20140332 Ver 1_G. Baker Field Notes_20140414

F[- TDp 204 o33a
The Browns Surrunit Creek Restoration Project will provide numerous water quality and ecol j{n
the Browns Summit Creek Watershed, which drains to the Haw River and ultimately the Cape ear River Basin.
While many of these benefits are limited to the project area, others, such as nutrient removal, sediment reduction,
and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have more far - reaching effects, potentially extending downstream to
the Haw River. As stated previously, the project is located within targeted local watershed 03030002 - 010020.
Expected improvements to water quality, hydrology, and habitat are outlined below as project goals.
The 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities includes three CU -wide fiunctional improvement objectives:
1. Reduce and Control Sediment Inputs
2. Reduce and Manage Nutrient Inputs
3. Protect and Augmcnt Designated Significant Natural Heritage Areas
The Brown's Summit Creek Project meets each of those goals. It will reduce nutrient and sediment inputs through
the project area and the unnamed tributary flows into the Upper Haw River Floodplain and Slopes Significant
Natural Heritage Area in Rockingham County, just over two miles from the northern project terminus.
Benefits Related to Water Quality
Nutrient removal
Restore riparian stream buffer — Currently excess nutrients and pollutants in the form of fecal
coliform and nitrogen from cattle waste and other agriculture practices are entering the project
reaches without flowing through adequate riparian buffers. Fully functioning riparian buffers will
be established and permanently protected to filter runoff containing excess nutrients and
pollutants before entering the project reaches.
Cattle exclusion — Cattle currently have direct access to the entire length of seven of the nine
project reaches and to parts of one more reach. Exclusion of cattle through easements and
fencing would remove a direct source of nutrient input to the system.
Sediment removal
Restore proper channel form — Streams with proper dimension, pattern, and profile will
efficiently transport sediment and allow for deposition on point bars and on the floodplain. In
addition, the design will prevent degradation by: decreasing stream slope and increasing stream
length /sinuosity, dissipating energy over proper riffle and pool sequences, and by dissipating
stream energy with overbank flooding for storms greater than bankfull.
Construct in- stream structures — In- stream structures such as cross vanes, single arm vanes, and j-
hooks divert shear stress from the near bank to the center of the channel during precipitation
events thus reducing bank erosion. Based on preliminary site assessments, stream bank erosion is
a main contributor of sediment and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) within the project area.
Cattle exclusion —Stream banks are currently eroding from unlimited cattle access to the stream.
Cattle will be excluded from the stream corridor with construction of a permanent fence system
encompassing the conservation easement areas.
Restore riparian stream buffer — All project reaches are lacking a mature, wide riparian buffer for
some portion of their length. As a result, stream banks are actively eroding and introducing
sediment to the stream in many areas. A restored riparian buffer will increase root mass within
stream banks, thus decreasing bank erosion and sedimentation.
Stream bank bioengineering — Construction of geolifts, installation of live stakes, and other
bioengineering practices will re- establish a healthy root mass along the stream banks, thus
preventing erosion and excess sediment delivery to the stream.
Page 19

Benefits Related to Ecological Processes
Improved Restore proper channel form — Restored channel dimension, pattern, and profile will ensure
substrate and in- adequate bed load and suspended sediment transport according to sediment supply, valley type
stream cover and valley slope. Appropriate sediment transport will ensure riffle substrate is adequately
transported and excessive degradation or aggradation does not occur.
Construct in- stream structures — Construction of in- stream structures which are designed to
improve bedform diversity and trap detritus will improve in- stream cover and aquatic habitat.
Cattle exclusion — Exclusion of cattle will reduce in- stream sediment from bank erosion, which
impairs channel substrate and destroys habitat for macro - invertebrates. Excess nutrients from
cattle waste will also be eliminated,
Reduce water
Restore riparian stream buffer —A restored and protected riparian stream buffer will increase
temperature
shading of the project stream reaches. The increased shade will decrease water temperatures.
Stream bank bioengineering — Bioengineering such as geolifts and stream bank live staking will
provide tree canopy and shading to the stream and reduce water temperatures.
Improve aquatic
Aquatic habit will be improved from each previously listed goal. If all goals are achieved, the
habitat
project will realize maximum aquatic habitat improvement and ecological uplift.
Improved
Riparian buffers and restored riparian wetlands will increase infiltration of precipitation into the
floodwater
local water table. In addition, the restored stream reaches will have increased access to their
retention
floodplains, which will be wider, allowing floodwater energy to dissipate over the floodplain,
which will increase floodwater retention time.
Restoration of
Riparian buffer planting and streambank bioengineering will improve terrestrial habitat adjacent
terrestrial habitat
to the project reaches and will provide connection to wildlife areas downstream of the project
site.
Improved
Restore riparian wetland vegetation —Areas where the riparian vegetation has been removed, is
aesthetics
being heavily grazed by livestock, or is otherwise limited, or of low quality due to lack of density
and /or presence of exotic species, will be replanted with native species vegetation. Removing
invasive plant species and planting native woody and herbaceous plants will greatly improve site
aesthetics.
Restore riparian stream buffer — Areas where the existing riparian buffer vegetation is limited, or
of low quality due to lack of density and /or presence of exotic species, will be replanted with
native species vegetation. Removing invasive plant species and planting native woody and
herbaceous plants will greatly improve site aesthetics.
Cattle exclusion — Cattle exclusion will benefit site aesthetics by reducing unsightly bank erosion
and eliminating cattle and excrement from the project area.
Restore proper channel form — Restoring stable channel dimension, pattern, and profile will
decrease unsightly bank erosion and restore a more "natural" aesthetic appearance to project
reaches.
Improved wetland
Priority Level I stream restoration will restore wetland hydrology and active flows to areas that
function
have been historically manipulated (channelized and filled). Native species riparian wetland
vegetation will be re- established in the rehabilitated wetlands as well. Livestock will be
permanently excluded from these wetland areas, which will eliminate the hoof shear, compaction,
and nutrient inputs associated with livestock.
MM Page 20

5.2. Project Description
and ecosystem improvements through the implementation of this project.
The project is located in Guilford
County, approximately 3 miles northwest
of the Community of Browns Summit.
The project site is located in th6 DENR
sub -basin 03 -06 -01 and the targeted local
watershed 03030002 - 010020 of the Cape
Fear River Basin (Figure 1). Browns
Sunvnit Creek is technically an unnamed
tributary (UT) to the Haw River. It joins
the Haw River approximately 2 miles
downstream where the Haw River flows
beneath Cunningham Mill Rd. In this
location, the Haw River is fisted by
NCDWQ as a Class C Nutrient Sensitive
Water (NSW). The project streams
include several unnamed tributaries
(UTs) to the Haw River.
Baker first visited the Browns Summit
Creek site in February, 2012. It continues
to degrade, though evidence of this is
more pronounced in winter when the
herbaceous bank vegetation dies back.
Each of the project reaches have been
heavily impacted from historic land use
practices, predominantly cattle farming,
agriculture, and forestry uses. Within the
project area, approximately 90 percent of
the stream banks have inadequate (less
than 50 feet wide) riparian buffers.
Figure 5 shows the most recent aerial
photograph with clearly marrow buffers.
Cattle hoof shear and/or shear stress have
severely impacted the stream banks along
the majority of the project stream
reaches.
The lack of adequate and quality buffer
vegetation, past land use disturbances,
and current cattle activities present a
significant opportunity for water quality
The Browns Summit Creek Restoration Project will provide maximum functional uplift, utilizing a true watershed
approach, as it appropriately addresses all of the intermittent and perennial stream reaches in the project watershed.
Based on a review of the Natural Heritage Program and the US Fish and Wildlife databases, there is one federally
Page 21

r
1"
C
C.�
listed species, the small whorled pogonia (Isotria rnedeoloides) known to occur in Guilford County. The project site
is not utilized by anadromous fish species.
The project is situated in a rural area of northern Guilford County (project watershed percent impervious cover less
than 10 percent). The land use within the project watershed is comprised of a mix of forested and active agricultural
lands (mostly pasture with some cropland), along with residential and transportation uses. The most prevalent land -
use is active agricultural, followed by forested land, with a very small percentage of residential /transportation land
use. Figures 2 and 4 show the topography in the project area. Soils information for the project is shown in Figure
3. The project area (i.e., proposed conservation easement area) encompasses more than 19 acres of land that
includes agricultural fields, cattle pastures, clear cuts, riparian wetlands, narrow forested buffer lands, and
residences (Figure 6).
The streams at the project site were broken into nine project reaches (Rl, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, T1, T2, and -T3)1-
based on drainage area breaks at confluences (Figure 4). The drainage area for each reach is shown in Table 1.
Project Reaches Rl, R2, R3, and R4 are shown as solid blue -line streams on the USGS topographic quadrangle -map
(Figure 2). Project Reaches R5, R6, T1, T2 and T3 are not shown as blue -line streams, dashed or solid, The
presence of historic valleys for each of the project stream systems can be seen from LIDAR imagery for the site -
(Figure 4), and are obvious during field investigations.
Field evaluations of intermittent/ /perennial stream status were made in late September 2013. These evaluations
were based on North Carolina Division of Water Quality's (NCDWQ) Methodology for Identification. of
Interrrrittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins, (v 4.11, Effective Date: I September 1; 20 10) stream -
assessment protocols. Table I below presents the results of the field evaluations along with the assessed status of
each project reach. Copies of the supporting field forms may be found in Appendix 1.
Table 1. Summary Information for Field Investigations to Determine Intermittent /Perennial Status.
Project
Reach
Designation
Existing Project
Reach Length (ft)
NCDWQ Stream
Classification Form
Score 1
Watershed Drainage
Area (acres) z
Stream Status Based on
Field Analyses
R1
996
35.5
448
Perennial
R2
623
35.5
314
Perennial
R3
1,398
41.5
224
Perennial
R4
1,031
25/41.5
95
Intermittent /Perennial
R5
427
28.5
24
Intermittent
R6
330
19
61
Intermittent
T1
144
26.75
64
Intermittent
T2
325
27.25
51
Intermittent
T3
93
19.0
39
Intermittent
aker
Note 1: NCDWQ Stream Classification forms are provided in Appendix 1 for the streams listed above.
Note 2: Watershed drainage area is approximated based on topographic and L1DAR information at the downstream
end of each reach.

The project site consists of all sand -
gravel bed streams with essentially no
cobble or coarser material as part of
the substrate. Bed materials were
sampled in middle Reach R3 to a depth
of 12 inches and sand and gravel were
predominant (see Figure 7 for this and
other pre - monitoring locations).
Visual inspections were done
throughout Reaches Rl, R2, and R3
and only sand and gravel were
observed on the substrate surface. A
substrate assessment was not
conducted within Reach R4 because it
is currently experiencing backwater
conditions in the lower reach and the
deeply incised iniddle reach will be
improved through Priority Level I
Restoration.. Only one bedrock
outcrop was observed in Reach R3
along a streambank, but it does not
extend to the charnel bed.
iack or q rlpgrlfln Dujjer.
- A reachwide pebble count was
conducted within Reach R3, which yielded d35, d50, d84, and d95 of 0.2, 0.4, 10.4, and 22.4 nun, respectively.
Since the project encompasses a watershed approach, future sediment supply from channel erosion is expected to be
minimal. However, a detailed sediment transport analysis will be conducted to confirm that if sediment is being
supplied to the project reaches it will be adequately transported, thus preventing aggradation. As part of the formal
design process, Baker will assess the hydraulic forces to ensure that the channel bed will not aggrade nor degrade.
Bed degradation -(incision) can occur without sediment supply if the design has excessive shear stress or stream
power. - Consequently, constructed riffles will be incorporated in the design with larger rock sizes that will not move
during storm events since bed material supply is not sufficient to build riffles naturally. The constructed riffles will
also raise dissolve oxygen, and provide aquatic habitat and assurance that the restored channel will not degrade over
time. Further discussion . of sediment transport analysis is provided in Section 5.3.
Baker conducted field, studies to evaluate and document the existing conditions of the site as well as each project
stream reach. These studies included pedestrian surveys, photographic documentation, total station cross section
surveys, GPS surveys of pertinent site features, completing the field -work dependant sections of the NCEEP's
Technical Proposal Evaluation Crileria -- Rating Form (CF -02, RFP# 76-005568, 2013, Rev2) and completing all
of the mapping and calculation of associated statistics in accordance with NCEEP's Guidance for the Submission of
Mapping and Associated Stalistics.for Fatll Delivery RFPs. Copies of the _completed described rating forms are
included in Appendix 3. The results of the existing condition cross section surveys were used to conduct
geomorphic (Rosgen) stream classification for the project stream reaches. The results of the existing condition
cross sections surveys are summarized in Table 2. The results of the pedestrian surveys and GPS surveys of
pertinent site features were used in conjunction with available GIS files to develop mapping as required by the RFP.
This mapping includes time- series historical aerial photography, recent aerial photography with topography and
proposed mitigation features /measures, channel stability mapping, site floodplain alteration and water quality
stressors, watershed planning contextual mapping, and mapping of adjacent and proximal planting elements are
provided as required by the RFP. Additional mapping and figures are provided herein to better convey the value
and benefit of the proposed project.
Page 23
e

Table 2. Summary of Existing Condition Cross section Survey Data.
Project Reaich
Desi nation
g
Watershed
Drainage
Area (acres) s
Entrenchment
Ratio
Width /Depth
Ratio
Typical Bank
Height Ratio
Existing
Channel Type
( Rosgen
Classification)
RI
448
8.7
9.3
1.2
E
R2
314
2.0
10.6
2.1
Bc
R3
224
2.1
7.2
2.0
Bc
R4
95
1.2
9.5
7.2
G
R5
24
1.6
16.9
5.8
Bc
R6
61
1.4
18.8
5.2
Bc
T1
64
13.1
10.2
1.6
E
T2
51
1.3
82
3.0
F
T3
39
22.7
2.6
1.7
E
Note 1: Watershed drainage area is approximated based on topographic and LIDAR information.
Note 2: Cross section locations are shown in Figure 7,
Reach R1 extends from the downstream extent of the project at the property line upstream to the confluence
between Reach R2 and Reach T1. Reach RI has a valley length of approximately 1,000 feet and a drainage area of
448 acres. Cattle have direct access to the entire reach. Reach R1 has a low valley gradient and has noticeable
floodplain wetting. The baril< height ratios range from 1.0 to 1.3 and erosion is present on approximately 10 to 30
percent of the streambanks. The observed erosion is typically in the form of surfieial scour though cattle hoof shear
is causing mass wasting in a some locations. A pond was formerly located on the downstream end of RL The
remnants of the pond are a sinuous channel and a lumpy floodplain. The stream pattern upstream from the former
pond is suprisingly straight for such a wide valley, suggesting that channel straightening may have taken place in
the past. Channelization is clearly confirmed by the historical aerial photo from 1937 (Figure 8). This is ffirther
evidenced by the relic spoil piles present in several locations along the reach. The Catena Group, in their hydric soil
delineation of Reaches R1 and R2 (see Appendix 5), noted significant manipulation of the soils by human and
livestock activity.
Reach Rl has very few mature trees along the streambank; as such these should be saved as part of the restoration
design. Invasive species vegetation such as Chinese privet clusters are common along the streambanks.
Approximately 60 percent of the length of Reach R1 has no trees, including both of the streambanks. Based on
existing conditions, Reach R1 is classified as an incised `B" Rosgen stream type. The lack of a natural stream
pattern is one of the primary drivers for Restoration of Reach R1.
Page 24

Reach R2 begins at the confluence of
Reaches T2 and R3 and flows northward
through lightly grazed pasture to its
confluence with Reach T1. The existing
length of Reach R2 is approximately 623
feet in length. Reach R2 has a drainage
area of 314 acres. Bank erosion on
Reach R2 is most severe at the
downstream. Section of the reach (40
percent), best in the middle (10 percent),
and moderate on the upstream section
(30 percent). This erosion is in the form
of surficial scour, with no mass wasting.
Reach R2 has been degraded through the
removal of the riparian buffer vegetaion
and through cattle access. The degree
of incision along Reach R2 is variable,
but the bank height ratio is frequently
greater . than 1.5. Most often the
streambank cover is limited to fescue
and other typical pasture grasses and
forbs. The buffer -in the top half of the
reach has very few trees along the
streambanks and is primarily composed
of grass and forbs. The bottom half of the reach has mostly Chinese privet on the left bank and grass on the right
bank. As such, more than 64 percent of the length of left and right banks of Reach R2 have longitudinal breaks or
interruptions of the existing tree line greater than 20 feet in length. Reach R2's floodplain is apparently unaltered in
the upper 60 percent but has been formerly straightened in the lower section (see Figure 8). The entire length of
Reach R2 is actively subject to water quality stressors, mainly in tile. of direct livestock access. Based on
existing conditions, Reach R2 has a Rosgen stream type classification of "W', with bank height ratios greater than
1.5.
Reach R3 originates at the confluence of Reaches R4 and T3. The drainage area for Reach R3 is estimated to be
224 acres. Reach R3 is backwatered initially because of an in -line pond along its upper section. The riparian buffer
is less than'50f feet wide along the entire length of both strearnbanks, and often less than 10 feet. However, mature
trees or wnderstory species are present along much of the reach. Invasive species vegetation are present though not
abundant. `The entire existing 1,500 feet of Reach R3 are consistently incised with bank height ratios above 1.5.
Active channel scour is typically 20 to 30 percent, however, because of protection provided by tree roots. Bedform
diversity is lacking due to a low percentage of riffles. Below the pond, however, 50 percent of the streambanks are
severely eroding for several hundred feet before the bank erosion becomes less acute in the lower section of the
reach. The floodplain along Reach R3 does not appear to have been altered. Based on existing conditions, Reach
R3 has a Rosgen stream type classification of "Be ", with bank height ratios typically around 2.0.
Reach R4 begins at the confluence of Reaches R5 and R6 near the southern extent of the project area and runs
approximately 1,150 feet to the confluence with Reach T3. The drainage area is estimated to be 95 acres at the
middle of the reach. Reach R4 flows 100 feet before entering an in -line farm pond for another 100 feet. The pond
dam is very close to failing as a result of a hcadcut (see Photo 4). Cattle commonly wallow in this pond and
nutrient inputs are high, as evidenced by abundant algae visible hi the surface waters. Below the farm pond, Reach
R4 flows for another 130 feet before it leaves the cow pasture and enters a forested section adjacent to a small
residential development. An active hcadcut marks the boundary betwben the upstream pasture and downstream
forested area. The channel is more than 10 feet deep through this forested section as a result of a pond dam failure
and subsequent channel incision (see Photo 3). Stormwater runoff from the residential development is causing an
additional hcadcut on the chamlel bark back towards the stormwater outlet. The incised channel flowing through
forest continues below the residential development through a section to which livestock have access.
MM Page 25

Bank erosion along Reach R4 is severe, with 70 -90
Incision is pronounced, with the bank height ratio on e
is limited to grass in the upper 300 feet and then most
understory is limited due to cattle grazing. The floodpl
two ponds (one existing and close to failing, and one a
percent of its length containing at least one eroding bank.
xgess of 7 in the measured cross section. The riparian buffer
ly forested for the next 750 feet. In the bottom 400 feet, the
aln has been altered in the upper half of the reach because of
ready failed). Based on existing conditions, Reach R4 has a
Rosgen stream type classification of " G ",
with bank height ratios typically greater
than 3.0.
Reach R5 begins at the upstream project
extent at a spring.. The drainage area is
estimated to be =24 acres- and the existing
length is approxitriately 430 feet. The
channel is an incised "Be" with a
measured bank height ratio of 5.8. The
riparian buffer- itas scattered single trees -_ -
along the streambank but. is mostly grass.
Cattle have direct access to- this entire.
reach. The floodplain has apparently not
been altered.
Reach R6 also begins at the upstream
extent of the project as an existing farm
pond. Below the dam, the channel is very.
Photo 6. Photo looking downstream along Reach R4 at current extent of eroded and has been filled with concrete
headcut, presumably caused by dam failure. slabs. The drainage area for Reach R6 is
estimated to be 61 acres and it is rated as
barely intermittent below the dam. The
reach is approximately 330 feet long with half of this length in the pond. The riparian buffer is limited to grass with
minimal to no mature woody vegetation. The measured cross section indicates the channel is an incised `Be" with a
bank height ratio of 5.2. Cattle have access to the entire reach and use the pond to wallow.
Reach T1 is a tributary that enters Browns Summit Creek between Reaches Rl and R2. It has a drainage area of
approximately 64 acres, draining through a neighborhood development. Approximately 150 feet of Reach TI are
included in the project, It is located in active pasture and has no trees along its banks. Buffer vegetation is largely
limited to fescue and other typical pasture grasses. Approximately 30 percent of the channel length has bank scour.
It appears that the floodplain has been altered because the channel does not follow the bottom of the valley. A cross -
section was surveyed and. indicates a Rosgen stream classification of "E" with a bank height ratio of 1.6.
Reach T2 is a tributary that emaciates below a pond and enters Browns Summit Creek between Reaches R2 and R3.
It has a drainage area of 51 acres. A channel length of approximately 325 feet of Reach T2 is included in the
project. The project section starts more than 100 feet below the pond dam. Cattle have access to the reach though
they do not appear to use it, at present. A headcut is present approximately 100 feet from Browns Summit Creek.
The upper section is stable but the buffer is limited to herbaceous vegetation. Bank scour is not present on the
upper half of the reach and estimated at 20 percent on the lower half. A cross section was surveyed and indicates a
Rosgen stream classification of "F" with a bank height ratio of 3.0.
Reach T' ) is a tributary that enters Browns Summit Creek between Reaches R3 and R4. It has a drainage area of
approximately 39 acres, draining through mostly cropland and a large pond. Approximately 100 feet of Reach TI
are included in the project. This section is located on the floodplain of Browns Summit Creek and a headcut has
migrated through it. There are little to no trees along the banks. Buffer vegetation is largely limited to herbaceous
grasses. Approximately 50 percent of the channel length has bank scour. The floodplain appears to not have been
altered, but the lower T3 channel is backwatered by the farm pond in Reach R3. A cross section was surveyed and
indicates a Rosgen stream classification of "E" with a batik height ratio of 1.7.
M Page 26

As shown in Figure 3, soils around project reaches are primarily Chewacla loam, Madison clay loam, and Cecil
sandy loam. The Chewacla group includes Wehadkee undrained soils in the floodplain depressions. Wehadkee
soils are classified as hydric. The area proposed for riparian wetland restoration is along of the floodplain of Reach
R1 at the downstream end of the project. This area has been heavily manipulated and degraded and is mapped
primarily as hydric soils, including Wehadkee.
On -site investigations of the areas proposed for wetland mitigation were conducted on October 15, 2013 by a
licensed soil scientist with the Catena Group, LLC (see Appendix 5 for the hydric soil investigation), as required by
the RFP. Their findings indicate the presence of hydric soils along the floodplain of Reaches RI and R2. The soils
in this area were identified as "Soil Unit 1 — Hydric Soil" in the hydric soil investigation. Catena noted that `Soil
Unit 1 would likely be considered jurisdictional wetland that has been severely degraded . by a combination of
human and livestock [activities]. As such, it is a prime candidate for rehabilitation." Catena further concluded that
"Soil Unit 1 is a prime candidate for wetland restoration through rehabilitation. it is anticipated that through
Priority 1 stream restoration, removal of livestock, and revegetation; the hydrology will be restored and the soils
will eventually form structure, which will allow the - wetland to = regain -its, normal functions." Hydric soil findings
were based on hand - turned soil auger borings and the "NRCS Field Indicators-of Hydric Soils in the United States —
Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils (Version 7.0, 2010) ". See page 36 for further presentation of the
proposed riparian wetland rehabilitation.
As stated above, there is currently one federally listed Threatened species -known to have occurred in Guilford
County. This 'projecf -'is not anticipated to have a negative impact on this species. This project is not anticipated to
have any adverse impacts on cultural or historical resources. The .nearest site listed as eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places is the Parker- Troxler House (CF- T594), which is approximately 1.5 miles from the
southern terminus of the project. On -site investigations and discussions with landowners have not revealed any
potential resources of this type on the property. If the project is awarded, Baker will contact the NC State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) to ensure that there will be no cultural or historical resource impacts.
The failed dam situated along Reach 4 does not appear to have historical significance. The aerial photograph from
1951 (Figure 9) clearly does not show a dam and associated pond. This means that unless the dam was built in the
following 12 years, it would definitely not hold historical signlificauce:.Furthermore, it is now situated within a
residential neighborhood.
The dearest airports to the project site are Ai Harbor Airport (approximately. 5.5 miles south of the project site and
Warf Airport Airpark (approximately 5.9 miles to the north). Both are private.air, fields.
None of the proposed project reaches are located within a FEMA regulated floodplain. While it is not anticipated
that there will be issues associated with FEMA permitting or documentation, Baker will coordinate with the local
floodplain administrator and prepare the required documentation to obtain approval for the project from FEMA.
5.3. Project Development
The Browns Summit Creek Restoration Project will involve the restoration, enhancement, preservation, and
protection of nine stream reaches, their associated riparian buffers, as well as restoration of significantly degraded
riparian wetlands. This broad balanced approach, utilising the entire range of practices, from Priority Level
I Restoration to Level H Enhancement is critical as it addresses all of the intermittent and perennial stream
reaches in the proiect watershed along with the restoring degraded riparian wetlands at the project site, thus
providing the maximum functional uplift and utilizing a true watershed arpproach. As a result of the proposed
restoration and enhancement activities, approximately more than 5,500 LF of stream will be restored or enhanced,
more than 4 acres of significantly degraded riparian wetlands will be rehabilitated, and 19 acres of riparian buffer
will be restored or enhanced (Figure 6a & 6b). The stream, wetland and riparian buffer systems to be restored have
been impacted by channelization and ditching, loss of riparian buffers, past land use disturbances, invasive species
vegetation, and direct cattle access (see Photos 1 through 15).

Baker will compile and assess watershed
information including: drainage areas,
historical land uses and development
trends, geologic setting, soil types, and -
terrestrial plant communities. Project
5t "� reach designs will use appropriate
i r regional curves to verify proposed
bankfull channel dimensions. Baker will
use the results of the existing condition
analyses along with reference reach data
from previous projects to develop a
proposed stream restoration design for
the project reaches. This -design %vi1I
¢ ` - •�' follow Ros en's "step -wise
$ C -0•r"°{ �!5e! V,i �� �, a$ r �1• g _ _
methodology in which dimensionless , •
rH� X }�'r✓r - e � �'i " °�_ � r y,�,., qtr ��
ratios fiom the reference, reach and. past
project experience . are used to restore
stable dimension, pattem,..and. profile, as
well as proper bankfull sediment -
Photo 7. Area proposed for wetland rehabilitation along Reach R3. Many transport competency for the proposed
visible holes have been punched in the floodplain from cattle hooves. The reach. The :stream - channel .design will,
channel has been straightened and grazing limits growth of natural include analysis of the. hydrology; -
vegetation.. hydraulics, shear stress, sediment
transport, and appropriate - channel -
dimensions. The hydrology and
hydraulics will include analysis of the bankfuull discharge, and comparison of the reference reach ratios to design
ratios from past projects under shnilar geomorphic settings which have proved successful. The bankfull discharge
will be used to develop [lie proposed channel dimension and to assess performance. Sediment transport calculations
and stream power analyses will be performed for the existing channels and the design channels for comparison.
Specifically, Baker will perform representative pebble counts and will collect pavement and subpavement samples
in order to evaluate bed material characteristics and sediment transport. The bed material will be sieved and a_grain
size distribution developed. The results of the substrate analyses will be used to classify the streams and to
complete shear stress, sediment transport, and stability analyses. Baker will use the critical shear stress and
boundary shear stress analysis approaches to verify that the channels as designed will not aggrade nor degrade.
Sediment transport calculations will be performed for the existing channels and the design channels for comparison.
In- stream structures will be constructed only from materials naturally found at the project site such as hardwood
logs, brush, rock, stone, and boulder materials. In order to ensure sustainabi lily of those structures, Baker will only
use methods of structure design and construction that have proven successful on numerous past projects in the same
geographic region.
Baker has field verified that the project site has adequate, viable construction access, staging, and stockpile areas.
Figures 6a & 6b shows the existing/proposed stream crossing, open areas, etc. that are available for use during
construction. These same site access points and features will be used for future access after the completion of
construction. Where practicable, impacts to existing native riparian buffer vegetation will be minimized. Any
potential impacts to existing wetland areas will be avoided during construction, with only temporary, minimal
impacts expected as necessary for maximized permanent stream and wetland functional uplift. Less than one (1)
percent of the project, by design length (estimated to be 6,200 feet), is affected by any physical constraints or
barriers. The barrier is the one crossing along Reach R3, which will be a culvert crossing constructed to be 24 feet
wide. The easement break will be 60 feet to allow potential future development of the western portions of the
parcels.
Page 28

Reach. R1— Restoration
Reach :1 ends at a culvert that is currently at existing grade; it is not sunk to prevent overtopping since it passes
beneath a farm access road. Therefore, Priority Level I restoration is proposed for the entire reach since it will not
be necessary to transition with Priority Level II, restoration. The main benefits of this restoration approach will
allow for a more natural channel pattern, with minimized earthwork required, as well as reducing the bank height
ratio to 1.0:t1lroughout the reach and stabilizing.isolated eroding banks. The restoration approach in this area will
promote more frequent over bank flooding into the hydric soils area, thereby creating increased opportunity for
wetland rehabilitation,
The restored channel will be constructed off -line as much as possible throughout the existing pasture, and will be
designed as a Rosgen C/E type channel. This approach will minimize the munber of existing trees that will need to
be r6ioved to construct the project. While formal design calculations have not been completed; it is likely that the
design width/depth ratio for the channel will be between 10 and 14, and over time, the channel will narrow due to
fine sediment deposition and streambank vegetation growth. In- stream structures such as log weirs and/or
constructed riffles will be installed to control grade, dissipate scour energies, and eliminate the potential for
upstreamh chamiel'incisioh: Additionally, root wads/brush toe and log rollers will -be incorporated for step -pool
formation, bank stability, and habitat diversity.
-The existing, ".unstable channel will be partially to completely filled along its length -using suitable fill material
excavated from construction of the restored channel, Venial pools will be strategically located along the filled
abandoned channel. to, provide habitat diversity and improved detention and treatment of concentrated stonnwater
runoff.
Riparian biiffers in excess of 50 feet will be restored and protected along all of Reach Rl. In fact, because extra
property was required to secure the easement, the riparian buffer will average approximately 100 feet on each bank
of Reach Rl: No stream crossings or other breaks in the easement are proposed along this reach and permanent
fencing will be installed to exclude cattle and reduce nutrient inputs associated with them.
The riparian area along the entire length of Reaches RI and R2 is proposed for wetland rehabilitation as described
below.
Reach R2 — Restoration
Due to the degraded nature of Reach R2, a
Priority Level I Restoration approach is
proposed for the entire reach and'to fully
restore stream functions. Starting at the
confluence with Reaches R3 and T1, the
restored channel will continue from R3 to
provide a reconnection to the historic
floodplain. This approach is feasible
because the profile elevations upstream
will also be raised higher than the existing
bed of the degraded stream channel.
The upstream portion the restored channel
will be constructed mostly within existing
channel geometry, and will be designed as
a Rosgen C/E type channel. This area of
the project has marginal buffer vegetation
and this approach will minimize the
number of existing mature trees that will
need to be removed to construct the new
channel.
Page 29

In- stream structures will most likely include constructed riffles for grade control and riffle habitat (gravel substrate
was observed in this channel section), log weirs, log vanes and rollers for step -pool formation, bank stability, and
habitat diversity.
This reach section will be restored through the use of appropriate riffle -pool meander geometry and in- stream
structures to control grade, dissipate energies, and eliminate the potential for upstream channel incision. Channel
banks will be graded to stable slopes, and the historic floodplain conmection will be reestablished to further promote
stability and re- establishment of riparian vegetation. The existing, unstable channel will be partially to completely
filled along its entire length using suitable fill material excavated from construction of the newly restored channels.
Vernal pools will be strategically located along the partially :filled abandoned channel to provide habitat diversity
and, improved detention and treatment of concentrated stormw.ater runoff. Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will
be- restored and protected along all of Reach R2. As with Reach R1, the lower 300 feet-will have riparian buffers
-that, on average, exceed 100 feet on each bank. Additionally, 'permanent fencing will'be installed to exclude cattle
and reduce nutrient inputs.
The riparian area along the entire length of Reach R2 is proposed for wetland rehabilitation-as described below.
Reach R3 — Restoration
Work along Reach R3 will involve Priority Level 1 restoration to provide a floodplain reconnection and long -term
channel stability. in its existing condition, the entire reach is severely incised (BHR > 1:5) and many of the outside
meander bends are eroding. Tt is estimated that 30 -50 percent of the chauiel is eroding in the .upper portion of the
reach, and 20 percent of the channel in the lower reach. Reach R3 begins at the confluence Reaches R4 and T3 just
above a farm pond. The pond will be completely removed as part of the channel restoration. - -Below the existing
pond, many mature single trees are located intermittently along both sides of the stream channel. The larger -trees of
significance will be identified during the field survey and the proposed design pattern will include working within
the existing channel and avoiding these trees whenever feasible. This approach will involve raising the existing bed
elevation and attempt to preserve and /or incorporate trees that currently provide bank stability and are not
undermined or likely threatened in the fixture. Appropriate removed trees will be incorporated as materials for
proposed in -stream structures.
This reach will be designed as a Rosgen C/E type channel and these techniques will allow restoration of a stable
channel form with appropriate bedform diversity, as well as improved channel function through improved aquatic
habitat, active floodplain connection, restoration of riparian and terrestrial habitats, exclusion of cattle and
associated nutrient inputs, and decreased erosion and sediment loss from bank erosion.
Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be restored or preserved along all of Reach R3. Only one break in the
easement is proposed in the downstream end of Reach R3 at an existing culvert crossing that will be improved. The
easement break will be 60 feet to allow for future access to the land west of the stream project, but the proposed
culvert crossing will be restricted to 24 feet.
Page 30

Since the primary source of impairment for Reach R3 is direct cattle access and channel incision, wood structures
will be incorporated into the channel, where appropriate, to promote stable bedforin sequences and habitat diversity.
The riparian area along the downstream end of Reach R3 is proposed for wetland rehabilitation (see page 36).
Reach R4 ® Restoration
Work proposed along Reach R4 will. involve a Priority Level I Restoration approach. The channel begins just
upstream from a fat-in pond at the confluence of Reaches R5 and R6, both of which are proposed for enhancement.
The fat-in pond on Reach R4 is proposed to be completely removed, and the channel bed elevation downstream will
be raised so that the bank height ratio is 1,0. The channel pattern will be shifted to the low part of the valley as it
exits the pasture area and enters the forested area through the residential neighborhood section. Here, the old
channel will be filled and the failed: pond. dam will be removed to provide a higher functioning floodplain
connection. The proposed CIE: channel will meander through this floodplain, utilizing old channel features where
possible. The trees on the relic floodplain are mostly small and unremarkable. The trees on the east side of the
existing channel will be preserved to be part of.the restored channel buffer.
Within the reconnected floodplain, Baker proposes to incorporke a basin that will capture and treat runoff from the
stormwater outlet that drains Broad Ridge Court. The outlet is currently causing a major headcut that will continue
to migrate. To correct this,. .a rock - lured charunel will: be constructed to bring the stormwater runoff from the outlet
to the floodplain elevation. Next, a: properly- sized basin wil I capture the runoff, diffuse its energy, and allow water
to spread across the vegetated floodplain,_promoting nutrient uptake within the buffer. A stable outlet channel will
be constructed to deliver the runoff toIhe project reach.
Below the residential development, Priority Level 1 restoration will be continued by weaving through the area with
the mature trees. The existing channel wilLber plugged and targeted foe vernal pools in the new channel.
Cattle will be excluded from all of Reach
R4 and riparian buffers of at least 50 feet
will be established. More rock structures
will be used on Reach R4 compared to
other reaches to guard against wood
degradation in a higher and less wet
proposed channel. i-harvested wood will
be used to fill the old channel and for log
vanes at meander bends.
It is worth noting that the dam on the
pond at the top of Reach R4 is close to
failing (see Photo 4). A migrating
headcut has only about 6 feet to travel
before the dann breaches. Removing the
pond will eliminate a large source of
sediment and pollutants from the Browns
Summit Creek system.
No channel crossings are proposed for
Reach R4.
Page 31

Reach R5 — Enhancement
Work along Reach R5 will involve
Enhancement Level 11 practices to
maintain stability of the channel. The
existing channel is severely incised but
bank erosion is isolated and limited.
Consequently,' proposes to install
one grade control structure, plant a riparian
buffer, and permanently exclude livestock.
The spring at the head of the reach will be
incorporated in the project area.- A cattle
crossing -will be established above the
project reach- so that there will be no break
in the enhanced channel:
Reach R6 Enhahcesnnent
Work along Reach R6 will involve an
Enhancement Level 1 approach- to remove .
the existing 'pond--and. stabilize the eroding
channel below it. Removing the pond may
be considered: as.. restoration. but the,
channel is clearly intermittent below - it
Consequently, raising the channel bed is
not proposed. Instead the channel banks will be sloped, matted, and seeded. Riparian buffers of at least 50 feet will
be established and livestock will be permanently excluded from the reach. This will remove the water quality
stressors from the reach and provide for much improved water quality throughout the project area, as well as
decreased erosion and sediment loss from bank erosion.
Reach T1— Restoration
Work on Reach T 1 will involve a Priority
Level l restoration approach. Priority
Level 11 restoration will only be needed
for a short distance to transition to raise,-
the streambed to a Priority Level I depth,..
The restored channel will follow the low
point of the valley, as it currently does
not, and it will tie in to the Reach R2 at
its newly restored elevation. The
primary source of impairment is
livestock access and permanent exclusion
fencing will end this practice.
Rock and wood structures will be
incorporated into the channel where
appropriate to promote stable bcdform
sequences and habitat diversity.
-M Page 32

Reach T2 — Enhancement
Work on Reach T2 will involve an Enhancement Level II approach to stabilize the channel through mainly planting
and livestock exclusion. The lower end of the reach, which is currently incised, will be raised to connect with the
Reach R2R3 floodplain and restored main,channel. A grade control structure will be incorporated to prevent a
headcut from forming at the confluence with the main channel.
Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be established along all ofReach T2.
Photo 14. Cattle congregating around the pond at the head of Reach
R4. Cattle have been seen wallowing in this pond on multiple occasions.
Algal growth is evident in the photo.
Reach n — Restoration
Work on Reach T3 will involve a Priority
Level I restoration to connect with the
restored main channel at the interface of
Reaches R3 and R4. The targeted
section Reach T3 is currently extremely
incised from a headcut that has migrated
from. the main channel through the reach.
The bed elevation will be raised so that it
ties to the restored main channel.
Structures will be irncorporated to provide
bedforni diversity and prevent future
headcutting: Riparian buffers in excess
of 50 feet will be established along all of
Reach T3
Cattle Exclusion
As previously described, direct cattle
access and the resulting erosion,
sediment, and pollutants are one of the
primary stressors for much of the Browns
Summit Creek Restoration Project Site.
Permanent cattle exclusion will be
provided with woven wire and /or barbed
wire fencing, both to N RCS standards as
required by the RFP, around all proposed
mitigation reaches, restored wetland
areas, and. riparian buffers, with the
exception of those reaches to which
cattle lack access.
Page 33

Conservation Easement Boundary Marking
Immediately following site construction and planting, the conservation easement boundaries will be permanently
marked and posted. All boundary marking, posting and signage will be in accordance with the applicable NCEEP,
SPO and State of North Carolina standards.
Restoration of Riparian Buffers
Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet from
the top of banks will be restored along all
proposed stream restoration and
enhancement reaches, as previously
discussed. The proposed vegetative plant __.:.-
selection for stream and wetland buffer'_`
areas will incorporate native species that
follow those suggested by Schafale and
Weakley (1990) and tolerances cited in
WRP Technical Note VN- RS -4.1 (1997),
The natural vegetation community will
include the appropriate strata (canopy,
understory, shrub, and herbaceous
species) based on an appropriate
reference community. Within the four
different strata, especially for the canopy,
a variety of species will be planted to
create an appropriate successional
planting strategy as shown in Table 3.
i -' - -- - - -- I Additionally, moderately - tolerant species
are able to survive on soils that are
saturated or flooded for several months during the growing season. Flood- tolerant species are able to survive on
sites in which the soil is saturated or flooded for long. indefinite periods during the growing season (WRP, 1997).
Tree species planted across the stream banks, wetland, floodplain, and upland areas will include a mixture of
appropriate native species for the local piedmont region and based on wetness conditions. Planting will be done at a
density to achieve the vegetative success criteria outlined in Part 5.7.
-� Page 34

Estimated Buffer Widths (mid - successional or older)
Reach No buffer 10 feet 20 feet X30 feet Lengths ..
R1 LB 85% 15% 996
R1 RB 35% 65% 996..
R2 LB 10% 90% 570
R2 RB 40% 60% 570
R3 45% 55% 1,400
R4 45% 25% 30% 1.030
R5 35% 65% 430 ` t i �_ ` t T rr , He! ch R1
R6 77% 23% 330
T1 100% 144
T2 37% 63% 325
T3 75% 25% 93
Reach:T1
cumulative sum
LB 2,736 1,760 822 10,636 a
51.4% 33.1% 15.5%
RB 2,409 1,611 11298 Reach R2
45.3% 30.3% 24.4%
M buffer width (ft)
Google Earth and knowledge of site assisted in ar
+ Reach T2
LB 7.9
.'0
RB 10.4
`\
MM1
T
�
Longitudinal Forest Continuity (Existing)\'
1 T
�a°,�•
Discontinuous Length (fl)�
� fJr c t. H
t
Reach ID Length (ft)
Left Bank
Right Bank
R1 996
840
350
R2 623
150
450
4
R3 1,398
650
650
..AYCS..ix ...
Reach R3
R4 1,030
480
480
Figure 16
Cary. Noah Carolm 27M
aker 9 Phom: 919.40.6408 .�
R5 427
120
120
Feet
Browns Summit Cr. Site
R6 330
200
200,ra..e�s
T1 144
144
144
{�"
T2 324
240
240
jy.•,
/
T3 93
Total 5365
Percentaae
70
2894
53.9%
70
2704
50.4%
h
Reach
Note: Scale in figure is difficult to assess buffer co
Google Earth and knowledge of site assisted in ar
.'0
T
3.
V
1 T
�a°,�•
'�i� lA'
� fJr c t. H
t
Conservation Easernen
4
SWI
..AYCS..ix ...
,
.,,
:,,
Figure 16
Cary. Noah Carolm 27M
aker 9 Phom: 919.40.6408 .�
Riparian
I'm 919.463.5490
Feet
Browns Summit Cr. Site

HE
r1l
= Conservation Easement
bra
4A
I -A
Reach RI
I
R �h_
laph T�l, N
IF
Reach R2
Reach T2 Fy
'10
Reach R3
Reach T3
Ir
j a x�`' ffY Reach R4
Reach vA
= 7� " . 1'*
iff
Reach R6 fit RF
f
.7
Reach R5
Naha I Sakor Engincering, Inc.
1111 R.­, P.,l—, 0 250 500 1,000 Figure 2
Cary, N-11, Cvdi". 27518
Waker Phone: Topographic Map
7—
Fax: [phone]
Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site

1, hSS� y t
CcB
r.
a AR �. .
�Y L.
Gcc
Or
1
• - ti!(f I`. Erg Ti
Yy e # NNN
Reach R1
Y
Conservation Easement
A ,
ft S� �' { 4 y-.•ti , 1
I S Y }
Reach T1
CeR2 f•
yr t �t CCC
Awe" }
l F r CeC2,
Reach R2
MM
Reach T2
u
Reach R3
QeB2 4 i
r
i
MgB2
` �V S"a4
� a
i Reach �3 '
a J�„ McC2
Ch
,r
CcB Reach R4 ,fir
Ce .
Reach R6 y
CCq
tf' CCB
ApB-
k �1
Reach R5i,
Hh6
CeB2 ": e
r•' r
ApB
Michael Baker Enflineadou, Inc- 0 250 500 1,000 Figure 3
009D Regency Pafkvzay
'ry,W0 Soils Map
�, r hry.: 9rh C53.548 27518
Phone: [phone]
fax: [phone] Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site

• ,: � -�, .. � _ r 'fit �f �'� � *�'r I .f
Conservation Easement
1
r1 P
Reach R1
,
�
I f..
,f rl
.z •, �. z , r + ,� �,// � ( y Reach T1 �;� Ac^. ..
< 6 r f 9 � f �: \/ ...� •� a _� <
+ � Reach R2
`i p1�F1r `v t r .I' Reach T2 _
{ �: � � .9f ". , �p , 'tie ! 11 ` 11 Z�•�1,
Note: The site contains no � J�1 � ; +,� �1 !�� 'f - � - ` ` " �• � �:
i f FEMA- mapped floodplains. f�; f,l 4,,
'+��' x te+
} Reach R3` 4 , i r'
X'j,r *�3 y,1 r �, } �ijr' 1f'.,,,'fll' �, -:' •, ti' vi �� ^ t.
Reach T3�
t +]!
+li 1���•. � , , f °r ;�i
k
R4
t Reach R6 y• 1,
I l
1 f 5
f
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. 0 M 500 1,000
8999 Regency Pafkway Figure
Suite 600
,,. C y,Nr 'Cardea27518 Floodplain Map
Phone: [phone] y
Par 91946,15490 Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site

Proposed Mitigation Features
Priority 1 Restoration
-- Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Conservation Easement
1 I 1 l
J'
} Reach R1 t t1�V,
Reach T1
/ t
(I ti
Td
I
#
I
�
.. :..--
Reach R2
1 I 1 l
J'
} Reach R1 t t1�V,
j1, \\ r
t , k , ..t• Reach R3 t f +�"
I I'll I I � r F'4-x n 4, —•�.- , >•*
Reach T3
Reach T1
/ t
Td
I
#
I
�
.. :..--
Reach R2
1
Reach T2
9
Reach R5
A
._
•1
, 1X
j1, \\ r
t , k , ..t• Reach R3 t f +�"
I I'll I I � r F'4-x n 4, —•�.- , >•*
Reach T3
Lin F
l,"
Reach R4
k
c
i
k 1 l 43'
.al+l i5(:3�1111� G�
W^^.^°..'
• .+Y i r �h1s
Mi,llaol Baker Engi -11n9. lnc. f=igure 6b
ODOO Dcnq Pa,kvray
5,40 . Cery,N.&Caroli -275,B 0 250 500 1,000 Option B
8463 5400 59.5499
F- 918.453 Proposed Mitigaton Featur
Far. 81
Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site
/ t
Td
I
#
I
�
Reach R6
c1 i
Reach R5
Lin F
l,"
Reach R4
k
c
i
k 1 l 43'
.al+l i5(:3�1111� G�
W^^.^°..'
• .+Y i r �h1s
Mi,llaol Baker Engi -11n9. lnc. f=igure 6b
ODOO Dcnq Pa,kvray
5,40 . Cery,N.&Caroli -275,B 0 250 500 1,000 Option B
8463 5400 59.5499
F- 918.453 Proposed Mitigaton Featur
Far. 81
Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site

o DWQ Stream Assessment Form 4.11
Bank Erosion Assessment
Bank Height Ratio Assessment (additional) `' !r'` ` Reach R1
11 rrr
0 Substrate Assessment
Surveyed Cross Sections
Vnom. I
jj 11A
Conservation Easement
Reach
c,i� r� i� r7s � ' -� �F,• }r_���.. 3�5�' ,rir i t�' • %t' r 5 '
Reach R2
�� � '' .z �7 •mot � `��� � R�>~ r r1
I,
\ I ,
A
V\
t
1 �s
'. IV 1
Reach
r / dttfl
Z, jt ,
Kit
Reach T3
II -4
.,�
i f} Y1
r YL ( r a 1'
i (3 i it f Y ~ Reach R4 a. EF , r Z' F Xyl
ti
1 1i ;!� r {�r�
Reach V
X75{ f147,
IF
Reach Reach R5 1
MlclrW Bakur Engineering, Inc.
8888 0 ?50 500 �I ('tioa
- a p gParkway I,V Figure i - Pre
Suite GOG
Cary, Nth Ceroliiu 27518 +_•� ^� monitoring Features
Phere:
F- 9199.4188.34883.858 488 Feet Browns Summit C
r. Site

Incision
Not Incised (BHR -- 1.0)
Moderate (BHR < 1.3)
Severe (BHR > 1.5)
® Headcut
Surveyed Cross Sections
Conservation Easement
No bedrock present on site.
Incision
Reach
Length (ft) Not Incised Moderate
Severe
R1
996 37% 63%
-
R2
623
100 %
R3
1,398
100%
R4
1,030
100%
R5
427
100%
R6
330
100%
T1
144
100%
T2
324 50
50%
T3
93
100%
j Ir
Reach R5
s
j rl
6llchael ency P fk%"y oring, Inc. 0 200 A 00 800
- 690e Regency Peihw9y 'i V
� SWIe Oee
Cary, Ra9r CmUnn 27518
Ph— 919.463.5196
Far: 919.463.6109 Feet
Reach R1
Reach T1
ti , . rd tiart
Reach R2
.;: Reach T2
Reach R4
Figure 10
Channel Stability Map
Incision and Bedrock Control
Browns Summit Cr. Site

Bank Scour
Reach Length (ft) 0% 10%
20%
30% 40% 50%
60% 70% 80% 90%
R1 996 20%
29%
51%
R2 623 31%
25% 44%
R3 1,308
19%
59% 22%
R4 1,030
10%
641% 7% 19%
RS 427
100%
R6 330 50%
50%
T1 144
100%
T2 324 57%
43%
T3 93
100%
Note: bank erosion percentages were considered to be
part of the chanml length
If erosion was evident Qi either streambank.
AP71 Ill k x _0
Bank Erosion W
0%
!­=F
10% ­X
20%
ON
30%
40%
50%
60%
I �W_
40
70%
........ 80%
90%
%
Headcut %
Surveyed Cross Sections F
Conservation Easement
1 10�
V,
No bedrock present on site.
N�
Q-1
P..rh R1 "A"N
0,
Reach T1
tr Reach R2
z
WI;,
p
Reach T72
Reach R3
7's wi i Reach T3
A
----------
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
------------ Reach R4
V
V.
P
x
W 'A
800 Figure 11
Channel Stability Map
Streambank Erosion
Browns Summit Cr. Site

Reach
Floodplain Alteration
Reach Channel Altered Unaltered
Reach fit
R1 100%
R2 43% 57 %
R3 80% 20%
R4 60% 40%
R5 100 %6
.J R6 100% I
T1 100% I
T2 100% i, Reach R3
T3 100%
WOW. '(
1'• `' ' i Reach T3 1
Reach R4
Reach R6 m t:' 1 ` ' A
.tea , '• '� 1 E�:r ;:
r
Reach R5
WWI
5 �
}
MOW Baker E091neorin8, In..
S 8000RO0encYPalkvM 0 200 400 800 Figure 12
Su10600
,. ' Cary,NonhC— fina27518 Floodplain Alteration Map
Ph—: 919.487.6488
F.. 919.463.549° Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site
Floodplain Alteration
a Floodplain apparently altered
!x Floodplain apparently unaltered
Reach
Floodplain Alteration
Reach Channel Altered Unaltered
Reach fit
R1 100%
R2 43% 57 %
R3 80% 20%
R4 60% 40%
R5 100 %6
.J R6 100% I
T1 100% I
T2 100% i, Reach R3
T3 100%
WOW. '(
1'• `' ' i Reach T3 1
Reach R4
Reach R6 m t:' 1 ` ' A
.tea , '• '� 1 E�:r ;:
r
Reach R5
WWI
5 �
}
MOW Baker E091neorin8, In..
S 8000RO0encYPalkvM 0 200 400 800 Figure 12
Su10600
,. ' Cary,NonhC— fina27518 Floodplain Alteration Map
Ph—: 919.487.6488
F.. 919.463.549° Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site

f S F I♦ '' f �.Y J ��`
1 �,
Water Quality Stressor riu y� �r � t r1 'V 'p ? d
Direct Livestock Access and Narrow Buffed
Direct Livestock Access
Stormwater Input t„
•j ,. r75 �
Narrow Buffer knaErE
�.
$ A1214 �° of ,� i �Iy,daf 5 t Reach T1 a'
.:14,rl,yr'f
� `6 vra
>�y ... Reach R2
� � 1 tlr
Siti ':z h1:�iurY� ri:j
Reach T2
Water Quality Slrussor
Reach Livestock Plus Narrow Buffer Uvestock Access Only Stormwater Input Narrow Buffer'G
R1 100 %:,
R2 100%
R3 100%
R4 37% 45% 18% II{ r5�
R5 100% Iz ;�''�3¢r
R6 100% i o-�: a t s•
T1 100% r ''
T2 100%
T3 100
Note: Uveslock have direct access to all but one reach
Narrow buffers were noted ff one of the buffers was less Ulan 30 ft.
At buffers within the project are deficient even It they are not narrow (e.g., lack understory).
T t
Reach R6
Mlcflael Baker Engineering, Inc. 0 250 500 I 00�
SM Renc
egy PerkWey 1
$U9. 000
alaker Cary, Neeh Catd- 27518
Ph— 919.483.5498
Fax: [phone] Feet
y6
..'�
Reach R3
e �
{
A.
i
-tG}
Reach T3 '
L.
Reach R4
gA
1
yf
�A N
h
Figure 13 - Water
Quality Stressor Map
Browns Summit Cr. Site

Estimated Buffer Widths
Reach No buffer
(mid - successional or older);
10 feet 20 feet
X30 feet
/,p��
Length
RB
LB 2,736
1,760
822
10,636
e
R1 LB
85%
15%
996
51.4%
33.1%
R1 RB
R2 LB
35%
10%
65%
90°%
996
570
1,611
30.3%
ti I -' }
R2 RB
40%
Left Bank Right
60%
570
R1
996
f ` {
350
R3
45%
55%
150
1,400
R3
1,398
R4
45%
25%
30%
1,030
480
480
f
427
R5
35%
65%
R6
430
200
200
S
1
Reach R1
R6
Ti
77%
100%
23%
330
144
1 !
240
4s•
4, _i'A r +`- -� `„?�i':�
T3
93
70
70••
Total
5365
2894
`A
11
tijjl
T2
37%
63%
50.4%
325
)
t
T3
75%
25%
93
Reach T1
cumulative
7.9
sum
RB
LB 2,736
1,760
822
10,636
e
'
51.4%
33.1%
15.50%
Forest Continuity (Existing)
RB 2,409
45.3%
1,611
30.3%
1,298
24.4%
Reach R2
mean buffer width (ft)
LB
7.9
RB
10.4
y
Longitudinal
Forest Continuity (Existing)
Discontinuous Length (ft)
Reach ID
Length (ft)
Left Bank Right
Bank
R1
996
840
350
R2
623
150
450
R3
1,398
650
650
R4
1,030
480
480
R5
427
120
120
R6
330
200
200
r
T1
144
144
144
T2
324
240
240
T3
93
70
70••
Total
5365
2894
2704
Percentage
53.9%
50.4%
Note: Scale in figure is difficult to assess buffer conditions.
Google Earth and knowledge of site assisted in analysis.
Reach R6
1S
D.rt.
Reach R3
Reach T3
Reach R4
Conservation Easement Ream R5 • : 3 r _ i µ
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
BOW HeBency flannmy 0 200 400 800 Figure 16
Cry Nh403.rAa2751B Riparian Buffer Analysis
Phone: 919.493.WBa
Fex 9I9.463.5490
Feet Browns Summit Cr. Site