20061521 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20140212

OAKLEY CROSSROADS (G)
STREAM & BUFFER RESTORATION
MONITORING REPORT (YEAR 3 OF 5)
Pitt County, North Carolina
SCO Project Number 050659701
EEP Project Number 273
Prepared for:
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
It" IR ilD 4S 1N A&iA
Status of Plan: Final
Construction Completed: 2011
Data Collected: 2013
Submission Date: February 2014

Prepared by:
J1
a n
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
801 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27606

Table of Contents
1.0
Executive Summary/ Project Abstract ............................................................... ..............................1
2.0
Methodology ....................................................................................................... ..............................3
2.1
Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability ...................................... ............................... 3
2.1.1
Dimension ................................................................................................... ..............................3
2.1.2
Pattern and Profile ...................................................................................... ............................... 3
2.1.3
Sediment Transport .................................................................................... ............................... 3
2.2
Vegetation ................................................................................................... ..............................3
2.3
Hydrology .................................................................................................. ............................... 4
2.3.1
Wetland ....................................................................................................... ..............................4
2.3.2
Stream ........................................................................................................ ............................... 4
3.0
References ........................................................................................................... ..............................5
4.0
Appendices .......................................................................................................... ..............................7
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Appendix D — Stream Survey Data
Appendix E — Hydrologic Data
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page i
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page ii
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

1.0 Executive Summary / Project Abstract
The overall goal of the Oakley restoration project was to improve water quality and wildlife habitat by
restoring a stable stream and riparian buffer system to the project site. The objectives of the project were
to restore stream stability and improve aquatic habitat, restore riparian buffer along the stream channel,
preserve riverine wetlands, establish a wildlife corridor, divert an unbuffered agricultural ditch system
from the stream channel to an irrigation pond, and establish native vegetation within the permanent
conservation easement. The project included 3,789 linear feet of stream restoration and 329 linear feet of
stream enhancement. Priority II stream restoration involved restoring riffle /pool sequences, the
installation of structures, and floodplain grading to improve floodplain connectivity and provide diverse
instream habitat. Enhancement II stream restoration involved the planting of native hardwood trees and
shrubs. Also, native riparian buffer planting took place on over 18 acres of the site, and an additional 1.37
acres of wetland was preserved. The project will result in 3,931 stream mitigation units (SMUs), 17.2
acres of buffer mitigation units (BMUs), and 0.27 wetland mitigation units (WMUs).
The Monitoring Year 3 [MY3] stem counts within each of the nine (9) vegetative monitoring plots are
included in Tables 7 and 9 in Appendix C. Located within the Tar- Pamlico River basin, this project was
instituted prior to October 11, 2007 and is therefore eligible for riparian buffer restoration credit up to 200
feet from the top of bank of all perennial and intermittent waterways within the conservation easement
area. As such, the vegetative monitoring plots have been assessed for the vegetation success criteria for
both buffer (320 planted trees /acre) and streams (MY3 interim criteria of 320 woody stems /acre). All nine
vegetative monitoring plots met the vegetation success criteria for riparian buffers. Of the five plots
within the 50 -foot stream buffer, all are currently meeting the vegetation success criteria for streams.
Minor evidence of beavers and nutria has been observed within the project limits in 2011 and 2012, and
was recently noted in the MY3 Initial Assessment in March 2013. During the annual fall monitoring a
majority of the Riverine Bottomland Hardwood Forest planting zone was inundated as a result of several
beaver dams. APHIS personnel, in November 2013, were able to remove 8 beaver dams within and
downstream of the project limits and alleviate the flooding within the project area. During the stream
survey, beaver activity was observed throughout the site, with relatively minor damage to the livestakes
along the stream banks. Some of the inner berms were lacking herbaceous vegetation after being
inundated for an extended period, however, these areas should rebound during the next growing season.
Approximately 6 -8 inches of fine sediment had accumulated in sections of the stream and this sediment
will likely be transported away once the site has a significant precipitation event.
Areas of Murclannia keisak (marsh dayflower), observed in previous years, are still present in and along
the banks of stream throughout Section I but have not expanded. Murclannia keisak continues to be most
abundant between Station 0 +50 and 1 +50, between Station 3 +50 and 7 +00, near Station 21 +50, and near
Station 28 +50. Currently, these areas of Murclannia keisak do not pose a threat to native vegetation
establishment or stream stability, but they will continue to be monitored during future field visits to
document any changes. Small areas of Mikania scanclens (Climbing hempweed) were observed on
planted stems in and around vegetative plots 6 and 7. These areas were below the mapping threshold, but
will continue to be monitored as there is potential for the vine to affect planted stems. Additionally, the
streambanks on both left and right bank were observed to be bare below the Briley culvert, between
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 1
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

Station 38 +25 and 39 +00. Overall the planted woody vegetation continues to have excellent vigor and
exhibit little to no issues becoming established among the common successional herbaceous species.
The stream survey occurred within one week of the beaver dams being removed, and as a result, water
surface and bed elevations are likely skewed as the stream has not had adequate time to adjust following
the removal of the dams and subsidence of the flooding. Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the Oakley restoration
project were observed generally to be in stable condition even after being flooded by the beaver
impoundment for an extended period of time. The channel's profile and cross- section adjusted only
minimally from baseline conditions. The channel has good connection to its floodplain. Evidence of
bankfull overflow was not discernable during the fall assessment as a result of the beaver impoundment,
however, evidence of a bankfull event was observed during the initial assessment in the spring of 2013.
The dimension, pattern, and profile survey for MY3 conditions for Section 1 and Section 2 are consistent
with the design intent to reduce stream power and erosion potential.
An area of aggradation, noted in previous years, was again observed below the upstream culvert between
Station 0 +00 and 0 +60. Additionally, one area of minor bed downcutting observed between Station
35 +00 and 37 +00 in 2012 has aggraded. The structures in this area have provided grade control and the
area is working toward an equilibrium. The areas of profile adjustment do not currently threaten the
stability of the stream. These areas will continue to be monitored during future field visits to document
any changes. A few relict nutria burrows were also observed between Station 4 +40 and 10 +00, but the
livestakes are maintaining bank stability and these areas do not threaten the stability of the stream.
Callitriche heterophylla (water starwort), a non - invasive species, was again observed in several areas
along all three sections of the stream. This aquatic plant was also noted to be present in monitoring years
1 and 2 as well as prior to the construction of the restoration project. Neither the nutria nor the water
starwort currently threaten the stability of the restored stream. These issues will continue to be monitored
during future field visits to document any changes.
The flooding caused by the beaver activity hindered the visual assessment of the vegetative cover of brush
mattresses along the entire stream as requested by NCEEP. Areas observed in 2012 where brush
mattresses had less than the required 80% vegetative cover remain on Figure 2 in Appendix A, and will
be assessed during the initial assessment in spring 2014.
The wetland preservation areas were also visually assessed during the vegetation monitoring. No issues
were observed in these areas and existing vegetation appears to be in good condition. These areas will
continue to be monitored during future field visits.
Summary information, data, and statistics related to the performance of various project and monitoring
elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and
supporting information formerly found in these reports can be found in the mitigation and restoration plan
documents available on EEP's website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is
available from EEP upon request.
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 2
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

2.0 Methodology
Channel stability and vegetation survival were monitored on the project site. Post - restoration monitoring
will be conducted for a minimum of five years or until the success criteria are met following the
completion of construction to document project success. The Monitoring Year 3 survey was completed
using survey grade GPS on November 13, 2013.
2.1 MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS AND CHANNEL STABILITY
2.1.1 Dimension
Dimensional characteristics were monitored at 7 permanent cross- sections (4 riffles, 3 pools) along
Section 1 and Section 2. Survey data included points measured at all breaks in slope including top of
bank, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg. Dimensional characteristics were compared to
baseline conditions. All monitored cross- sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined
for channels of the design stream type. Stream channel stability and geomorphic monitoring for Section 3
was documented visually. Natural variability is expected, however the system should not experience
trends toward excessive increasing bank erosion, channel degradation, or channel aggradation.
2.1.2 Pattern and Profile
The entire longitudinal profile of Section 1 and Section 2 was surveyed. Stationing from the as -built
survey was used. The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are remaining stable.
The pools should remain deep with flat water surface slopes, and the riffles should remain steeper and
shallower than the pools.
2.1.3 Sediment Transport
As discussed in prior project documentation, additional sediment transport evaluations will not be
undertaken during the five -year monitoring period. However, the dimension, pattern, and profile survey
for MY3 conditions for Section 1 and Section 2 were analyzed to determine whether the current sediment
competency and capacity is consistent with the design.
2.2 VEGETATION
The Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Level 2 methodology was utilized to sample vegetation on
October 2, 2013 and November 13, 2013. Nine 100 - square meter CVS plots have been established within
the project area. In each plot, four plot corners have been permanently located with rebar. Volunteer plant
species (Level 2) were recorded this year and will only be considered in vegetative success
determinations for the stream portion of this project. As such, volunteer plant species will be recorded for
subsequent monitoring years in vegetation plots located within the 50 foot buffer of the restored stream.
Refer to Figure 2 in Appendix A. In all vegetation plots species composition, density, and survival of the
planted vegetation was monitored.
This project is generating both stream and riparian buffer mitigation assets. Vegetation success for these
assets is measured in two ways. Stream mitigation units (SMUs) require 260 planted and volunteer native
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 3
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

hardwood stems (trees and shrubs) per acre for a minimum of 5 years. Buffer mitigation units (BMUs)
require 320 planted native hardwood stems (trees only) per acre for a minimum of 5 years. In accordance
with North Carolina Division of Water Quality Administrative Code 15A NCAC 0213.0260 (TAR -
PAMLICO RIVER BASIN, Mitigation Program for Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian
Buffers) `[planted vegetation] shall include a minimum of at least two native hardwood tree species
planted at a density to provide 320 trees per acre at maturity." Also, for SMUs and BMUs, the buffer must
be at least 50 -feet wide on both sides of the channel.
The interim measure of vegetative success for SMUs for the site will be the survival of at least 320 3 -year
old stems per acre at the end of year three of the monitoring period and 280 4 -year old stems per acre at
the end of year four monitoring period. There are no interim measures of vegetative success for BMUs.
2.3 HYDROLOGY
2.3.1 Wetland
Neither wetland restoration nor enhancement credit is being sought for this project. Existing jurisdictional
wetlands as depicted in Figure 2 in Appendix A are being preserved. The wetland preservation areas are
visually assessed during each monitoring year.
2.3.2 Stream
One crest gauge has been installed onsite and is located near Cross - section 3. Each visit to the site
included documentation of the highest stage for the monitoring interval and a reset of the device. Other
indications of bankfull flow including the presence of wrack lines, sediment, or flooding were also
monitored, and their presence was recorded and documented photographically. Refer to Figure 2 in
Appendix A for the location of the crest gauge.
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 4
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

IOReferences
Lee, Michael T., R. K. Peet, S. D. Roberts, and T. R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4.2 ( http : / /cvs.blo.unc.edu /methods.htm)
NCDWQ. 2004. Tar - Pamlico River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.
NCEEP. 2010. Procedural Guidance and Content Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh,
NC. Version 1.3, January 15, 2010.
NCEEP. 2008. Mitigation Plan Document — Format Data Requirements, and Content Guidelines. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh,
NC. Version 2. 0, March 27, 2008.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley, 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDEHNR, Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
United States Environmental Protection Agency — Region IV, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 5
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

(This page intentionally left blank for two sided printing)
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 6
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

4.OAppendices
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Appendix D — Stream Survey Data
Appendix E — Hydrologic Data
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 7
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)
Oakley Crossroads (G) Stream and Buffer Restoration (Year 3 of 5) Page 8
Stantec - 2013 Monitoring Report (EEP# 273) February 2014

Appendix A. Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Figure 1
— Vicinity Map and Directions
Table la.b.
— Project Restoration Components
Table 2
— Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
— Project Contacts
Table 4
— Project Attribute

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

N
COUNTY
MARTIN
C PtRC4, Creek
iy�y ro
/3s�
�✓
r
{ �.
Cr
�
' -" � PITT C U T�
w,
Oakley Crossroads
_
Project Site
\ k
\
*The subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) and is encompassed by a recorded conservation
easement, but is bordered by land under private ownership.
Accessing the site may require traversing areas near or
along the easement boundary and therefore access by the
general public is not permitted. Access by authorized personnel
of state and federal agencies or their designees /contractors
involved in the development, oversight and stewardship of the
restoration site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of
their defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles and
activities requires prior coordination with EEP.
BEA
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Oakley Crossroads
Stream & Buffer Restoration
Pitt County, North Carolina
0 0.5 1 2 Miles
Stantec
�:Us�l �y.1J,1 Ir

Table Ia. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Oakley Crossroads
Stream and Buffer Restoration (EEP#
273)
Project
Existing
Restoration
Footage or
Stationing/
Mitigation
Mitigation
BMP
Component
Approach
Comment
Feet /Acres
Level
Acreage
Location
Ratio
Units
Etc ments1
or Reach ID
Ten foot width of ford crossing removed
00 +00 to
from total length. 152 LF of restored stream
Section 1
2,950
R
PII
3,637
37 +98.64
1:1
3,637
with <50' buffer separated into line item
below. Total restoration footage 3,637 LF.
152 LF of restored stream has <50' buffer
Section 1,
—33 +00 to
on right bank. Mitigation ratio is likely to
152
R
PH
152
1:1
152
<50 ft buffer
—37 +00
change once DWQ publishes reduced SMU
calculation for areas with <50 ft of buffer.
—38 +39 to
Enhancement - log structures, brush
Section 2
40
E
EII
40
1.5:1
26.7
—38 +79
mattresses and planting.
downstream
Section 3
289
E
EII
289
2.5:1
115.6
Enhancement - planting only.
of Section 2
786,258 sq ft planted, 747,167 sq ft of which
Riparian
are eligible for mitigation credit. Area
n/a
R
747,167 sq ft
n/a
1:1
747,167
Buffer
removed for areas with undiffase flow,
buffer width >200', or buffer width <50'.
Wetlands
1 1.37
1 P
1
1 1.37
1 n/a
1 5:1
1 0.27

Table lb. Component Summations
Oakle Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration (EEP #273
Restoration
Stream
Riparian
Non -Ripar
Upland
Buffer
Level
(if)
Wetland (Ac)
(Ac)
(Ac)
(Ac)
BMP
Riverine
Non-
Riverine
Restoration
3789
17.2
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
329
Creation
Preservation
1.37
HQ Preservation
Totals Feet /Acres
4118
1.37
17.2
MU Totals
3,931.3
0.27
17.2
on- Applicable

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration EEP# 273
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete:
30 months
Elapsed Time Since Original Planting Complete:
30 months
Number of Reporting Years:
3
Data Collection
Com letion or
Activity or Deliverable
Complete
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
n/a
August 2006
Final Design — Construction Plans
n/a
June 2010
Construction (Grading complete)
n/a
May 2011
Seeding
n/a
May 2011
Planting
n/a
May 2011
As -built (Year 0 Monitoring— baseline)
June 2011
July 2011
Year 1 Monitoring
September 2011
November 2011
Replanting (bareroots)
n/a
January 2012
Year 2 Monitoring
October 2012
November 2012
Year 3 Monitoring
November 2013
Februrary 2014
Year 4 Monitoring
n/a
n/a
Year 5 Monitoring
n/a
n/a
1 = Equals the number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration (EEP# 273)
Designer
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
801 Jones Franklin Rd, Ste 300, Raleigh, NC 27606
Primary project design POC
Nathan Jean (970) 449 -8615
Construction Contractor
Ecosystems Grading Solutions, Inc.
6642 Roper Hollow Rd., Morganton, NC 28655
Construction contractor POC
Bobby Koone (828) 584 -3018
Survey Contractor
Turner Land Surveying
3201 Glenridge Dr., Raleigh, NC 27604
Survey contractor POC
Elizabeth and David Turner (919) 875 -1378
Planting Contractor
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 1197, Remont, NC 27830
Planting contractor POC
Charlie Bruton (919) 242 -6555
Seeding Contractor
Ecosystems Grading Solutions, Inc.
6642 Roper Hollow Rd., Morganton, NC 28655
Contractor point of contact
Bobby Koone (828) 584 -3018
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resources
Nurs a ry Stock Supplie rs
Southeastern Native Plant Nursery
South Carolina Super Tree Nursery
Natives
Monitoring Performers
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
801 Jones Franklin Rd, Ste 300, Raleigh, NC 27606
Stream Monitoring POC
Tim Taylor (980) 297 -7669
Vegetation Monitoring POC
Amber Coleman (919)865 -7399
Wetland Monitoring POC
n/a

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration (EEP# 273)
Project Information
Project County
Pitt
Project Area (acres)
26.6
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
35.76692,-77.269077
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Tar- Pamlico
USGS HUC for Project (14 digit)
0302010309002
NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project
03 -03 -06
Project Drainage Area (sq rrn)
1.71
Project Drainage Area % Impervious
<1%
CGIA Landuse Classification
Cropland and Pasture
Reach Summary Information
Reach name
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Length of reach (linear feet)
3,799
40
289
Valley classification
VIll
VIII
VIII
Drainage area (acres)
1,014.5
1,014.7
1,092.3
NCDWQ stream identification score
41
40.5
40.5
NCDWQ classification
n/a
n/a
n/a
Morphological description (stream type)
E5
F5
F5
Evolutionary trend
E5
C5
C5
Underlying mapped soils
Bladen
Pantego
Pantego
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Very poorly drained
Very poorly drained
Soil hydric status
Yes
Yes
Yes
Slope
0 -2%
0 -1%
0 -1%
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Native vegetation community
Riverine bottomlandhardwood andmesic mixed hardwood forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
0% 1 0% 10%
Wetland Summary Information
n/a - wetland preservation only
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
USACE 404 permit
Waters of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
NCDWQ 401 permit
Endangered Species Act
No
n/a
n/a
Historic Preservation Act
No
n/a
n/a
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) /Coastal
Aream Management Act (CAMA)
No
n/a
n/a
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
n/a
n/a

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Appendix B. Visual Assessment
Figure 2 — Current Condition Plan View (3 Sheets)
Table 5 — Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6 — Vegetation Condition Assessment
Photos — Stream Stations (S1 -S9)
Photos — Vegetation Plots (V1 -V19)

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

VVVIWyJWilo�,
E
� ,,
JO
Cross - section Pins
Latitude
Longitude
XS1 Left
35.763932
- 77.273188
XS1 Right
35.763715
- 77.273168
XS2 Left
35.764464
-77.271851111
XS2 Right
35.764192
- 77.271913
- 77.270211
' Veg Plot Origin Latitude Longitude
XS3 Left
35.764990
XS3 Right
35.764655
- 77.270179
✓ VP1
VP2
35.763800
- 77.272727
XS4 Left
35.764086
- 77.266309
35.764217
- 77.272054
XS4 Right
35.764104
- 77.266513
VP3
35.764550
- 77.272106
XS5 Left
35.763775
- 77.265646
VP4
35.764898
- 77.270463
XS5 Right
35.763637
- 77.265766
VP5
35.764071
- 77.266808
XS6 Left
35.763569
- 77.265016
" VP6
35.764591
- 77.267194
XS6 Right
35.763546
- 77.265224
VP7
35.764370
- 77.266611
XS7 Left
35.763388
- 77.264134
VP8
35.763290
- 77.264121
XS7 Right
35.763208
- 77.264251
VP9
35.762979
- 77.262949
Figure 2. Asset Map MY3
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration Project
EEP #: 273
Pitt County, North Carolina
November 2013
P'u'
A Crest gage
Q Vegetation monitoring plots (VP 1 -9)
Stream cross - section surveys (XS 1 -7)
Conservation easement
Section 1 Stream Restoration Centerline MY1
Section 2 Stream Enhacement II
Section 3 Stream Enhacement II (planting only)
Other on -site hydrography
Non - buffered waterways
Ponds
0 Ford crossing
Wetland preservation
Buffer Zones (747,167 sqft)*
Top of Bank - 50 ft (368,217 sqft)
50 ft - 100 ft (228,582 sqft)
100 ft - 200 ft (150,368 sqft)
No Credit Non - diffuse /Non - buffered waterways
"" (4,3560 sqft removed per waterway)
* Buffer zones are planted contiguous areas that have a buffer
width of at least 50' but not greater than 200'. Areas not included in
the buffer credit area include: existing Jurisdictional wetlands, farm
ponds, areas that were not planted, and areas surrounding each
non - diffuse /non - buffered waterway entering the easement.

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

A
® Photo points (Veg =V, Stream =S)
Figure 2a. Current Condition Plan View MY3 ^� Stream cross - section surveys (XS 1 -7)
2' contours
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration Project Farm paths
EEP #: 273 Ford crossing
Pitt County, North Carolina Conservation easement
November 2013 Vegetation Plot Success (VP 1 -9)
Buffer =Yes, Stream =Yes or n/a
......,,,,,,,,J Buffer =No, Stream =n /a
taritec (3) S
Buffer =No, Stream =No
STREAM STRUCTURES
Count Type
Station Condition
Failing
1
Log Vane
00 +07.20 Intact, stable, functioning
N
2
Log Sill
22 +68.02 Intact, stable, functioning
N
3
Log Sill
23 +27.75 Intact, stable, functioning
N
4
Log Sill
25 +93.49 Intact, stable, functioning
N
5
_ _Rock J- Hook with Log Vane
28 +61.89 Intact, stable, functioning
N
6
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
31 +53.02 Intact, stable, functioning
N
7
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
33 +97.82 Intact, stable, functioning
N
8
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
35 +34.81 Intact, stable, losing grade control
N
9
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
36 +01.21 Intact, stable, functioning
N
10
Rock J- Hook with Log Vane
36 +70.73 Intact, stable, losing grade control
N
11
Log Vane
37 +66.50 Intact, stable, functioning
N
® Photo points (Veg =V, Stream =S)
Figure 2a. Current Condition Plan View MY3 ^� Stream cross - section surveys (XS 1 -7)
2' contours
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration Project Farm paths
EEP #: 273 Ford crossing
Pitt County, North Carolina Conservation easement
November 2013 Vegetation Plot Success (VP 1 -9)
Buffer =Yes, Stream =Yes or n/a
......,,,,,,,,J Buffer =No, Stream =n /a
taritec (3) S
Buffer =No, Stream =No
This map represents field conditions as of November
Planting Zones
Riverine Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
Livestakes
Existing Trees
Problem Areas
Brush Mattress <80% vegetative cover (2012)
T� Beaver Dam
Dead livestakes
20131
Murdannia keisak Feet
0 50 100 200
Section 1 Stream Restoration Thalweg MY1
Section 2 Stream Enhacement II
Section 3 Stream Enhacement II (planting only)
Other on -site hydrography
Non - buffered waterways
Ponds
Wetland Preservation
A
Crest gage
opw
ow
Log Vane
Log Sill
Cry
a r
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
This map represents field conditions as of November
Planting Zones
Riverine Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
Livestakes
Existing Trees
Problem Areas
Brush Mattress <80% vegetative cover (2012)
T� Beaver Dam
Dead livestakes
20131
Murdannia keisak Feet
0 50 100 200

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

VP6
IN V11•V12
23 +00
4 +00
V13,V14
s +00
a
00
Illl�c ,
27 +00 ��//
.d'
XS -4
VP7
STREAM STRUCTURES
Count Type Station Condition
1 Log Vane 00 +07.20 Intact, stable, functioning
Failing
N
2
Log Sill
22 +68.02 Intact, stable, functioning
N
3
Log Sill
23 +27.75 Intact, stable, functioning
N
4
Log Sill
25 +93.49 Intact, stable, functioning
N
5
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
28 +61.89 Intact, stable, functioning
N
6
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
31 +53.02 Intact, stable, functioning
N
7
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
33 +97.82 Intact, stable, functioning
N
8
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
35 +34.81 Intact, stable, losing grade control
N
9
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
36 +01.21 Intact, stable, functioning
N
10
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
36 +70.73 Intact, stable, losing grade control
N
11
Log Vane
37 +66.50 Intact, stable, functioning
N
This map represents field conditions as of November 13, 2013
®
Photo points (Veg =V, Stream =S)
Section 1 Stream Restoration Thalweg MY1
Planting Zones
Figure 2b. Current Condition Plan View MY3
^�
Stream cross - section surveys (XS 1 -7)
Section 2 Stream Enhacement II
Riverine Bottomland Hardwood Forest
2' contours
Section 3 Stream Enhacement II (planting only)
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration Project
Farm paths
Other on -site hydrography
Livestakes
EEP #: 273
Ford crossing
Non - buffered waterways
/ Existing Trees
Pitt County, North Carolina
Conservation easement
EM
Ponds
Problem Areas
November 2013
Vegetation
Plot Success (VP 1- 9)
":;; j
Wetland Preservation
Brush Mattress <80% vegetative cover (2012)
Buffer =Yes, Stream =Yes or n/a
A
Crest gage
Beaver Dam
,,,,,,,�
1,,,,,,,,;
Buffer =No, Stream =n /a
00W
Log Vane
Dead livestakes
1'� m� ,.µ
���uu�� "'�
Buffer =No, Stream =No
Log Sill
Murdannia keisak Feet
}� -,t, �,.��
Rock J -Hook with Log Vane
0 50 100 200

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 1
Assessed Length 3800
Adjusted %
Number
Number with Footage with for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable Unstable
Performing
Woody Woody Woody
Cate o
Sub-Cateciory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments Foota a
as Intended
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
1. Aggradation - Bar formation /growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0 0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting
0 0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture /Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
N/A
56
100%
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
56
56
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
56
56
o
100 /o
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
56
56
100%
4.Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
56
56
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured /Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and /or
scour and erosion
0 0
100%
0 0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0 0
100%
0 0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0 0
100%
0 0
100%
Totals
0 0
100%
0 0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
11
11
o
100 /o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
9
11
82%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
11
11
100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
3. Bank Protection
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance
11
11
100%
document)
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining - Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads /logs providing some cover at base -flow.
11
11
o
100 /o

Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration (EEP# 273)
Planted acreage*
18
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of woody material
0.1 acres
none
0
0
0.0%
2. Low Stem Density
Woody stem densities below target levels for
stem count success criteria
0.1 acres
none
0
0
0.0%
Total
0
0
0.0%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that
are obviously small given the monitoring year
0.25 acres
None
0
0
0.0%
Total
01
01
0.0%
Easement acreage
26.6
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Easement
Acreage
4. Invasive areas of concern
Murdannia keisak
1000 SF
Magenta line
with cross-
hatches
4 line
segments
—3' wide
0.039
0.1%
5. Encroachment areas
none
None
01
01
0.0%
*Total planted acreage

Stream Station Photos
Photo Station Sl — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 1
Station 00 +72 - Priority 2 (11/13/13 Year 3)
Photo Station S2 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 2
Station 06 +17 — Priority 2 (11/13/13 Year 3)

Photo Station S3 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 3
Station 12 +59 — Priority 2 (11/13/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station S4 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 4
Station 28 +46 — Priority 2 (11/13/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station S5 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 5
Station 32 +71 — Priority 2 (11/13/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station S6 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 6
Station 35 +24 — Priority 2 (11/13/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station S7 — Stream channel looking downstream at cross- section 7
Station 38 +71— Enhancement 2 (11/13/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station S8 — Crest gauge indicating a bankfull event (3/28/2013 Year 3)

Vegetation Plot Photos
Photo Station VI - Veg Plot 1 looking southeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V2 - Veg Plot 1 looking east (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V3 - Veg Plot 2 looking south (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V4 - Veg Plot 2 looking southeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V5 - Veg Plot 3 looking east (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V6 - Veg Plot 3 looking northeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V7 - Veg Plot 4 looking south (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V8 - Veg Plot 4 looking southeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V9 - Veg plot 5 looking south (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V10 - Veg plot 5 looking southeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station VI - Veg plot 6 looking east (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V12 - Veg plot 6 looking northeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V13 - Veg plot 7 looking south (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station V14 - Veg plot 7 looking southeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V15 - Veg plot 8 looking east (10/2/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station VI - Veg plot 8 looking northeast (10/2/2013 Year 3)

Photo Station V17 - Veg plot 9 looking northeast (11/13/2013 Year 3)
Photo Station VI - Veg plot 9 looking north (11/13/2013 Year 3)

(This page intentionally left blank).

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7a,b. — Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 8 — CVS Vegetation Metadata
Table 9 — CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Stem Class characteristics
IBuffer
Stems Native planted hardwood trees. Does NOT include shrubs. No pines. No vines.
2Stream/
Wetland
Stems Native planted woody stems. Includes shrubs, does NOT include live stakes. No vines
3Volunteers Native woody stems. Not planted. No vines.
°Total Planted +volunteer native woody stems. Includes live stakes. Excl. exotics. Excl. vines.
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Table 7. Oakley Crossroads (G) ( #273)
Year 3 (02- Oct -2013 to 13- Nov -2013)
Vegetation Plot Summary Information
Riparian
Stream/
Unknown
Buffer
Wetland
Growth
Plot #
Stems'
StemsZ Live Stakes Invasives Volunteers3
Total°
Form
0001
21
23 0 0 11
34
0
0002
14
14 0 0 53
67 `
0
0003
22
22 0 0 6
28
0
0004
20
21 0 0 19
40
0
0005
9
9 0 0 5
14
0
0006
18
18 0 0 78
96
0
0007
9
9 0 0 2
11
0
0008
16
16 0 0 5
21
0
0009
15
15 0 0 14
29
0
Wetland /Stream Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Stream/ Success
Wetland Criteria
Plot#
StemsZ Volunteers3 Total° Met?
0001
9311 445 1376 Yes
0002
567+ 2145 2711 Yes
0003
890! 243 1133 Yes
0004
850 769 1619 Yes
0005
364' 202 567 Yes
0006
728 3157 3885 Yes
0007
364; 81 445 Yes
0008
647 202 850 Yes
0009
607 567 1174 Yes
Project Avg !
668' 868 1529; Yes
Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Riparian Success
Buffer Criteria
Plot # Stems' Met?
0001 850 Yes
0002 567 Yes
0003 890 Yes
0004 809 Yes'
0005 364 Yes
0006 728 Yes
0007 364 Yes
0008 647 Yes
0009 607 Yes':
ProjectAvg 647 Yes
Stem Class characteristics
IBuffer
Stems Native planted hardwood trees. Does NOT include shrubs. No pines. No vines.
2Stream/
Wetland
Stems Native planted woody stems. Includes shrubs, does NOT include live stakes. No vines
3Volunteers Native woody stems. Not planted. No vines.
°Total Planted +volunteer native woody stems. Includes live stakes. Excl. exotics. Excl. vines.
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%

Table 8 - CVS Metadata
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration - EEP #273
Report Prepared By
Alex Baldwin
Date Prepared
1/2/201416:30
database name
STantec_ Oakley_ 2012cvs- eep- entrytool- v2.3.1.mdb
database location
U:\175613016\project\site_data\vegetation
computer name
BALDWINA -SP1
file size
61751296
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT=--= ____...:_;:
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a
summary of project(s) and project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each
year. This excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year.
This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live
stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of
occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for
each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species
(planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead
and missing stems are excluded.
�PROJECT SUMMARY- ___.. ___-----------
--- ------- _ --
Project Code
273
project Name
Oakley Crossroads (G)
Description
Stream and Wetland Restoration
River Basin
Tar - Pamlico
length(ft)
stream -to -edge width (ft)
area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
9

*Bolded hardwood trees are counted toward riparian buffer success criteria.
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
of � O %1O 1 / NEW NEW l�
t by less than 10% P -all =All planted stems including livestakes
Falls to meetreg6irements, by less than 10% T =All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
IIIO JON ,i is by more than 101/o Total includes natural recruit stems
Table 9. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
EEP Project Code 273. Project Name: Oakley Crossroads
Current Plot Data (MY3 2013)
Annual Means
E273 -01 -0001
E273 -01 -0002
E273 -01 -0003
E273 -01 -0004
E273 -01 -0005
E273 -01 -0006
E273 -01 -0007
E273 -01 -0008
E273 -01 -0009
M (2013)
MY2 (2012)
MY1(2011)
MYO (2011)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Ace rubrum
red maple
Tree
3
28
2
5
4
78
1
3
124
Acer rubrum var. rubrum
red maple
Tree
147
Alnusserrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
6
6
4
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
2
Eubotrys racemosa
swamp doghobble
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
22
22
22
22
22
22
13
13
13
13
13
13
Liquidambarstyraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
6
15
11
9
41
33
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
Magnolia virginiana
sweetbay
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Morelia cerifera
wax myrtle
shrub
2
2
2
1
1
2
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Nyssa biflora
swamptupelo
Tree
6
6
6
2
2
2
8
8
8
9
9
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
3
3
3
5
5
6
3
3
3
1
1
1
4
4
4
16
16
17
13
13
13
2
2
2
2
2
2
Pinustaeda
loblolly pine
Tree
1
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
5
5
5
4
7
7
8
6
6
6
4
4
4
1
1
2
4
4
4
27
27
33
28
28
28
14
14
14
14
14
14
Quercus
oak
Tree
2
2
2
7
7
7
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
Tree
8
8
8
5
5
6
5
5
6
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
6
6
8
32
32
36
30
30
30
10
10
10
12
12
12
uercus Iyrata
overcup oak
Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
4
4
4
uercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
6
6
6
7
7
7
9
9
9
uercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
11
11
13
13
13
14
14
14
13
13
13
7
7
7
uercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
uercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
12
12
12
16
16
16
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
Rhuscopallinum
flameleafsumac
shrub
1
5
6
Sambucuscanadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
1
3
Toxicodendron radicans
eastern poison ivy
Vine
1
Unknown
Shrub orTree
1
1
1
Stem count
23
23
34
14
14
67
22
22
28
21
21
40
9
9
14
18
18
96
9
9
11
16
16
21
15
151
29
147
147
340
148
1481
339
90
901
90
931
93
93
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
9
9
9
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
Species count
ms
Ste per ACRE
6
6
10
5
5
9
5
5
7
6
6
9
5
5
7
7
7
8
4
4
5
3
3
4
3
3
5
12
12
19
12
12
19
14
14
14
14
14
14
1930,81930.81
13761566,61566.61
27111890.31890.31
11331
849.81
849.81
16191364,21364.21566.61728,41728.41
38851364,21
EL5.21
647.51
647.51849.81
6071
6071
11741
6611
6611
15291
665,5!
665.5
15241404,71,104.71404.7141&21418.21418.21
*Bolded hardwood trees are counted toward riparian buffer success criteria.
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
of � O %1O 1 / NEW NEW l�
t by less than 10% P -all =All planted stems including livestakes
Falls to meetreg6irements, by less than 10% T =All planted and natural recruit stems including livestakes
IIIO JON ,i is by more than 101/o Total includes natural recruit stems

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figures 3a -j
— Cross - Sections with Annual Overlays
Figure 4
— Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Table 10a,b.
— Baseline — Stream Data Summary
Table l la.
— Monitoring — Cross - section Morphology Data
Table l lb.
— Monitoring — Stream Reach Morphology Data

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Tar - Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -1, Riffle, STA 0 +72
1.59
11/13/2013
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
MY 00 "19.331 01 MY 02 MY 03
12.21 49.05 49.05 150.82 41.25 150.84 41.28
19.33 48.29 48.29 153.07 41.201 156.311 41.09
87.171 45.621 87.171 45.621 175.621 41.081 190.461 40.37
93.571 44.591 93.571 44.591 178.751 41.061 191.751 40.25
160.311 41.001 160.251 41.021 193.291 40.171 196.711 39.13
173.901 40.961 165.471 40.951 194.001 40.001 197.551 39.24
18.33 8.37 9.77 9.15
20.80 12.39 15.49 15.73
Sta. 0 +75 Looking Downstream
100.00
120.00 140.00
As Built MY00 Flood Prone Area Elevation
160.00 180.00
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation MY 01 MY 02
200.00 220.00 240.00
MY 03

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

54.24
44.37
54.24
44.37
1 172.32
41.46
172.25
41.54
72.47
43.91
72.47
43.91
175.26
41.16
177.69
41.02
92.77
43.54
92.77
43.54
178.46
40.99
183.24
40.78
110.68
43.14
110.68
43.14
181.16
40.77
186.21
40.49
136.32
43.27
136.32
43.27
184.02
40.67
193.91
40.42
153.53
42.83
153.53
42.83
187.28
40.50
199.31
40.50
168.42
42.08
168.42
42.08
190.92
40.49
206.79
40.49
169.10
42.69
169.10
42.69
193.78
40.41
212.08
40.29
175.71
41.04
174.60
41.30
196.48
40.49
216.27
40.31
193.21
40.52
183.93
40.80
199.93
40.52
219.32
40.35
210.45
40.43
193.68
40.52
205.00
40.50
222.74
40.37
219.41
40.32
208.61
40.41
208.82
40.45
226.20
40.33
223.60
40.35
217.46
40.30
213.63
40.35
229.24
39.41
226.57
40.33
226.67
40.33
217.51
40.31
230.85
38.74
226.69
40.37
229.04
39.32
221.63
40.32
231.55
38.21
227.04
40.30
230.82
38.62
224.41
40.38
232.36
37.92
228.42
39.64
231.63
38.04
226.25
40.26
233.06
37.77
229.95
38.99
232.76
37.70
227.67
39.77
233.87
37.73
231.78
38.21
233.53
37.92
228.58
39.49
234.81
38.26
232.29
38.09
235.12
38.52
229.56
39.23
236.06
38.51
Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 2, Riffle, Station 6 +17
SUMARY DATA MY00
MY01
MY02
MY03
40.35
40.38
40.38
40.33
...............................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18.16
17.88
18.17
18.06
45.00
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
16.60
13.16
15.09
13.85
44.00
42.89
43.06
42.99
42.93
124.27
124.27
124.27
125.00
2.54
2.68
2.61
2.60
1.09
1.37
1.20
1.30
15.23
9.61
12.58
10.65
� 7.49
9.44
8.24
9.03
Sta. 6 +17 Looking Downstream
47.00
46.00
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45.00
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
44.00
..
43.00
c
42.00
v
..
W
41.00
....
40.00
.... .... .... ....
.... .... ....
....
� .
........
_.,,. � . ,
39.00
....
38.00
....
37 00
100.00 120.00
140.00
As Built MY00
160.00 180.00 200.00 220.00 240.00 260.00
Station (ft)
Flood Prone Area Elevation •••••• Bankfull Elevation MY01 u°°°°°°°°°°_MY02 MY 03
280.00
300.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 3, Pool, Station 12 +59
51.00
49.00
47.00
45.00
c
0 43.00
m
w
w
41.00
39.00
37.00
35.00
0.00
Sta.12 +59 Looking Downstream
50.00 100.00 150.00
As Built MY00 — — Flood Prone Area Elevation
200.00
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation
250.00
- --------------- MY 01 MY 02
300.00
MY 03
350.00
400.00
- Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -3, Pool, STA 12 +59
MITar
1.59
11/13/2013
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 3, Pool, Station 12 +59
51.00
49.00
47.00
45.00
c
0 43.00
m
w
w
41.00
39.00
37.00
35.00
0.00
Sta.12 +59 Looking Downstream
50.00 100.00 150.00
As Built MY00 — — Flood Prone Area Elevation
200.00
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation
250.00
- --------------- MY 01 MY 02
300.00
MY 03
350.00
400.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 4, Riffle, Station 28 +46
46.00
44.00
42.00
c
0
m
v
M 40.00
38.00
36.00
34.00
0.00
Sta. 28 +46 Looking Downstream
50.00
100.00
As Built MY00
150.00
— — Flood Prone Area Elevation
200.00 250.00
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation
300.00
- ---------------- MY 01
350.00
„::::::::::_ M Y 02
400.00
MY 03
450.00
500.00
- Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -4, Riffle, STA 28 +46
MITar
1.59
11/13/2013
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 4, Riffle, Station 28 +46
46.00
44.00
42.00
c
0
m
v
M 40.00
38.00
36.00
34.00
0.00
Sta. 28 +46 Looking Downstream
50.00
100.00
As Built MY00
150.00
— — Flood Prone Area Elevation
200.00 250.00
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation
300.00
- ---------------- MY 01
350.00
„::::::::::_ M Y 02
400.00
MY 03
450.00
500.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

*Floodprone width adjusted to not include adjacent farm pond.
Sta. 32 +71 Looking Downstream
Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 5 Pool, Station 32 +71
43.00 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ...............................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42.00
41.00
40.00
39.00
c
y 38.00
m
v
w
37.00
36.00
35.00
34.00
33.00
201
).00
220.00 240.00 260.00 280.00 300.00 320.00 340.00 360.00 380.00
Station (ft)
As Built MY00 Flood Prone Area Elevation •••••• Bankfull Elevation AMY 01 MY 02 MY 03
400.00
- Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -5, Pool, STA 32 +71
MITar
1.59
11/13/2013
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
*Floodprone width adjusted to not include adjacent farm pond.
Sta. 32 +71 Looking Downstream
Oakley Crossroads - UT to Tranters Creek
X- Section 5 Pool, Station 32 +71
43.00 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ...............................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42.00
41.00
40.00
39.00
c
y 38.00
m
v
w
37.00
36.00
35.00
34.00
33.00
201
).00
220.00 240.00 260.00 280.00 300.00 320.00 340.00 360.00 380.00
Station (ft)
As Built MY00 Flood Prone Area Elevation •••••• Bankfull Elevation AMY 01 MY 02 MY 03
400.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

220.80 1 38.40 1 220.80 1 38.40 1 298.82 1 36.79 1 286.16 1 36.79
237.17 1 39.75 1 237.17 1 39.75 1 306.18 1 36.84 1 292.51 1 36.78
290.35 1 36.85 1 287.43 1 36.82 1 321.44 1 34.10 1 320.27 1 35.30
301.91 1 36.75 1 288.9 1 36.88 1 322.57 1 33.28 1 321.36 1 34.78
322.30 1 34.33 1 322.78 1 34.18 1 326.57 1 35.65 1 325.31 1 35.45
323.55 1 34.36 1 324.04 1 34.17 1 328.9 1 36.67 1 327.21 1 35.87
SUMARY DATA MY00
MY01
Tar - Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -6 Riffle STA 35 +24
36.88
36.87
1.59
36.75
18.91
11/13/2013
19.10
18.74
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
220.80 1 38.40 1 220.80 1 38.40 1 298.82 1 36.79 1 286.16 1 36.79
237.17 1 39.75 1 237.17 1 39.75 1 306.18 1 36.84 1 292.51 1 36.78
290.35 1 36.85 1 287.43 1 36.82 1 321.44 1 34.10 1 320.27 1 35.30
301.91 1 36.75 1 288.9 1 36.88 1 322.57 1 33.28 1 321.36 1 34.78
322.30 1 34.33 1 322.78 1 34.18 1 326.57 1 35.65 1 325.31 1 35.45
323.55 1 34.36 1 324.04 1 34.17 1 328.9 1 36.67 1 327.21 1 35.87
SUMARY DATA MY00
MY01
MY02
MY03
36.88
36.87
36.83
36.75
18.91
17.43
19.10
18.74
17.17
12.92
12.37
12.92
G
39.43
39.57
40.44
40.26
158.46
166.08
160.00
160.00
2.55
2.70
3.61
3.51
1.10
1.35
1.54
1.45
15.61
9.59
8.03
8.91
9.23
12.82
12.93
12.38
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
C
C
E
E
Sta. 35 +24 Looking Downstream
200.00
250.00
As Built MY00
300.00
Flood Prone Area Elevation
Station (ft)
•••••• Bankfull Elevation
350.00
MY 01 MY 02
400.00
MY 03
450.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

26.111 38.201 26.11 1 38.20 1 43.00 1 38.91 1 50.02 1 38.86
34.241 38.521 34.24 1 38.52 1 51.58 1 38.82 1 55.25 1 38.61
66.761 38.141 71.32 1 37.96 1 77.16 1 35.34 1 79.48 1 34.52
69.331 38.101 75.06 1 36.251 1 79.17 1 34.57 1 79.92 1 33.85
84.271 31.821 92.45 1 36.186 1 85.93 1 32.58 1 86.84 1 34.47
86.461 31.911 95.74 1 37.49 1 86.64 1 33.08 1 87.31 1 34.64
31.46 1 36.52 1 34.07 1 25.52
G 44.28 1 44.01 1 43.42 1 43.24
16���' MIM' M�Mllli" mIM' M" MIMNM�IP�IL '"�T�IIINF"NMM,F "�MI�XNm^ i'��� iB:Ca �8'l� �6ia
* REVISED X -SEC DATA
Sta. 38 +71 Looking Downstream
0.00
20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
Station (ft)
As Built MY00 - - Flood Prone Area Elevation •••••• Bankfull Elevation
100.00 120.00 140.00
- --------------e MY 01 MY 02 MY 03
160.00
Tar - Pamlico River
Tranters Creek
XS -7 Riffle STA 38 +71
1.59
11/13/2013
T. Taylor, A. Baldwin
26.111 38.201 26.11 1 38.20 1 43.00 1 38.91 1 50.02 1 38.86
34.241 38.521 34.24 1 38.52 1 51.58 1 38.82 1 55.25 1 38.61
66.761 38.141 71.32 1 37.96 1 77.16 1 35.34 1 79.48 1 34.52
69.331 38.101 75.06 1 36.251 1 79.17 1 34.57 1 79.92 1 33.85
84.271 31.821 92.45 1 36.186 1 85.93 1 32.58 1 86.84 1 34.47
86.461 31.911 95.74 1 37.49 1 86.64 1 33.08 1 87.31 1 34.64
31.46 1 36.52 1 34.07 1 25.52
G 44.28 1 44.01 1 43.42 1 43.24
16���' MIM' M�Mllli" mIM' M" MIMNM�IP�IL '"�T�IIINF"NMM,F "�MI�XNm^ i'��� iB:Ca �8'l� �6ia
* REVISED X -SEC DATA
Sta. 38 +71 Looking Downstream
0.00
20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
Station (ft)
As Built MY00 - - Flood Prone Area Elevation •••••• Bankfull Elevation
100.00 120.00 140.00
- --------------e MY 01 MY 02 MY 03
160.00

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration - Longitudinal Profile
Station 0 +00 to 38 +79
2012 Monitoring - Year 0, Year 01, Year 02, Year 03
42
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
41
m11�
mw
�,1
NI11�
1
•�� *
40
_ • muu
................ ............................... uuu...................................................................
muu =+
1uu1 ........................uuuuuuu
�m� rr,ml " 'i • °u ^ all NFL's
II m M
............... 1111111 .........�............... .t * !�
7
1 ..............
............................... ............. ....�..........................
�
II � VIII
112.
um1 �
'!
1U �1 m�
� + +'�.`.� • * *
• •
:•_
uuu v muu
w1u uuu uuu
um1
muu
0 u1 muu
m v1_
+
uuu m mM
uuu 111111110 mlmmdU�
mum m
w1u m1
** +•
*!v +• • ��
miw mu� mmuu mllu
+ +! + *`
�W. m1
+��
MII4
w1u
1
v a u1i1"+ uuu
`muu
` •lItl''II
m muumu••
��
�
111111 111111
,lull.
� 111111 � m1m � �
ml�
«
row
+ +
11Fmll�
IIIII� M Z
39
... ...............�.�
.. .......
_ muu�..,.vmu�
111111 _
��......m11U..........._.......
+mIN'
•
uum�...•IIV1
�.....
�
— m1111, �
111111
m1m«
m
mi3 n
m
.
M .•
+11111
«muu1'lIP1
1
uuu
m Z
w
Z mu •r
°* 1 muu all
1 v ,,
uuu
muu
_
* * IS 111 muu °alum uu *1011. i
38
.........
.......................�.'t
M muu 1111110 Hill =
*
1 .
1
1
w1u
uu° uuu
*
vp
all _
mm� illlll
+IWW VIII
111111
ii
v
' m
`i
M
muuull
f uuv
uumm
v'
mlll� Z
uum`+'v+ •• +!um�
�m oll
uum
'
S'
,
v
muu uuu * r
t v,vv
muu
p
37
u
,
�1
muu
v muu
........� �1
`'
'•,
•�
uum m�*
>
'
�
u1vi11
LJ
1
�
uuu
mlm _ v Hill
t`••�IIIIIN-dIIIIIU
mllU
1
uum :IL
mllU
35
uum
m1m
34
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
'
33
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
........
32
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............................
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500 4000
Station (ft)
Year 0 Thalweg ` Year 0 RTOB ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °° Year 1 Thawleg a Year 1 RTOB ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° °° Year 2 Thalweg 1111 Year 2 RTOB Year 3 Thalweg — Year 3 RTOB 0 Log Sill ® Log Vane , Rock J -Hook w/ Log Vane

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration / EEP Protect No. 273 - Segment/Reach: Mainstem 3,950 feet
Parameter
lGauge 2
1 Regional Curve
Pre - Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SDs
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SID
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SID
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.40
4
7.80
11.20
14.60
2
12.3
14.64
17.31
20.82
4
Floodprone Width (ft)
15.00
4
120.00
126.50
133.00
2
240.0
80.66
182.63
367.14
4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.80
4
0.70
1.15
1.60
2
1.5
0.88
1.13
1.43
4
Bankfull Max Depth it
2.70
4
1.60
1.85
2.10
2
2.4
2.15
2.56
2.99
4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
19.00
1
4
9.50
11.051
1 12.601
1 2
1
1 19.0
1
118.161
19.081
20.90
4
Width /Depth Ratio
5.70
4
4.80
13.601
1 22.401
1 2
1
1 8.0
1
1 10.241
16.191
23.66
4
Entrenchment Ratio
1.40
1 4
1 8.20
1 12.651
1 17.10
1
1 2
1
1 19.5
1
1 4.66
1 10.551
21.21
4
Bank Height Ratio
Profile'
Riffle Length (ft)
-
-
24.83
35.98
53.02
4
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.002
0.003
0.006
4
Pool Length (ft)
20.47
33.67
44.45
2
Pool Max depth (ft)
1.7
2.3
2.9
2
4
2.81
3.12
3.43
2
Pool Spacing (ft)
5
27
35
67
4
43
52.5
62
43.4
64.26
94.03
2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
45
72.5
- 100
2
62
74.0
86
38.56
55.94
86.18
48.00
Radius of Curvature (ft)
8
12.8
14 21
4
22
27.0
31
19.24
27.81
36.28
56.00
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
0.5
1.2
1.4 1.8
4
1.8
2.2
2.5
1.11
1.61
2.10
56.00
Meander Wavelength (ft)
17
75
100 156
4
86
111
135
85.46
103.92
118.61
48.00
Meander Width Ratio
5.8
6.3
6.8
2
5
6.0
7
2.23
3.23
4.98
148.00
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) lb/f2
0.2
0.14
0.093
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
1
1
-
-
25
Unit Stream Power (transport capacity)
Ibs /ft/s per unit widths
0.25
0.17
0.16
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
G5c
C5, E5
E5
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
1.9
1.7
1.65
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
30
Valley length (ft)
-
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
-
-
-
3950
Sinuosity (ft)
1.01
1.18
1.28
1.4
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0018
0.002
0.0014
0.00146
BF slope (ft/ft)
-
-
0.00144
3Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
4% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells mdicate that these will typ ically not be filled h,.
1 = The distribmtions for these puunetas can nrchtde information from both the cross - section surveys and the longitndvral profile. 2 = For projects with a p -,d, -1 USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfiill verification -rue).
3. Utilizing stuvey data produce an estvnate of the bankfitll floodplain azea m acr ,which should be the azea from the top of bank to the toe of the terace risa/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting bazilcs that are eroding based on the visual stuvey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Of valve /needed only if the n exceeds 3; 6. Units changed from W /m2 to reflect those provided in origvral design.

Table 10b. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank, and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Oaklev Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration / EEP Pro'ect No. 273 - Sew ment/Reach: Mainstem (3.950 feet
Parameter
Pre- Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As- built/Baseline
1Ri% /RU % /P % /G % /S%
-
0
-
0
0
1
-
-
I -
-
-
-
-
-
-
52
-
48
-
1SC% /Sa% /G% /C% /B% /Be%
0
33
67
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / dip / dis' (mm)
0.14
0 26
0 5
4.4
7.3
-
30
03
0.9
11.2
-
2Entrenchment Class <1.5/1.5-1.99/2.0-4.9/5.0-9.9/ >10
-
-
-
±4005
'Incision Class <1.2/1.2-1.49/1.5-1.99/>2.0
-
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, lisp = max subpave
2 = Entrenchment Class - Assign /bin the reach footage into the classes indicated and provide the percentage of the total reach footage in each class in the table. This will result from the measured cross - sections as well as visual estimates
3 = Assign /bin the reach footage into the classes indicated and provide the percentage of the total reach footage in each class in the table. This will result from the measured cross - sections as well as the longitudinal profile
Footnotes 2,3 - These classes are loosley built around the Rosgen classification and hazard ranking breaks, but were adjusted slightly to make for easier assignment to somewhat coarser bins based on visual estimates in the field such that measurement of every segment for ER would not be necessary.
The intent here is to provide the reader/consumer of design and monitoring information with a good general sense of the extent of hydrologic containment in the pre- existing and the rehabilitated states as well as comparisons to the reference distributions.
ER and BHR have been addressed in prior submissions as a subsample (cross - sections as part of the design survey), however, these subsamples have often focused entirely on facilitating design without providing a thorough pre - constrution distribution of these parameters, leaving the reader/consumer with a sample that is weighted heavi
the reach. This means that the distributions for these parameters should include data from both the cross - section surveys and the longitudinal profile and in the case of ER, visual estimates. For example, the typical longitudinal profile permits sampling of the BHR at riffles beyond those subject to cross - sections and therefore can be readily
a more complete sample distribution for these parameters, thereby providing the distribution/coverage necessary to provide meaningful comparisons.

Table 11a. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration /EEP Project No. 273 - Segment/Reach: Mainstem 3,950 feet
Cross Section 1 (STA0 +72, Riffle)
Cross Section 2 (STAG +17, Riffle)
Cross Section 3 (STA 12 +59, Pool)
Cross Section 4 (STA28 +46, Riffle)
Cross Section 5 (STA32 +71,
Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
40.49
40.57
40.37
40.38
40.38
40.33
39.70
39.70
39.61
37.85
37.93
38.22
37.33
37.23
37.19
Bankfull Width ft
20082
12.39
15.49
15.73
16.60
13.16
15.09
13.85
20.58
24.38
20.80
19.56
14.64
13.70
14.70
16.10
19.06
29.71
23.49
21.70
Floodprone Width (ft)
80.66
65.65
78.50
78.50
124.27
131.28
128.50
125.00
248.08
120.86
244.10
245.00
367.14
332.68
367.00
367.00
289.16
315.10
301.17
300.00
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.88
0.68
0.63
0.88
1.09
1.37
1.20
1.30
1.79
1.55
1.66
1.67
1.43
1.33
1.35
1.34
1.55
1.20
1.48
1.40
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.15
1.14
1.84
2.15
2.54
2.68
2.61
2.60
3.43
3.41
3.17
3.05
2.99
2.69
3.28
3.29
2.81
3.65
3.77
2.82
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
18.33
8.37
9.77
9.15
18.16
17.88
18.17
18.06
36.86
37.87
34.50
32.69
20.90
18.22
19.85
21.57
29.47
35.63
34.74
30.33
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
23.66
18.22
24.59
27.12
15.23
9.61
12.58
10.65
11.50
15.73
12.53
11.71
10.24
10.30
10.89
12.01
12.30
24.76
15.87
15.50
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
3.88
5.30
5.07
4.99
7.49
7.51
8.52
9.03
12.05
4.96
11.74
12.53
25.08
24.28
24.97
22.80
15.17
10.61
12.82
13.82
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.90
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.98
1.00
1.00
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ftZ)
d50 mm
Cross Section 6 (STA35 +24,
Riffle)
Cross Section 7 (STA38 +71, Other)
Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Cross Section
9 (Pool)
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation's
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
36.87
36.83
36.75
38.00
38.00
37.85
Bankfull Width (ft)
17.17
12.92
12.37
12.92
31.46
36.52
34.07
25.52
Floodprone Width (ft)
158.46
166.08
160.00
160.00
132.69
132.69
>200
200.00
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.10
1.35
1.54
1.45
2.41
2.13
2.09
2.46
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.55
2.70
3.61
3.51
6.23
6.01
5.42
5.39
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
18.91
17.43
19.10
18.74
75.91
77.93
71.24
62.90
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
15.61
9.59
8.03
8.91
13.05
17.15
16.30
10.37
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
9.23
12.82
12.93
12.38
4.22
3.63
5.87
7.84
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ftZ)
d50 mm
1 = Widths and depths for monitoring resurveywill be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional /depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."

Table 11 b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration / EEP Project No. 273 - Se ment/Reach: Mainstem 3,950 feet
Parameter
Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY- 3
MY- 4
MY- 5
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle only
Min
Mean
Med
Max
4
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
4
SD
n
Min Mean
Med
Max
4
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
4
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
4
SD
n
Min
Mean Med
Max
4
SD
n
Bank-full Width (ft)
14.6
17.31
-
20.82
-
4
12.4
12.8
12.9
13.16
0.39
4
12.4 14.4
14.9
15.49
1.399
4
12.9
14.7
14.8
16.1
1.5
4
Floodprone Width (ft)
80.7
182.63
-
367.14
-
4
65.7
118.7
124
166.1
50.4
4
78.5 183.5
144.3
367
126.9
4
78.5
182.6
142.5
367.0
127.4
4
Bank-full Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
1.13
-
1.43
-
4
0.7
1.1
1.35
1.37
0.39
4
0.6 1.2
1.275
1.54
0.392
4
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.5
0.2
4
Bank-full Max Depth ft
2.2
2.56
-
2.99
-
4
1.1
2.2
2.68
2.703
0.9
4
1.8 2.8
2.945
3.61
0.783
4
2.2
2.9
2.9
3.5
0.6
4
Bank-full Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
18.2
19.08
-
20.9
-
4
8.4
8.4
17.4
17.88
5.37
4
9.8 16.7
18.64
19.85
4.686
4
9.2
16.9
18.4
21.6
5.4
4
Width /Depth Ratio
10.2
16.19
-
23.66
-
4
9.6
12.5
9.61
18.22
4.98
4
8.0 14.0
11.73
24.587
7.289
4
1 8.9
14.7
11.3
27.1
8.4
4
Entrenchment Ratio
4.7
1 10.55
-
21.21
-
1 4
5.3
9.2
9.44
12.82
3.77
4
5.1 12.9
10.73
24.966
8.682
4
5.0
12.3
10.7
22.8
7.6
4
Bank Height Ratio
-
I -
I -
I -
-
-
1
1
1
1
0
4
1 1
1
1
0
4
1.0
1
1
1
0
4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
24.8
35.98
-
53.02
-
4
24.2
35.2
-
53.1
-
4
20.28 30.8
-
55.2
4
19.4
33.1
52.1
4
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.002
0.003
-
0.006
-
4
0.002
0.003
-
0.006
-
4
0.002 0.004
-
0.006
1
4
10.002
0.004
0.006
4
Pool Length (ft)
20.47
33.67
-
44.45
-
2
21
32.54
-
45.21
-
2
26.76 38.88
-
51
2
22
33
44
2
Pool Max depth (ft)
2.81
3.12
-
3.43
-
2
3.41
3.53
-
3.65
-
2
3.17 3.47
-
3.77
2
3.02
1 3.4
3.77
2
Pool Spacing (ft)j
43.4
1 64.26
1 -
1 94.03
-
2
1 42.1
1 65.2
-
95.2
-
2
28.72 64
-
106
33
27.5
64.311
113
33
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
Radius of Curvature (ft)
38.6
19.2
55.94
27.81
- 86.18
- 36.28
- 48
- 56
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data
indicate significant shifts from baseline
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1.1
1.61
- 2.1
- 56
Meander Wavelength (ft)
85.5
103.92
- 118.61
- 48
Meander Width Ratio
2.2
1 3.23
1 - 1 4.98
- 48
Additional Roach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4,E5
C4,E5
C4,E5
C4,E5
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
Sinuosity (ft)
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.00146
0.00145
0.00145
0.00152
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.00144
0.00139
0.00137
0.00135
3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%
52
-
48
-
-
52
-
48
-
-
52
-
48
-
-
52
-
48
-
-
3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
3d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/
2% of Reach with Erodina Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross - section surveys and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt /Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value /needed only if the n exceeds 3

Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 12 — Verification of Bankfull Events

(This page intentionally left blank for two -sided printing)

Table 12 - Verification of Bankfull Events
Oakley Crossroads Stream and Buffer Restoration Project - EEP Project No. 273
Date of Data Collection
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo
Visual observation of
September 13, 2011
unknown
n/a
wrack lines
October 4, 2012
unknown
Crest gauge
S9 (MY2)
Visual observation of
October 10, 2012
unknown
S8 (MY2)
wrack lines
March 28, 2013
unknown
I Crest gauge
S8 (M Y-3)