 0.5
-451 I. } f Y' r Y 0.0
N c_ N v N N J N `I'' N w Yo N L N N J N w N w 'o N
ti c o 00 v w o 0 00 o . . — o ti oo J - w o 0 0o O v Z N — o oo J
ppp' . ' - - N "N cr cr 7 w w a a a N N Vvcr r 'a "a 'aN c c c 2 2N
Date
Rainfall — Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 3
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2
November 5
5.5
2 -
5.0
4.5
1 Gauge installed
5/24/21 4.0
w
o
7-1
0 - 3.5
at
\\
a? :v
1111!110filt
W 3.0 E'
011116111111 �k 46 Days-1 9 I 1vitt) 'r,1� 2.5 .
0 2.0
s,
C -2 -
1.5
at
g -3 1.0
IIL ii,L 1111k 1. I a 0.5
III
0.0
ti c o oak' a v - N , o �o 0N o vNW NN ow oo N - N o N NW N W ooN
w ti tiJ w O . Z .
' - - N " ` `
, . . . cr cr 7 w w a a a < N N vcr r , , , �, - - c c c n n. N
1
Date
Rainfall — Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 4
3 - - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5 - 5.5
2 -
- 5.0
- 4.5
1 -
w ii
Gauge installed 11 Days - 4.0
5/24/21
c 0 - 3.5
at ,
* ' 1 \ \ I
� I 3.0
1114*
-1 j
II \ VV 2.5gVc 2.0
s,
C7 -2 -
at
i I 1.5
g -3 1.0
it IU1 J 1 Ii. I �41 0.0
d oc oak' a v N co 0N ovN `I''' N w Yo o N L N © 0N N w N w Yoo oN
w , ` N tiJ w O . Z . .
. cr N a " ` `N cr 7 w w a a a `< PN N vcr r 'a "a 'aN - - c c c n nN —1 — 1 1 Date
Rainfall —Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 5
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5
- 5.5
2 5.0
- 4.5
1 -
_ Gauge installed - 4.0
w 5/24/21 7 Days
o0 0 _ . - 3.5
at
W 1J1, . 3.0
�/ rrr WWW`�++r
-1 -i.
!I\ IN1\1 �1 "l 2.5
\vs)
40 IIIII \II Vill:\ 1 11\tv\L _ .. .1\\‘..1
- 2.0
s,
U' -2 -
- 1.5
ct
g -3 - 1.0
� iL � IiL I 1 Y �I _ � 1111i. - 0.5
-4ill 11 1 0.0
N cN v N N J N w N w 'o N L N N J N w N w 'o N
ti c o . -i — w „ o c . o . ,. . . ,. oo J w c o 0 o O . Z . — o oo J
N 0- 0- 7 w w N 'a �-a �-a N N 'r 'r ac ai ai N "a "a "a N c c c " i° i°
D ate
r•Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface — Sensor Depth

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 6
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April November 5
5.5
2 -
5.0
4.5
1 - Gauge installed
5/24/21
, 4.0
w
0 0 - I ti 3.5
at
'd
0 .'
\IIII111
28 I.ys
-1 43 Days ��1 � r I 3.2.5 .
lit iiii
0 2.0
c7 -2 -
.. I 1.5
at
g -3 -111 I,
1.0
�LIIIIII L I� . J11111 i. I 0.5 0
N c N v N N J N w N w 'o N L N N J N w N w `o, 1 1 11 1 J . 1 irl , N
ti c o 00 - w , o 0 00 o v ti N — o ti oo J - w o 0 0o O v Z N — o oo J
' - - N ". Iti cr cr 7 w w Na a a N N vvcr r , , , N c c c 2 2—
Date
Rainfall — Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 7
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5
IT
- 5.5
2 -
- 5.0
- 4.5
1 - Gauge installed
5/24/21
�, 4.0
0 - Likk
- 3.5
ct
W � 3.0 :
y 61 Days
-1 28 Days i 2.5
= V\....„
H 1 \I\
0 2.0
s,
C7 -2 -
1 1.5
ct
g -3 1.0
IIL N lj
— i. 0 I
0.5
0.0
ti c o ocN a v Lot') , o �o 00N o vNw NN ow Yo oo NL wN o N NwNN wo '000 NJ ti tiJ O Z
cr N " ` `N cr 7 w - a n a `< N N vcr r 'a "a 'aN - - c c c n n. N
Date
Rainfall — Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 8
3 - 6.0
Begin Growing Season End Growing Season
April 2 November 5
5.5
2 -
1111 5.0
4.5
1 - Gauge installed
5/24/21 4.0
w 5llays 5llays
0 - 1 1ct
3.5
W 3.0
-1 - ;f,o 2.5
= Y
2.0
� -2 \ \I\\I .._„..., .,,,,.a*._ ,,,IL,\„,,t,v, 11
-
1.5
ct
g 1.0
-3
IIL1JJ I L II I I. d d
0.5
J FL II
N N N N TN WN N w oN - N c400N TN WN N W cN0.0
ti c `o oc v, p w o `o oc p v, ti o ti J w ` c 0 v, o J
w c �I � 4 4 .oaaa 44B ' ' ' 5- ' ' aa rn nnnOOo ZZZrn
N 0- cr 7 w w 'a -a -a << ,_c ,_c tJ t� Uc r r , , , ,;., - - c c c 2 2N
Date
Rainfall — Sensor Depth — Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12 Inches Below Ground Surface

APPENDIX E
Project Timeline and Contact Info
Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#97136 69 MY-01 Monitoring Report

Table 14. Project Activity&Reporting History
Hipbone Creek Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Actual Completion or
Delivery
Project Instituted April 23,2018
Mitigation Plan March 17,2020
Final Design-Construction Plans March 17,2020
Construction Grading Completed April 16,2021
Planting Completed April 30,2021
Baseline Monitoring/Report May 2021 July 2021
Vegetation Monitoring May 14,2021
Stream Survey May 21,2021
Year 1 Monitoring December 2021 January 2022
Vegetation Monitoring November 17,2021
Stream Survey December 13,2021
Table 15.Project Contacts
Stony Fork Restoration Site(ID-100059)
Design Firm KCI Associates of North Carolina,PC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh,NC 27609
Contact:Mr.Tim Morris
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
Construction Contractor Chatham Civil Contracting
811 Archie Johnson Road
Siler City,NC 27344
Contact:Mr. Stephen James
Phone:[phone]
Planting Contractor Shenandoah Habitats
1983 Jefferson Highway
Waynesboro,VA 22980
Contact:Mr.David Coleman
Phone:[phone]
Monitoring Performers
KCI Associates of North Carolina,PC
4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh,NC 27609
Contact:Mr.Adam Spiller
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC,PA
DMS Project#97136 70 MY-01 Monitoring Report

APPENDIX F
Other Data
Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#97136 71 MY-01 Monitoring Report

150 9001:2015 CERTIFIED
iii 1=N e* 1N EER S • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS • CON ST R u LT IAN MAN AGEgs
cJ 4505 Falls of Neuse Rd..Suite 4 0• Raleigh,NC 27609•Phone 3IQ-783-921 • Fax 9 I9-783-9266
:1 ;c,t:i.\i i$Or NC
Date: February 8, 2022
To: Kim Browning, USACE
From: Tim Morris, Project Manager
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Subject: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
Baseline Site Review—Response to IRT Comments
Cape Fear River Basin -03030003
Chatham County, North Carolina
DEQ Contract No.#7528
DMS Project#100059
USACE AID#: SAW-2018-01160
Below are our responses to comments received on November 2, 2021 after the baseline report review for
the Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification
concerning these responses.
Kim Browning, USACE:
1. What was the minor change in wetland area due to miscalculation at the Mitigation Plan stage?
KCI Response:KCI had originally forgotten to exclude the stream footprint from the wetland
rehabilitation area around T2 and the wetland enhancement area around T3. This area consisted
of 0.017 acres of wetland rehabilitation and 0.020 acres of wetland enhancement for a total of
0.020 WMC's. Because this is below the threshold of 0.1 acres, no changes have been made to
the project assets from how they are presented in the mitigation plan.
2. Please notify the IRT once the fencing for the interior crossings has been installed.
KCI Response:All fencing was completed on 10/4/2021
3. Please provide a random transect of the vegetation in the enhancement wetlands at least twice
during monitoring.
KCI Response:KCI will perform these transects sometime between MY03 and MY07.
4. I would recommend keeping an eye on the red maple in the vicinity of veg plots 3 and R4 in
future monitoring years.
KCI Response: We will keep an eye on this area but because of the extended periods of saturation
that this area experiences we do not anticipate red maple being a problem in this area. Only 2 of
the 7 red maple survived in VP3 and none were present in R4 during the MY01 survey.
Employee-Owned Since 1988
RISE TO THE CHALLENGE www.KCI.COM

5. Were soil borings collected near the installed wetland gauges (as per the 2016 IRT Guidance)?
Please submit this data with the MY1 report. It would have been helpful to include the baseline
data for the wetland gauges, if any were installed prior to construction.
KCI Response: This data has been included in Appendix F—Other Data of the MY01 report.
Casey Haywood, USACE:
1. If supplemental planting will be needed in the future, it is recommended to avoid American
sycamore and river birch due to their already high stem counts.
KCI Response: These species will be avoided in future plantings of the site.
2. Overall,the report was thorough and well organized.Also appreciate the inclusion of drone
footage.
Erin Davis, DWR:
1. DWR appreciates the inclusion of the drone video. It was very helpful for this review. And it was
a bonus to see monitoring staff in action.
2. Were soil borings collected near the installed wetland gauges (as per the 2016 IRT Guidance)?
Please submit this data with the MY1 report.
KCI Response: This data has been included in Appendix F—Other Data of the MY01 report.
3. Based on the plant list and veg plot data (many starting with only 4 or 5 species), DWR
recommends watching species diversity through monitoring and if any supplemental planting is
needed to take advantage of the opportunity to include additional species. Since sycamore and
river birch make up over 50%of planted stems, DWR requests that these species be avoided in
potential supplemental plantings or included only at very low percentages.
KCI Response: These two species will be excluded from future plantings and KCI will use any
future plantings to enhance species diversity on site.
4. What were the final upstream and downstream elevations streambed/embedded structure for
all culvert installations? Were there any deviations in the upstream/downstream structure
station numbers from the design plan? Ideally, DWR would like to see a redline of the proposed
crossing sizing table from the culvert details design plan sheet 5A.
KCI Response:A redlined version of the proposed crossing size table(Sheet 5 of the construction
plans)has been added to Appendix F—Other Data. Since the surveyors generally are instructed
to survey the pipe invert, it is possible that the points that are presented in this table are for the
elevation of the invert, not the elevation of the embedded material.Additionally, because the
work done at the top of T3 was Enhancement II level work, this area was not surveyed as part of
the as-built survey and so elevations for the culvert on T3-1 are not available. Visual inspection of
the site shows that it is functioning as designed with an appropriate amount of embedded
material within the pipe. Please see Appendix F—Other Data for photos of all of the culverts.
5. Redline Sheet 3—Based on the drone video, it appears the pond drainage rock outlet was
extended within the easement to approximately the first boundary bend (approximately 80-100
feet). DWR believes this change warrants a redline callout.
KCI Response: The pond drainage outlet near the top of T1 was built as designed with no
modification from the construction plans.
Employee-Owned Since 1988
RISE TO THE CHALLENGE WWW.KCI.COM

Todd Bower, USEPA:
1. Missing fencing and landowner agreement was noted and KCI has stated that installation will
occur as soon as possible. Recommend sponsor notify the IRT when this occurs if significantly
before the MY1 Report is drafted.
KCI Response:All fencing was completed on 10/4/2021.
2. Planting followed the plan very closely with just a few minor shifts in species stem
counts/percentages; all appear suitable and maintains a diverse mix of species.
3. I am concerned that the late date of planting (April 30, 2021) may incur a higher rate of
mortality than desired, especially in first growing season. Recommend the sponsor and IRT pay
particularly close attention to this in the upcoming MY1 report.This also pushes back the MY1
monitoring to extremely late in the season.
KCI Response: Typically KCI tries to plant sites in late February/early March. For this site this was
not an option since construction wasn't completed until April 16`h, and it seemed better to plant
the site late rather than to leave it unplanted for almost an entire growing season.Average stem
mortality across the 10 fixed vegetation plots was 6%.
4. All the photos of the streams, veg plots, and crossings are excellent. I also really appreciated the
cross section pages with data tables, charts and photo. Very well presented.
5. Thank you very much for posting the site-wide drone footage. I greatly appreciate this
information as I am currently unable to make site visits.This approach also provides a level of
detail that enhances the text and photos.
Sincerely,
Tim Morris
Project Manager
Employee-Owned Since 1988
RISE TO THE CHALLENGE WWW.KCI.COM

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: GW-1
Soil Series: Georgeville-Badin Complex
Soil Classification: Fine,kaolinitic,thermic Typic Kanhapludult/Fine,mixed,semiactive,thermic Typic Hapludults
AWT: 20" SHWT: 0" Slope: —5% Aspect: Concave
Elevation: 570' Drainage: Well Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 30 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Apc 0-9 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 4/6 2 PL cL 2msbk Mn concretions starting at 6"
Bt1 9-15 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 4/6 10 PL,M cL 2msbk
Bt2 15-27 10YR 5/2 2.5YR 4/8 20 PL,M cL 2msbk
10YR 6/8 5 M
Bt3 27-30+ 10YR 5/2 2.5YR 4/8 2 PL cL 2msbk
10YR 6/8 2 M
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: GW-2
Soil Series: Chewacla and Wehadkee
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy,mixed,active,thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts/Fine-loamy,mixed,active,nonacid,thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: >30" SHWT: >30" Slope: 0-1% Aspect: Concave
Somewhat Poorly Drained,Poorly Drained and
Elevation: 565' Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 30 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-9 10YR 4/3 7.5YR 4/4 5 M cL 2msbk
Btc 9-20 10YR 5/2 5YR 3/4 2 PL,M cL 2msbk Mn concreations
Bt 20-30+ 2.5Y 6/3 10YR 5/8 5 M cL 2msbk
2.5Y 7/6 5 M
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: GW-3
Soil Series: Chewacla and Wehadkee
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy,mixed,active,thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts/Fine-loamy,mixed,active,nonacid,thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: 2" SHWT: 0" Slope: 0-1% Aspect: Concave
Somewhat Poorly Drained,Poorly Drained and
Elevation: 550' Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-10 10YR 4/2 5YR 3/4 2 PL cL 2msbk
Bg1 10-12 4/10Y 7.5YR 4/4 2 M,PL cL 2msbk charcoal present
Bg2 12-18 4/10Y cL 2msbk charcoal present
Btg 18-24+ 10YR 4/1 10YR 4/2 40 M c massive
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: WM-4
Soil Series: Chewacla and Wehadkee
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy,mixed,active,thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts/Fine-loamy,mixed,active,nonacid,thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: >24" SHWT: 10" Slope: 0-1% Aspect: Concave
Somewhat Poorly Drained,Poorly Drained and
Elevation: 550' Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Apc 0-6 10YR 5/3 7.5YR 5/6 2 PL cL 2msbk Mn concreations
BAc 6-10 10YR 5/3 7.5YR 5/6 10 PL,M cL 2msbk Mn concreations
Btc 10-14 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 5/6 10 PL,M cL 2msbk Mn concreations
Bt 14-24+ 10YR 6/2 10YR 5/8 20 M c massive
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: WM-5
Soil Series: Chewacla and Wehadkee
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy,mixed,active,thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts/Fine-loamy,mixed,active,nonacid,thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: 12" SHWT: 17" Slope: 0-1% Aspect: Concave
Somewhat Poorly Drained,Poorly Drained and
Elevation: 540' Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 30 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-5 10YR 5/3 cL 2msbk
BAc 5-15 10YR 5/3 10YR 6/8 2 M cL 2msbk Mn concreations
7.5YR 4/6 5 M,PL
Btc 15-17 10YR 5/3 7.5YR 4/4 20 M cL 2msbk Mn concreations
Bt 17-22 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 4/4 20 M cL 2msbk
Btg 22-26 10YR 5/1 7.5YR 4/6 2 M c 2msbk
Btgc 26-30+ 7/10Y 10YR 6/8 10 M c 2msbk Mn concreations
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: WM-6
Soil Series: Georgeville
Soil Classification: Fine,kaolinitic,thermic Typic Kanhapludult
AWT: 18" SHWT: 0" Slope: 2% Aspect: Concave
Elevation: 570' Drainage: Well drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-7 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 5/6 5 PL cL 2msbk
BAc 7-14 10YR 5/2 7.5YR 5/6 5 PL c 2msbk Mn concreations
Bt 14-16 10YR 5/2 10YR 6/8 20 M,PL c 3msbk
Btg 16-24+ 6/10Y 10YR 6/8 20 M,PL c massive
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: WM-7
Soil Series: Georgeville
Soil Classification: Fine,kaolinitic,thermic Typic Kanhapludult
AWT: >24" SHWT: 0" Slope: 2% Aspect: Concave
Elevation: 555' Drainage: Well drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-7 10YR 5/2 5YR 4/6 2 M,PL cL 2msbk
Btgl 7-12 10YR 6/1 10YR 6/6 10 M c massive
Btg2 12-24+ 7/10Y 10YR 5/6 20 M c massive small gravel
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

Jccsc
f SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA,PA
Client: NC Division of Mitigation Services Date: December 27,2021
Project: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Project#: DMS#100059
County: Chatham State: North Carolina
City/Town: Siler City Location: WM-8
Soil Series: Georgeville
Soil Classification: Fine,kaolinitic,thermic Typic Kanhapludult
AWT: >24" SHWT: 8" Slope: 2% Aspect: Concave
Elevation: 555' Drainage: Well drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Planted restoration site
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH(IN) MATRIX MOTTLES PERCENTAGE LOCATION TEXTURE STRUCTURE NOTES
Ap 0-8 10YR 4/3 5YR 4/6 5 PL L lmsbk
Bt 8-10 10YR 5/2 5YR 4/6 5 PL cL 2msbk
Btc 10-16 10YR 5/2 5YR 4/6 10 PL,M cL 2msbk Mn concreations starting at 12"
Btgc 16-24+ 10YR 5/1 5YR 4/6 5 PL cL 2msbk Mn concreations
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: Tommy Seelinger DATE: 12/27/2021

TYPICAI CROSSING - CROSS-SFCTIONAL VIFW TYPICAI CROSSING - PROFILF VIFW "I11110 ,,
12"PEP _. . •,OF�SSIpti...-v ,'
FLOODPLAIN CULVERT PIPE CULVERT PER .1.--
:¢Q 9�.
SET AT ELEVATION
APPROXIMATELY PROPOSED CROSSING -
TWO-THIRDS SIZING TABLE BELOW = SEAL -
OF MAIN LENGTH OF STRUCTURE _ •
040899 -•
STRUCTURE'S
INSTALL RIPRAP CAPACITY MIN. FILL 1' N
UP TO TOP OF 6"ABC STONE o
TO TOP OF ROADWAY (� NE `�` .~ v,
ROADWAY EDGE �� Q , /
uU n O v O u n \ TOP OF ROADWAY WIDTH S+ C?
r, n r` _�0. n r 6"CLEAN 6"ABC STONE `., 1] .,„ _ >
STABILIZE WITHi CI°OOQ °OO��o v FILL DIRT CLASS 1 STONE 6"CLEAN FILL DIRT '�i�r +riv Ei j j5��}�` -
• O OOo O I�. •Etz EMBED CULVERT
CLASS 1 RIPRAP •l /_� __� /i ww
7 • z- w 1'BELOW INVERT f f 1 '�
UNTIL ROADWAY Q���O COI O �O
TRANSITIONS 0i 0 00 O 0 ' e0 zp USING: X z
�O• O 10%CABC STONE FLOW OU
INTO NATURAL '' -0 O00 DO OV° 6' g6� 10%CLASS A STONE STREAMBED °nz
GRADE. ^" n n �- ��a 20%CLASS B STONE ELEVATION 'z
SEE NOTE ON EMBEDDED ROCK MIX OLLI�
o
9S 60%CLASS 1 STONE u000uauoo�o0000o Oo°�°6Oo°�° OoOo Oo°va Oo°va U oO a
STRUCTURE INVERT TOP WITH SURGE STONE ° o o
(EMBEDDED TO FILL VOIDS AND ° o Un°v
UNLESS NOTED) WASH IN NATURAL STRUCTURE INV.
STREAM MATERIAL EMBEDDED 1 FT STRUCTURE INVERT < ,,
TO REACH FINAL GRADE UNLESS NOTED EMBEDDED 1 FT
BANK STABILIZATION DETAIL ROADWAY DETAIL OTHERWISE PROFILE A-A' THROUGH PIPE OR BOX UNLESS NOTED
(REPLICATE ON OTHER SIDE) (REPLICATE ON OTHER SIDE) OTHERWISE z 6
UPSTREAM SECTION J g
,
i - am
} 2 c
• Oo
trm' z
zz
TYPICAL CROSSING - PI ANVIFW w
6"COVER OF ABC STONE
UNDERLAID BY 6"CLEAN FILL o
DIRT FOR EXTENT OF ROADWAY. I- 7,
COMPACT FILL DIRT IN 0.2'-LIFTS co F I"
PROPOSED CROSSING SIZING BEFORE INSTALLING ABC STONE. LL L w 5a
TIE OUT ROADWAY GRADING o o z
PROJECT WIDTH OF APPROX. STRUCTURE(ALL LENGTH OF UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM cms)E3 . as
CLASS 1 AT EXTENT OF FLOODPLAIN GRADING.
REACH ROADWAY TOP OF EMBEDDED 1 FT STRUCTURE ELEVATIONS(FT) ELEVATIONS(FT) STRUCTURE STRUCTURE STONE . fl
H
(FT) ROADWAY BELOW STREAM (FT) STREAM BED STREAM BED STATION STATIONU ,ELEVATION THALWEG DESIGN/AS BUILT DESIGN/AS O ° ° O O�
a
(FT) UNLESS NOTED) BUILT 3 O a 0 Fj o°
aa 0 CLASS 1 STONE �z
�� a ° ° O o 0 ° a _) w a w
Ti Upper 12 567.1 48" HDPE 24 562.45 design/562.24 562.45 design/ 13+15.04 13+39.04 0� 0 ° ° 0 ° o o a0 0 a
as-built 562.08 as-built )9 00 6 o ° 0 0 ° , o Q 00( 12"PEP w u,
°
Ti Lower 15 542.5 60" HDPE 30 536.78 design/537.07 536.13 design/ 27+92.26 28+22.26 0 ° o a 0 a 0 FLOODPLAIN
as-built 536.16 as-built Q O o , o v o a CULVERT
T2 12 562.4 36"HDPE 24 558.71 design/557.65 557.86 design/ N/A N/A
as-built 556.52 as-built o 0 ° o o o
T3 Upper 12 593.0 36" HDPE 24 589.30 design 588.56 design 301+60.49 301+84.49 0 0 ° a a a 0 0 PIPE
Qo o67 o ° Q (SEE TABLE Z z
T3 Lower 12 551.5 48"HDPE 24 546.78 design/546.86 546.60 design/ 318+00.49 318+24.49 Y 0 0 ° 0 o FOR SIZING) O 71
as-built 546.51 as-bull` o ° ° o �O
ALL ELEVATIONS ARE FINISHED STREAM BED ELEVATIONS. FLOW�Q��� ° ° ° �� � < U
*Note: The upper culvert on T3 was not surveyed due to being outside the bounds of the as-built survey. A 0 a d o q 0 _
O oQ o o ° oW
w
0 ' ° ° a0 Qo O � � z
� ° o ° oo � a ° QO Y � Z
0 ') ° 0 ' a a 0 0 12"PEP W n
NOTES: �� T
Q 0 ° ° 0 a 0 ° FLOODPLAINR U o
CULVERT THICKNESSES ASSUMED TO BE 8". ACTUAL THICKNESSES a U n w
TO BE DETERMINED BY FABRICATOR. �� ° I a Q o ° o Q�� z O a
DESIGN ROADWAY FILL IS A MINIMUM OF 1.0' AT ALL CROSSINGS. ) ° o o ° a °o 0
a a
IN LIEU OF WINGWALLS SEE RIPRAP PROTECTION/STABILIZATION. O ° o o ° a �� O� z
DOOC � 0 ° o d Q QD00c
� a Q o o �� "U FEBRUARY 2022
O O3)/111I n p h �� n SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
ROADWAY WIDTH
PIPE OR BOX LENGTH CULVERT
DETAILS
SHEET 5A OF 11

Culvert Photos
,..„-:40:. ,.--- it,..:
'KF K� v 5>, y"villit..,, . ."r Y
4.71
ih
i •
Ue ✓34 � ' � y, ti
•
E .'_ _ _
•
T1-1 Culvert—4/15/2021 T1-3 Culvert—4/15/2021
•
•
rI
0054
. x ,? .� yr , 6 i w ' o al'
Y f•.-.,,:. ... - .4. i''A"'- -:,, - - .44,-4r .• .- .1., ..''''',!.--, ... •' -k.--WC-it_,;*.;-:;14::
V g • •:-•- _44,,N.._ ,)4.,, .. .....:: - ---.. ...- --...,::',.L.:4,—...- ......,4
,...„„„,,..,.,;,,,..„,„,,,,,...„,,„„,,,„,...„.._ _ .
.„..,
....xis,,,,,-- ,-- . .
,:,,,,:.:,..„,,,,,...,_„:-.„.„-::-.•.::,":'7f:,"
•
,ice + 4 k 4 s * 3 Rg r
T2 Culvert—4/15/2021 T3-1 Culvert— 1/27/2022
._
i
PP
ar—
ft rf Y'"9 L r • �� k9 - .
yi �� ;
f
T3-3 Culvert—4/15/2021
Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCIAssociates of NC,PA
DMS Project#97136 84 MP-01 Monitoring Report