The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20190157 Ver 1_PerryHill_100093_MY2_2022_20230123ID#* 20190157 Select Reviewer: Ryan Hamilton Initial Review Completed Date 01/23/2023 Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/23/2023 Version* 1 Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* Type of Mitigation Project:* Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset (Select all that apply) Project Contact Information Contact Name:* Jeremiah Dow Project Information ID#:* 20190157 Existing ID# Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank Project Name: Perry Hill Mitigation Site County: Orange Document Information O Yes O No Email Address:* jeremiah.dow@ncdenr.gov Version:* 1 Existing Version Mitigation Document Type:* Mitigation Monitoring Report File Upload: PerryHill_100093_MY2_2022.pdf 12.39MB Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted... Signature Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow Signature: * MONITORING YEAR 2 PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Orange County, NC ANNUAL REPORT Neuse River Basin FINAL HUC 03020201 DMS Project No. 100093 January 2023 DMS Contract No. 7744 DMS RFP No. 16-007576 USACE Action ID No. 2019-00125 DWR Project No. 2019-0157 Data Collection Dates: January -October 2022 PREPARED FOR: if NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 W 1LDLANDS �.: [.i I r.: I.:. n N I : January 4, 2023 Jeremiah Dow NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services 217 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Subject: DIMS Comments on Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Report DMS Project Number 100093, DMS Contract 7744 Dear Mr. Dow, We have reviewed the comments on the MY2 Report for the above referenced project dated December 22, 2022. Below are responses to each of the comments. For your convenience, the comments are reprinted with responses in italics. 1. In the stream report Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits, please break down the lost stream credits in the footnote or incorporate into the Table. 20 SMUs on Perry Branch Reach 4 and 5.17 SMUs on Perry Branch Reach 2. A footnote has been added to Stream report Table 1 to break down the credit reduction by stream reach. 2. In the buffer report, please do the same on Table 1 as requested above for the stream report. Show in the footnote the actual square footage and amount of buffer credit lost by reach due to the water line. The original square footage and buffer credits have been added back into Table 1 to show credit reductions. A footnote has been added to break down the credit reduction by mitigation activity to match the way credits are broken out in Table 1. 3. If UT1 does not meet minimum flow requirements in MY3, we recommend that Wildlands determine the linear extent of the channel that should be considered at -risk and include in the MY3 report. Wildlands has taken note of this comment for MY3. 4. There is a typo in the flow plot summary table in appendix D digital submission, please fix this in next year's submission; one gauge was omitted due to another being reported twice. This typo was not present in the report version of the summary table. The original flow gauge on UT1 is labeled "UT1 Reach 1 — In -Stream Flow Gauge". The flow gauge that was installed upstream on UT1 months later to provide supplemental information is labeled "UT1 Reach 1 — In -Stream Flow Gauge 8". The names are very Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 919.851.9986 • 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 • Raleigh, NC 27609 WILDLANDS C"G I NE[RING similar, but they are separate gauges. An updated copy of the excel workbook is included in the digital files again. If you have any questions, please contact me by phone (919) 851-9986, or by email (jlorch@wild landseng.com). Sincerely, r Jason Lorch, Monitoring Coordinator Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 919.851.9986 • 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 • Raleigh, NC 27609 PREPARED BY: W WILDLANDS E N G I N E E R I N G 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 Jason Lorch jlorch@wildlandseng.com Phone: 919.851.9986 PERRY HILL MITIGATION SITE Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW.......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits...................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives.....................................................................................................1-3 1.3 Project Attributes.......................................................................................................................1-4 Section 2: Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment...............................................................................2-1 2.1 Vegetative Assessment..............................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern.....................................................................................................2-1 2.3 Stream Assessment....................................................................................................................2-1 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern...........................................................................................................2-2 2.5 Hydrology Assessment...............................................................................................................2-2 2.6 Adaptive Management Plan......................................................................................................2-2 2.7 Monitoring Year 2 Summary......................................................................................................2-3 Section3: REFERENCES...................................................................................................................3-1 TABLES Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits.....................................................................................................1-1 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements......................................................1-3 Table 3: Project Attributes.........................................................................................................................1-5 Figures Figures 1-1b Current Condition Plan View APPENDICES Appendix A Visual Assessment Data Table 4 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Stream Photographs Culvert Crossing Photographs Vegetation Plot Photographs Stream Area of Concern Repair Photographs — UT1 Rock Sill Repair Vegetation Areas of Concern Updated Photographs — Conservation Easement Encroachment Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data Table 6 Vegetation Plot Data Table 7 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data Cross -Section Plots Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 9 Cross -Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Appendix D Hydrology Data Table 10 Bankfull Events Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL Table 11 Rainfall Summary Recorded Bankfull Events Plots Table 12 Recorded In -Stream Flow Events Summary Recorded In -Stream Flow Events Plots Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Info Table 13 Project Activity and Reporting History Table 14 Project Contact Table Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW The Perry Hill Mitigation Site (Site) is located in Orange County, approximately three miles northwest of Hillsborough, NC. The Site drains to Corporation Lake on the Eno River, which then flows to Falls Lake. Corporation Lake is a water supply reservoir on the Eno River, which is classified as Water Supply Waters (WS-II) and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). Falls Lake is classified as Water Supply Waters (WS-IV), as well as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). Table 3 presents information related to the project attributes. 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits The Site is located on one parcel and a conservation easement was recorded on 26.88 acres. Mitigation work within the Site included restoration and enhancement I and II of perennial and intermittent stream channels (Figures 1-1b). In October 2021, waterlines were installed by the tenant farmer within the conservation easement, parallel to the internal crossings. This work was done without consulting Wildlands. In an effort to find the most reasonable and least disruptive solution, it was decided that the area containing the waterlines would be marked as a maintenance area and credits reduced accordingly. This will allow for maintenance in the future and avoid any further easement encroachments. Approximately 20 feet (or a total of 0.19 acres) was added alongside both internal crossings as a maintenance area. No credit is claimed in the maintenance area and project credits were reduced accordingly. Table 1 below shows updated stream credits by reach and the total amount of stream credits expected at closeout. Wildlands is working with a surveyor to mark the area. Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ..o Ell , Mitigation Mitigation Project As -Built Mitigation Restoration Plan Ratio Credits Comments Segment Footage Category Level Footage (X:1) Stream Full Channel Restoration, Perry Branch 321 323 Warm R 1.0 321.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Reach 1 Exclusion Grade Control Structures, 344 342 Warm Ell 3.5 98.286 Invasive Control, Planted Perry Branch Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Reach 2 20 20 N/A N/A 0.0 N/A Maintenance Area 60 60 N/A N/A 0.0 N/A Culvert Crossing Full Channel Restoration, Perry Branch 691 694 Warm R 1.0 691.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Reach 3 Exclusion Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-1 PROJECT Mitigation Mitigation Project As -Built Mitigation Restoration Plan Ratio Credits Comments Segment Footage Category Level Footage (X:1) Stream Full Channel Restoration, 634 642 Warm R 1.0 634.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion 20 20 N/A N/A 0.0 N/A Maintenance Area Perry Branch Reach 4 60 60 N/A N/A 0.0 N/A Culvert Crossing Full Channel Restoration, 1,284 1,297 Warm R 1.0 1,284.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Full Channel Restoration, UT1 Reach 1 285 285 Warm R 1.5 190.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Full Channel Restoration, UT1 Reach 2 291 293 Warm R 1.5 194.000 Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Bank Stabilization, Planted UT2 Reach 1 221 223 Warm Ell 2.5 88.400 Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Grade Control Structures, UT2 Reach 2 947 941 Warm El 2.5 378.800 Bank Stabilization, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Grade Control Structures, UT3 343 319 Warm Ell 2.5 137.200 Bank Stabilization, Planted Buffer, Livestock Exclusion Total: 4,016.686 *Credits updated in Monitoring Year 2 to reflect the addition of the maintenance areas and resulting reduction in credits. Twenty LF of stream fall within each of the maintenance areas, reducing credits on Perry Branch Reach 2 by 5.714 credits and Perry Branch Reach 4 by 20 credits. Restoration Level Stream Warm Cool Cold Restoration 3,314.000 Enhancement 1 378.800 Enhancement 11 323.886 Preservation Totals 4,016.686 Total Stream Credit 4,016.686 Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-2 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits. Table 2 below describes the project goals and objectives along with the expected outcomes to water quality and ecological processes. Additionally, performance criteria for project objectives and a summary of the related monitoring data results for Monitoring Year 2 (MY2) are included. Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Uplift Monitoring Results Visually inspect Reduce and control the perimeter, Exclude Exclude livestock from sediment inputs; livestock (i.e. streams and riparian reduce and manage Exclusion fencing is as well asinstalled cattle) from areas by installing nutrient inputs; and interior, of the maintained. Site to ensure Cattle are excluded project fencing around project contribute to Livestock remain there are no from project streams. streams and area and/or removing protection of or adjacent livestock from the improvement to a excluded from the signs of riparian areas. Site. Water Supply project area. livestock Waterbody. entering the Site. Construct and enhance stream Cross-section channels that will monitoring will Reduce sediment Entrenchment ratio be assessed Improve the maintain a stable inputs; contribute to over 2.2 and bank during MY1, stability of pattern and profile protection of or height ratios below MY2, MY3, Minor deviations from stream considering the improvement to a 1.2 with visual MY5, and MY7 design. channels. hydrologic and Water Supply assessments showing and visual sediment inputs to the system, the landscape Waterbody. stability. inspections will setting, and the be assessed watershed conditions. annually. Install habitat features such as constructed riffles, cover logs, and There is no Improve brush toes on Improve aquatic performance instream restored/enhanced communities in N/A N/A habitat. streams. Add woody project streams. standard for this materials to channel metric. beds. Construct pools of varying depth. Four bankfull events Reduce and control in separate years within monitoring Reconstruct stream sediment inputs; period. 30-days of Bankfull events were channels with reduce and manage continuous surface Pressure documented on UT1, Reconnect appropriate bankfull nutrient inputs; water flow will be transducers UT2, and Perry channels with dimensions and depth contribute to documented recording flow Branch. Greater than floodplains. protection of or 30 days of consecutive relative to the existing improvement to a annually along elevations. flow was recorded on floodplain. Water Supply intermittent UT2 but not UT1. Waterbody. restoration or enhancement I reaches. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-3 Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Convert active livestock pasture to Reduce sediment Survival rate of 320 forested riparian inputs; provide a stems per acre at One hundred buffers along all Site canopy to shade MY3, 260 planted square meter Restore and streams. Protect and streams and reduce stems per acre at vegetation All 14 vegetation plots enhance plots are placed native enhance existing thermal loadings; MY5, and 210 stems on 2% of the have a planted stem floodplain forested riparian contribute to per acre at MY7. planted area of density greater than vegetation. buffers. Treat invasive protection of or Vegetation plots will the Site and 320 stems per acre. species during improvement to a average 7-ft in height monitored monitoring period to Water Supply in MY5 and 10-ft in permit establishment Waterbody. height in MY7. annually. of native plantings. Ensure that Visually inspect No easement development and encroachments have Permanently agricultural uses that the perimeter occurred in MY2. The protect the Establish a would damage the Prevent easement of the Site to areas affected by the Site from conservation Site or reduce the encroachment. ensure no waterline installation harmful uses. easement on the Site. benefits of the easement in October 2021 will encroachment project are be marked as a prevented. is occurring. maintenance area. 1.3 Project Attributes The project includes one parcel that has been managed as pasture and/or crop production, as indicated by aerial photographs from 1938 to 2017. Portions of the upper watershed historically have been forested. The stream crossings which existed prior to construction on Perry Branch were installed before 1938. Forested areas within the headwaters of UT2 and UT3 were cleared between 1938 and 1950. The high -voltage utility transmission line that crosses the downstream extent of Perry Branch was constructed between 1938 and 1950. Between 1950 and 1955, two ponds were constructed on the project parcel, including one within the headwaters of Perry Branch Reach 1 and the other an offline pond adjacent to Perry Branch Reach 4 within the lower portion of the watershed. Table 3 below and Table 8 in Appendix C present additional information on pre -restoration conditions. Project Activity and Reporting History, as well as the Project Contact Table are included in Appendix E. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 1-4 2 \ \ \ 3 3 » m / � >. \ § m s \ Ln / k \ / a)/ 3 3 a a / \ / � / v 2 '� t a - ) \ / \ £ $ 3 § ~s _ � r t 2 / » ® � G /_ u ) k m _ \ -- / E » S / ®/ a t \ 3 / m { _ @ = = \ m _ / / } / / § % \ \ 2 ) � � ' \ j - \ \ \ G °2 - a2 2 \ - \ \ \ 2 \ \ 7 / _ % u u z - \_ . _ § \ y t ƒ \ / E 2 . % 2 & 0 u . � 9 m _ £ # 2 \ \ _ E S 7 - 2 2 > '2 \ m g ® ' ƒ m - u G @ e - E _ # # = $ 3 e \ 0 2 @ § § u t u® _ a)° f \ \ \ k % 3 0 / : $ § » [ m m 6 \ / _ » _ _ _ < 2 ± / \ _ % / : / b % \ / \ \ \ \ \ u # ƒ ƒ / \ \ / on / G / S LU ( § \ - % f ^ \ u ) ± a E = : @ / O 7 2 &/ E/ k\ ° ƒ p t("10 k \ ° E z 7 ` •- - ® § / / § \ / � \ \E } \ o } { 2 { 5 7 2 [ \ @ .§ . & z g . = t _ _ @ y / G - _ / k 0- = c = < _ = j E ± _ 3 \ �ƒ u k § (N cu ) 0 � V. \ \ - \ tu / > 0 2 4 \ 5 u E 0 ~ k§ _ 0 z z ® m _0\ _ g % _ t 3 / \ 7 / ƒ s 3 7 \ 2 � 2 / I 2 .g 3 m - z \ ' _ . _ u . co . m � § ® . 2 . � _ 2 CL « ® \ \ < \ § § / E � � § \ \ u - k _u \ \ ® f \ b 6 6 ® u< 2 § k / 2 7 7 \ ./ ® \ E / \ • \ • \ § / \ % \ 6 2 / / _ ) @ �\ m\ » » ( \ �< / \ / \ k » » ƒ / \ \ / 3 3 E \ \ 3ƒ /\ 3 / J �ƒ Section 2: Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted during MY2 to assess the condition of the project. The vegetation and stream success criteria for the Site follow the approved performance standards presented in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands Engineering, 2020). Performance criteria for vegetation, stream, and hydrologic assessment are located above in Section 1.2 Table 3: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements. Methodology for annual monitoring is described in the MYO As - Built Baseline Report (Wildlands, 2021). 2.1 Vegetative Assessment The MY2 vegetative survey was completed in September 2022. Vegetation monitoring resulted in an average stem density of 479 planted stems per acre across all vegetation plots, which is well above the interim success criteria of 320 stems per acre required at MY3. All fourteen vegetation plots individually met the interim success criteria and stem densities for each plot range from 324 to 729 planted stems per acre. Herbaceous vegetation is growing well and desirable volunteer tree species such as common hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) are establishing themselves. Refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table and Appendix B for Vegetation Plot Data and Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table. 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern As was discussed above, an additional 20 feet (a total of 0.19 acres) was added alongside both internal crossings as a maintenance area due to the installation of waterlines in October 2021. The affected area was seeded, and herbaceous vegetation has grown over the disturbance. The soil is stabilized, and Wildlands does not anticipate any future problems in these areas. Recent photographs showing vegetation cover are included in Vegetation Areas of Concern Updated Photographs in Appendix A. While planted trees are growing well, pasture grasses are still thick. To ensure planted trees remain competitive, herbicide ring sprays were applied around the base of trees where necessary in April 2022. Additionally, follow up treatments were done on the intermittent Tree -of Heaven (Ailanthus altissima) stems via cut stump application of triclopyr in August 2022. Occasional resprouts of Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) were also treated in March 2022 in the wooded areas along UT2, UT3, and Perry Branch. While waiting for the live stakes to grow and shade the stream channels, in -stream vegetation was treated with a foliar spray of glyphosate in August 2022 on UT1, UT2 and sections of Perry Branch. 2.3 Stream Assessment Morphological surveys for MY2 were conducted in April 2022. All streams within the Site are stable and functioning as designed. Cross -sections show minimal change in max depth and bankfull cross -sectional area. Bank height ratios are less than 1.2 and entrenchment ratios are over 2.2. Cross -sections show slight deviations from as -built due to sediment deposition and establishment of vegetation. Some sediment deposition in pools is natural and expected. Pebble count data is no longer required per the September 29, 2021 Technical Work Group Meeting and is not included in this report. The IRT reserves the right to request pebble count data/particle distributions if deemed necessary during the monitoring period. Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table, Current Condition Plan View maps, Stream Photographs, and Culvert Crossing Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for the morphological data and cross-section plots. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-1 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern Wildlands continued to observe the lack of flow in the short stretch of UT1 Reach 1 through the winter and spring of 2022. When gauge data and observations did not show an increase in flow throughout the wettest part of the year (see Section 2.5 Hydrology Assessment Section below), it was decided that repairs were necessary. In September 2022, a rock sill was repaired by reinstalling filter fabric and backfill material on the upstream face. The original fabric and backfill material are believed to have failed to seal this structure, resulting in stream flow going subsurface. The repair was completed to return the structure to the original design condition. This does not leave much to see on the surface, however pictures with a red arrow pointing to the area of disturbance in the channel are included in Appendix A — Stream Area of Concern Repair Photographs. Approximately five linear feet of channel were impacted (see Figure 1b for location). Wildlands will continue to monitor flow in MY3. 2.5 Hydrology Assessment By the end of MY7, four bankfull events must have occurred in separate years within the restoration and enhancement I reaches. Bankfull events were recorded on Perry Branch and UT2 on May 241h, and UT1 on May 23rd, 2022. Bankfull was recorded on Perry Branch on a gauge installed in January 2022 (Perry Branch Reach 4 crest gauge B in Figure 1b) to gather more information on the stream. All streams on the Site recorded a bankfull event during MY2. In addition, the presence of baseflow must be documented on restored or enhanced intermittent reaches (UT1 Reach 1 and UT2 Reach 2) for a minimum of 30 consecutive days during a normal precipitation year. UT2 Reach 2 exceeded baseflow criterion with 164 days of consecutive baseflow and 183 total days of flow. UT1 Reach 1 did not meet baseflow criteria this year. As in MY1, the original UT1 Reach 1 flow gauge recorded one day of flow. As mentioned in the previous section, repairs were completed on this small section of UT1 in response to continued low flow through the winter months. This area will continue to be monitored for the presence of baseflow in MY3. UT1 Reach 1 flow gauge B (Figure 1b) was installed upstream of the original flow gauge (in cross-section 8 in Figure 1b) in December 2021 to learn the extent of the low flow stretch on UT1 Reach 1. Twenty consecutive days and 92 total days of flow were recorded in MY2. While this is below the 30 consecutive day minimum, all gauges are taking a measurement every 30 minutes. If one reading during a 24-hour period falls below thalweg, the entire day does not count toward the consecutive days of flow. The UT1 Reach 1 flow gauge B flow events plot shows that most of the readings in January and half of February are above the thalweg (see the Recorded In -stream Flow Events Plots in Appendix D). Refer to Appendix D for Hydrology Summary Data. According to the National Integrated Drought Information System, Orange County was abnormally dry November 2021 through January 2022, a significant portion of the county was abnormally dry through March 2022, and again mid -June through mid -August, and all of September 2022 (NOAA, 2022). This likely had some effect on low baseflow of intermittent streams. 2.6 Adaptive Management Plan Wildlands plans to re -apply herbicide in rings around planted trees in areas of thick herbaceous competition and treat aggressive blackberry growth as needed in spring of 2023. Additionally, native permanent seed will be spread as a cover crop in areas where agricultural weeds are still dominant. Wildlands will continue to monitor for resprouts of invasive species, and additional treatments will be applied as necessary. Wildlands will continue to monitor flow on UT1 Reach 1 through flow gauges and visual observation. Data through MY3 will inform additional management actions if deemed necessary. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-2 2.7 Monitoring Year 2 Summary Vegetation across the Site is exceeding performance standards and is on track to achieve the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems per acre. Monitoring Year 2 data shows an average density of 479 planted stems per acre across vegetation plots. Resprouts of sporadic invasive vegetation were treated in MY2 and follow up treatments will be scheduled as necessary. Additional ring sprays will be applied around the base of trees in areas of high competition with herbaceous vegetation in spring 2023. Wildlands is working with a surveyor to mark the maintenance area. Project streams are stable and functioning. Cross -sections show limited deviations from as -built due to sediment deposition and vegetation establishment. Bankfull events were documented on UT1, UT2, and Perry Branch. UT2 achieved more than 30 consecutive days of baseflow, while UT1 did not. A short section of the UT1 Reach 1 channel was resealed in September 2022 to address the low flow. Wildlands will continue to observe this stretch of channel. Summary information and data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are available from DIMS upon request. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 2-3 Section 3: REFERENCES Breeding, R. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Accessed at: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Neuse_River_Basin/FINAL% 20RBRP% 20Neuse%202010_%2020111207%2000 RRECTED. pdf Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook. Harrelson, C.C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Accessed at: https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/nsaec/fishxing/fplibrary/Harrelson_l994_Stream_Channel_Reference _Sites_An_IIIustrated. pdf Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., & Wentworth, T.R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. Accessed at: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf NOAA. 2022. National Integrated Drought Information System. Drought Conditions for Orange County. Accessed at: https://www.drought.gov/states/north-carolina/county/orange Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books. United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC. United States Geological Survey. 1998. North Carolina Geology. Accessed at: http://www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/usgs/carolina.htm Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 2020. Perry Hill Mitigation Plan. DIMS, Raleigh, NC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 2021. Perry Hill Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report. DIMS, Raleigh, NC. Perry Hill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report - FINAL 3-1 e g". +\�' LAB E' j +Q � •c 4 O / {} Project Location Conservation Easement +•�G ; J - Existing Wetland +� 1 , Internal Crossing +. ❑ +� / MaintenanceArea(0.19acres) Stream Area of Concern - UT1 Rock Sill Repair Fixed Vegetation Plot -MY2 '•r • / ; 0 Criterion Met j Random Vegetation Plot -MY2 / I` / q • A.�� ♦ 0 Criterion Met � Stream Restoration Stream Enhancement I Stream Enhancement II No Credit Project Stream 4 •� `� y .l > • • '�� 4 . gI � No Credit Ephemeral Channel No Credit Headwater Conveyance Non -Project Stream 4111, Crass -Section - `�'• '� x _ y - / Fence Existing Utility Easement -- Existing Utility Line Existing Utility Pole Photo Point Reach Break Gate y t Figure 1, Current Condition Plan View W I L D L A N D S 0 30a 600 Feet Perry Hill Mitigation Site ENGINEERING I I DIMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Orange County, NC ww -r. :-- v - C C N w aEi � E x a Y 4 L N � C ❑ r N V 10 C C d °= W = m m A � "' 'p N JO y c ❑ m m E W E W Etg � � >w u E u` in Yn in z z LL H H V u m r G n 0 I I m f i,- LL A� zw a� Aw a i a i i� APPENDIX A. VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Perry Branch Reach 1 NuT;Fer Total Amount of MajograWnneCategory Performing As- i "tage I % Stable, Intended as Intended Assessed Stream Length ft 323 Assessed Bank Length 646 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour. 0 100% Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure Bank Toe Erosion appears likely. Does NOT 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. 2 2 100% Structure Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100% Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. Perry Branch Reach 3 and Reach 4 M" I WCa Number Total Amount of Major ChFnne Metric Stable, Number in Unstable Performing As -Built Footage Assessed Stream Length % Stable, Performing as Intended 2,653 Assessed Bank Length 5,306 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour. 0 100% Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure Bank Toe Erosion appears likely. Does NOT 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. 18 18 100% Structure Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 17 17 100% Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 UT1 Reach 1 and Reach 2 �h NuT;Fer Total Amount of Major C Metric Stable . , N u m be jr', unstable Performing As- i "tage as Intended I Assessed Stream Length % Stable, Performing as Intended ft 578 Assessed Bank Length 1,156 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour. 0 100% Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure Bank Toe Erosion appears likely. Does NOT 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. 18 18 100% Structure Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 7 7 100% Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. UT2 Reach 2 Total Amount of Major Channel Category Metric Stable Number in Unstable Performing As -Built Footage as Intended I Assessed Stream Length % Stable, Performing as Intended 941 Assessed Bank Length 1,882 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour. 0 100% Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure Bank Toe Erosion appears likely. Does NOT 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. 8 8 100% Structure Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 2 2 100% Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. Table S. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Planted Acreage 20.53 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Combined % of Planted Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 0 0% Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count Low Stem Density Areas 0.10 0 0% criteria. Total 0 0% Areas of Poor Growth Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 0 0% Rates Cumulative Total 0.0 0% Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. Easement Acreage 26.88 PW 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 Invasive Areas of Concern potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term or 0.10 0 0% community structure for existing communities. Invasive species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists Easement Encroachment of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common 0 Encroachments Noted Areas encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no none / 0 ac threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. Visual assessment was completed October 19, 2022. STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS PHOTO POINT 1 Perry Branch RI — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 1 Perry Branch Ri — downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 2 Perry Branch R2 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 2 Perry Branch R2 —downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 3 Perry Branch R3 — upstream (0411412022) PHOTO POINT 3 Perry Branch R3 — downstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 4 Perry Branch R3 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 4 Perry Branch R3 —downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 5 Perry Branch R3 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 5 Perry Branch R3 —downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 6 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) PHOTO POINT 6 Perry Branch R4 — downstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 7 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 7 Perry Branch R4— downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 8 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 8 Perry Branch R4— downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 9 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) PHOTO POINT 9 Perry Branch R4 — downstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 10 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 10 Perry Branch R4— downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 11 Perry Branch R4 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 11 Perry Branch R4— downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 12 UT1 R1— upstream (0411412022) Cr PHOTO POINT 12 UT1 R1— downstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 13 UT1 R2 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 13 UTi R2 — downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 RI — upstream (0411412022) L_ PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 — upstream (0411412022) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 RI — downstream (0411412022) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 — downstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 16 UT2 R2 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 16 UT2 R2 — downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 17 UT2 R2 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 17 UT2 R2 — downstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 — upstream (0411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 — upstream (0411412022) 1 PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 — downstream (0411412022) 1 1i Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Photographs CULVERT CROSSING PHOTOGRAPHS Perry Branch R2 — Looking Upstream (0411412022) Perry Branch R2 — Looking Downstream (0411412022) Perry Branch R4 — Looking Upstream (0411412022) I Perry Branch R4 — Looking Downstream (0411412022) I k Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Culvert Crossing Photographs VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS FIXED VEG PLOT 1(912712022) FIXED VEG PLOT 2 (912712022) FIXED VEG PLOT 3 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 4 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 5 (912712022) FIXED VEG PLOT 6 (912712022) ok Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Vegetation Plot Photographs FIXED VEG PLOT 7 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 8 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 9 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 10 (912712022) 1 FIXED VEG PLOT 11 (912712022) FIXED VEG PLOT 12 (912712022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Vegetation Plot Photographs 1 Perry Hill Mitigation Site `�' Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Vegetation Plot Photographs STREAM AREA OF CONCERN REPAIR PHOTOGRAPHS UT1 Rock Sill Repair UT1 R1 US — Repair just above rock sill in foreground (912712022) UT1 R1 DS — Repair at end of riffle above rock sill (912712022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Stream Area of Concern Repair Photographs VEGETATION AREAS OF CONCERN UPDATED PHOTOGRAPHS Conservation Easement Encroachment C Perry Branch R2 — CE Encroachment Seeded and Stabilized (1011912022) v, °r f Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Vegetation Areas of Concern Updated Photographs Perry Branch R4—CE Encroachment Seeded and Stabilized (1011912022) z Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data —Vegetation Areas of Concern Updated Photographs APPENDIX B. VEGETATION PLOT DATA ))§§))Li §§5)§))k\G))\)\ }\)))\}}\}})))))))))} ) ` ®-f)u5�\5\�\5ji\/ 7|fJE2!!§!E!##K2;« [ :R)y|«§f!;!§t%!f[« ` ~ \ ) ` ` ƒ } § §j{}§)§2o !\o !!!/!\!u E t mu0 = § a_&r{g;la:§§\):;){ ` k ) o kj\�}}�»§r �` �` -_ §{)§(l;:j®[[��[2:u mmIu ; m'Cf )a` EE - _ 2E ):§) �u \ %a ®~«) § §!� ) o o Ti" - - - iTill I I )ONE )§§))§§5)§))k\G))\)\ }\)))\}}\}})))))))))} ) 'o \o\5ji\/ ` ®-f: 7|fJE2!!§!E!##K2;« oo [ :R)yEm2E3:!§t%!f[« ` ~ \ ) ` ` ƒ } § §j{}§)§2{o !\o ! Ou E� m t !!/!\!!!/ �m�§)I = § a_&r{g;la:§§\):;){ ` k ) ®§®§r �` �` -_ uu[2:u ; mo006 )a `!E uooz Dml - _ 2E ):§) �- o %a ®~«) a 0 1O - > o F v c o o a o z 0 > 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 v 0 o F a ro o ry co > a 0 F FIT a� � a `o u u 3 3 u u 3 u>> 3 u>> 3 u 1. - a a u n ¢ u Q ¢ n Q a n o u Q ¢ n u u ¢ ¢ m u O ¢ Q u n ¢ u u ¢ Q u ¢ E � w0 E o E o 0 3 0 Yo �e o o E E o v E 3 m E c 'o' c o ,v. o c -- V 3 E E o n> �. E 3 5 =- o t v 3 Y c 3 E u E E o ° ¢ o o Q u E o 0 ° f °q v u E 0 ° E 09 v o> Q u u=- Q u u= Y n� o E ° E ° c m no c _ o ° V ° > > Z - o Eo > - - > - E E -_ c c f0 m> o N E m= o u u ``' m E m °" E o o in Q E ,'. Q m c Q o Z v ° O O cf U= 0 0 u o > _ O > — - o o i — o f -m o a0 c E -m a a a E E a E o d M F m A E E VI T m C A N N V m A E O W o. C mO Y G1 W N O m CO 2 T U1 o_ M N N O N O O N •; •; •; •; O O O O O O O O O O O O e e e e v v v v LL N LL N LL N LL N M l0 iNy O O T O a a a a > > > i i 9 9 Q Q Q Q u Q Q u Q Q l0 O W a a W N N N N O O W W W W j o O O j O O O j O O O j o o o > O O O C C C C C 0 0 0 0 W W W W W u u u uu a v, o0 oD a co m m a m a n n n v c o0 00 0� LL N LL N LL N LL N N N Vf 00 ft j icy O O O ° a a a a q, ._ > = > = > = > 9 9 9 > Q Q Q Q Q u Q u Q u Q u Q u Q \ V1 o0 o0 \ Vt Vl o0 \ \ h h cl \ h V1 V1 C C a W 00 CC C a a 00 CC C I N n I N n N N n CC C l0 N l0 N O LD C C lD to W W W W W C C C C C 0 0 0 0 W W W W W C io io io a a io 0o C m m m C io � � M a io a n LL N LL N LL N LL N N tw > i i i i 9 Q Q Q Q Q u Q Q u Q Q u Q w \ E 00 m O o0 O 0o E M lD n O E 't v w v w v E N m 1p n 7 w E w w w w m N 1n N N 1n m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m > m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m T m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m Y m c m c m c m c m c m c m c m c m c m c m c h0 c h0 c m c m c m c m c h0 c m c m c m c m c m c h0 c m c m c m c m c m c m c `o ccccccccccccccccc `o `o`o .ccccccccccc `o `o `o `o `o `o `o `o `o c c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O APPENDIX C. STREAM GEOMORPHOLOGY DATA Cross -Section Plots 6s 652 C a G�•i [tl 7 tl] LU Gyp 649 Crass -Section 1 (Riffle) - Perry Branch Reach 1 p }p n 0 40 50 Distance (ft.) MY O + MY i MY 2 — — Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Currenl Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 650.73 650.88 650.81 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.96 1.01 Thalweg Elevation 649.33 649.61 649.60 LTOB Elevation 650.73 650.83 650.83 LTOB Max Depth 1.44 1.22 1.23 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 6.71 6.24 6.83 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots sop 535 C 638 m m W 637 636 Cross -Section 2 (Riffle) - Perry Branch Reach 3 20 d0 60 Distance (ft.) y MY 0 -•- MY 1 --- MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 637.59 637.57 637.54 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.88 0.89 Thalweg Elevation 636.38 636.56 636.52 LTOB Elevation 637.59 637.45 637.43 LTOB Max Depth 1.21 0.89 0.91 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 6.27 5.22 5.06 e4 I' P _ 414i. - Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 639 638 637 s= m 636 w 635 634 Cross -Section 3 (Pool) - Perry Branch Reach 3 — MY 0 -•- MY 1 - MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 634.49 634.71 634.76 LTOB Elevation 637.17 637.32 637.40 LTOB Max Depth 2.68 1 2.61 2.64 1 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 16.26 16.24 16.79 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots it 53� C 634 7 W W 633 632 Cross -Section 4 (Riffle) - Perry Branch Reach 4 10 30 40 50 6Cf Distance (ft.) — MY 0 — HAY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area — Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 634.12 634.27 634.26 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.96 0.97 Thalweg Elevation 632.30 632.49 632.56 LTOB Elevation 634.12 634.20 634.21 LTOB Max Depth 1.81 1 1.71 1.65 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 12.85 11.91 12.18 - a}' q a, .. lNI l•rii- 5 • a R �� Y.. �' d�l'F'i ��[ `tee. �,� ',;. .r, Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 6'_� 634 v 633 R 7 LU 631 630 Cross -Section 5 (Pool) - Perry Branch Reach 4 7 in =.n 60 70 Distance (it.) �- MY 0 — MY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfuli Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 630.33 630.62 630.61 LTOB Elevation 633.73 633.76 633.77 LTOB Max Depth 3.40 1 3.14 3.16 1 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 28.55 26.42 25.56 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 62 622 v 621 C Q 7 _2 F-20 LU 619 618 Cross -Section 6 (Pool) - Perry Branch Reach 4 20 4fl 60 Distance (ft.) + MY ❑ — MY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfuli Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankiull Area Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 618.34 618.60 618.51 LTOB Elevation 621.17 621.28 621.32 LTOB Max Depth 2.83 1 2.68 2.81 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 26.08 22.86 23.88 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots �.a v 621 76 7 N 520 Lu 619 618 Gross -Section 7 (Riffle) - Perry Branch Reach 4 n n ?n =n ja 50 Distance (ft.) + MY ❑ -•- MY 1 -- MY 2 - - Bankfuli Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Tap of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 620.89 621.15 621.17 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.87 0.91 Thalweg Elevation 618.98 619.35 619.33 LTOB Elevation 620.89 620.92 621.01 LTOB Max Depth 1.91 1 1.57 1.68 1 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 14.13 11.34 12.15 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 629 62E c 627 m 7 m W 626 625 Cross -Section 8 (Riffle) - UT1 Reach 1 n 10 20 30 40 50 Distance (ft.) MY O — MY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 626.30 626.45 626.46 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.82 0.79 Thalweg Elevation 625.54 625.77 625.80 LTOB Elevation 626.30 626.33 626.32 LTOB Max Depth 0.77 0.56 0.52 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 2.52 1.86 1.72 '441 6 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 621 5:0 c � 610 7 N W 618 617 Cross -Section 9 (Riffle) - UT1 Reach 2 10 20 30 40 50 Distance (ft.) MY O — MY 1 -- MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based an As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Top of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 618.63 618.74 618.76 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.02 1.05 Thalweg Elevation 617.81 617.99 618.01 LTOB Elevation 618.63 618.76 618.80 LTOB Max Depth 0.82 0.77 0.79 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 3.23 3.32 3.49 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 64•: 543 c 642 7 W Lu 641 640 Gross -Section 10 (Riffle) - UT2 Reach 2 n 10 Ul ja Sp Distance (ft.) + MY ❑ -F- MY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfull Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Tap of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 641.54 641.78 641.80 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.82 0.73 Thalweg Elevation 640.35 640.63 640.62 LTOB Elevation 641.54 641.58 641.48 LTOB Max Depth 1.18 0.95 0.86 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 5.39 3.93 3.42 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots 6: Fay v 640 R 7 v 639 LU 638 637 Cross -Section 11 (Pool) - UT2 Reach 2 n 10 :0 =n !n Sp Distance (ft.) MY U — MY 1 — MY 2 - - Bankfuli Elevation - Based on As -Built Bankfull Area Current Low Tap of Bank MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 637.54 637.81 637.83 LTOB Elevation 640.51 640.30 640.24 LTOB Max Depth 2.97 1 2.49 2.41 1 LTOB Cross -Sectional Area 14.86 12.04 12.15 Downstream (411412022) Perry Hill Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data — Cross -Section Plots Table B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DIMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 L Parameter ONITORING BN K PRE-EXISTING CONDITION • r (MYO) Perry Branch Reach 1 Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min I Max Max I Min n Bankfull Width (ft) 2.7 2.9 2.9 3.1 2 8.0 9.2 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 4 4 4 4 2 61 80 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 2 0.6 0.7 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 2 1.0 1.4 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 1.1 1.6 1 1.6 1 2.0 2 5.0 6.8 1 Width/Depth Ratio 5.2 6.0 6.0 6.8 2 12.8 12.6 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 2 7.6 8.7 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.7 2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 29 36 39 Rosgen Classification G4c C4 C4 Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 2.8 4.4 4.4 5.9 2 14.9 22.0 1 Sinuosity 1.10 1.16 1.13 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0129 0.0127 0.0128 Other --- --- --- Parameter Perry Branch Reach 3 Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min I Max Min I Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.3 5.7 5.7 6.1 2 9.6 11.0 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 11.0 12.5 12.5 14.0 2 156 100 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 0.8 0.6 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 2 1.2 1.2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 2 7.2 6.3 1 Width/Depth Ratio 8.7 8.8 8.8 8.8 2 12.8 19.2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2 16.3 9.1 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.3 2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 35 46 32 Rosgen Classification G4c C4 C4 Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 9.1 1 9.7 9.7 10.2 2 25.1 17.9 1 Sinuosity 1.15 1.12 1.12 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0155 0.0135 0.0130 Other --- --- --- Parameter Perry Branch Reach 4 Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min I Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.7 6.7 6.0 9.3 4 11.4 13.0 13.1 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 9 12 12 17 4 123 125 175 2 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.0 4 0.9 1.0 1.1 2 Bankfull Max Depth 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.4 4 1.4 1.8 1.9 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 4.0 5.1 1 5.2 5.9 4 10.1 12.8 14.1 2 Width/Depth Ratio 6.3 9.2 7.9 14.6 4 12.9 12.1 13.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 1.9 1.8 2.7 4 10.8 9.6 13.5 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.2 2.2 2.3 3.0 4 1.0 1 1.1 1.0 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 33 46 48 Rosgen Classification F4 C4 C4 Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 10.8 15.1 1 14.4 1 20.7 4 35.5 48.3 1 56.4 2 Sinuosityl 1.11 1.14 1.15 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)l 0.0109 0.0111 0.0110 J Other --- --- --- Table B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Perry Hill Mitigation Site DIMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Parameter CONDITIONADESIGN (MYO UT1 Reach 1 Riffle Only Min I Mean Med Max n Min I Max Min I Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 1.7 1.7 1.7 1 6.0 5.8 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 6 6.0 6.0 1 11 50 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.8 0.8 0.8 1 0.4 0.4 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 0.6 0.8 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 1.4 1.4 1 1.4 1 2.5 2.5 1 Width/Depth Ratio 2.1 2.1 2.1 1 14.3 13.2 1 Entrenchment Ratio 3.3 3.3 3.3 1 1.8 8.7 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.9 1.9 1.9 1 1.0 1.1 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 22 111 94 Rosgen Classification E6b B4 B4 Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 7.5 7.5 7.5 1 9.4 11.7 1 Sinuosity 1.04 1.06 1.04 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0473 0.0522 0.0508 Other --- --- --- Parameter UT1 Reach 2 Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min I Max Max I Min n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.7 4.6 4.6 5.4 2 6.0 6.4 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 7 8 8 9 2 113 175 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 2 0.5 0.5 1 Bankfull Max Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 0.8 0.8 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 2 2.9 3.2 1 Width/Depth Ratio 9.3 14.0 14.0 18.7 2 12.5 13.0 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 1.8 1.8 2.0 2 18.8 27.2 1 Bank Height Ratio 2.6 2.8 2.8 3.0 2 1.0 T 1.1 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 22 51 48 Rosgen Classification F4b C4b C4b Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 3.2 1 3.5 3.5 3.7 2 7.6 11.0 Sinuosity 1.14 1.15 1.14 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0204 0.0221 0.0233 Other --- --- --- Parameter UT2 Reach 2 Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min I Max Min I Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.2 3.8 4.0 4.0 3 6.0 7.7 1 Floodprone Width (ft) 20 44 42 69 3 44 100 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 3 0.5 0.7 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 3 0.7 1.2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ 2.0 2.7 2.7 3.0 3 2.7 5.4 1 Width/Depth Ratio 5.0 5.4 5.2 5.9 3 13.2 10.8 1 Entrenchment Ratio 6.2 11.3 10.3 17.3 3 7.3 13.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.6 3 1.0 1.1 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 52 37 51 Rosgen Classification E4 C4 C4 Bankfull Discharge (cfs) 6.2 1 8.7 9.0 10.9 3 8.2 20.7 1 Sinuosityl 1.13 1.11 1.11 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)l 0.0187 0.0177 0.0179 Other --- --- --- O U E E H tlD C O C0 G tw O O O. � Ol LNl1 � rl l0 ID m o m m 6 O M u W Vl w Ln Z1, m N W l6 n 00 N m o m m O V O1 00 m ri O 116 ^ N N M m m �o ID m � K M C O W D U N % N N Ol Ln N Ln x p V1 M O M M w ID �o U � OM M O M M 00 � N N N O O_ Q Q N m t N Y Y W a v C C m X m m m 30 0 J c fG cc0 m N c o c o 0 J vv o V m m m O0 w O N K o O r > w _m w = w Y m m o � 0 a � m � c O N Q Q W U O U Q Q W O 8 O C! C \ Z \ Z ri M o * � N N � W � } Q Q V�1 U� I� 00 Z Z M W W N SIC U1 d' M 00 C D O N y N } D O ^ 00 Li M 6 N N V1 O O N eel 7 N n M 1p w U r tD i l6 Lq 00 O O .--� OM 't OM O O O ui 6 I, n N n N OID N ID N N O O Q Q N m t 3 Y ~w Y v w v w a w v Q C C 41 m X f0 m m 3 C) cc0 C 0 m c m c [O O W O O J vv o m U m CO w O 0 c � K O L v W v � Y m m O APPENDIX D. HYDROLOGY DATA � a § � a § � a § � a § � a § ~ ~ ® / z §z \ \ � ® IN § Ln z / / 4 _ _ = b m - m m m = _ _ u u a) a) m m @ m @ a 0: 0 0. _ CL D CL ; D a) � a § � a § � a § � a § � a § � k / un § , / \ 2 I C-4 0 r- / \ \ / I a) EL a 0 § § 2 E § § # o z -&�&�k m o 0 \ / « >- § $ R >- § $ R « u \ S 0 a (ui) uoi;e;idioaJd m w n io in v m r� ti o O n v m o � � s 0 v ao 3 0 p � C7 — o W V N ' N � N s _ u N f6 � W � s a u � c � m � I 0 a � 3 F _ _ I v a > 3 0 � o I v o Ol of l in in v v v 0 a (ui) uoi;e;idioaJd m w ^ io in v m N 1 O I I O I Ell I I n v m o � o I on Q _ 0 F CO �° b 3 � N I , i V N N O I I' W � s o4 c I la `o I ca T c a _Jr> I `w I o I I I `s I v v o ^ I I I I I I Io N O Ol OJ I� l N N N (4) UOR-813 O a (ul) uope;ldpaJd m w n io in v m N .ti o O n v m o n � 0 on a 0 � W 60 0 � > 3 f6 � 3 0 LL -6 N � N � N � N i � V W N } Oq s - c u w I .. 0 � 3 _ > I v a 3 a 0 a i 2 0 I m w n io l (4) uol;ene13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I v I o T Io N I O a (ul) uol;e;ldloaJd m w n io in v m r� ti o • I I I . I I I I O I I I I � - o I I I n v o I , I I I I I Q 0 F _ I y I — o o m C7 , I vN I I o V N I — N ID (a 1— � C I o L , I I I > I - I • I 3 I I • ° I o I • o I o I -o I I I I I I I I a LL II o m l v v v m (4) uol4ene13 CO 0 C N O rIL P. } �D N O �D } O N O N GJ ... R M } m O Ln R 0 N O O � R 0 O M N *' O O N vOi M O } O u X N �` � `� O 01 'D O N -4 N N N _r 6 �F N E V L-n C U cn r I c � Z m GJ w0 ri 3 tu N f6 �tu _ U _ U _ ) t U R GJ 0 a (ul) uol;e;ldhaAd m w n io in v m N 1 o 1 • I � I I I I . O I I I I I I � n - o • I I I I v o I I I I _ 3 I � (J o l LL I I v N ! I — N m I IV I I u w ° x I I > I a I I - I • I 3 I o_ I I I 2 Is o I I- E v> v I I I I I LL 0 0 ti• I I I I w n o n v m l N N N N N N (4) uol;an813 0 0 a (ul) uol;e;ldloaad 0 m m m (4) uoi4ena13 0 a (ul) uol;e4ldl3aAd m w n io in v m r� ti o 1 • I � I I • I I I o I I I a v s I I s I . • I I a' 0 � - I I O I 6p 3 o � � 3 I , o I LL N ' o y — N � N . w N I s c I u w I .. � •c I x I I > I • oL I I I I � I - I I I 3 I I a o � I 3 I I = v v I v I o I o I I I I I V ' o Ol in v of v (41) uoiaenal3 I l n v io v APPENDIX E. PROJECT TIMELINE AND CONTACT INFO Table 13. Project Activity and Reporting History Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Activity or Report Data Collection CompuFf -1 Project Instituted NA Completion or Scheduled Delivery December 2018 Mitigation Plan Approved July 2020 July 2020 Invasive Vegetation Treatment November 2020 Construction (Grading) Completed NA March 2021 As -Built Survey Completed April 2021 April 2021 Competitive Vegetation Treatment' April 2021 Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0) Stream Survey March 2021 May 2021 Vegetation Survey April 2021 Invasive Vegetation Treatment October 2021 Easement Encroachment October 2021 Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey October 2021 December 2021 Vegetation Survey October 2021 Competitive Vegetation Treatment' April 2022 Invasive Vegetation Treatment March and August 2022 In -Stream Vegetation Treatment August 2022 UT1 Channel Repair September 2022 Maintenance Area Marked TBD Year 2 Monitoring Stream Survey April 2022 December 2022 Vegetation Survey September 2022 Year 3 Monitoring Stream Survey 2023 December 2023 Vegetation Survey 2023 Year 4 Monitoring 2024 December 202, Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey 2025 r' Vegetation Survey 2025 Year 6 Monitoring 2026 Year 7 Monitoring Stream Survey 2027 December 202 Vegetation Survey 20„ 'Herbicide ring sprays around the base of planted stems. Table 14. Project Contact Table Perry Hill Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100093 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Designer 497 Bramson Ct, Suite 104 Geoff Smith, PE Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 843.277.6221 Main Stream Earthwork, Inc. Construction Contractor 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd Reidsville, NC 27320 Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Jason Lorch Monitoring, POC 919.851.9986