20130250 Ver 1_Monitoring Baseline Report_20150414

NORKETT BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION SITE
Union County, NC
DENR Contract 004673
NCEEP Project Number 95360
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report
FINAL
Data Collection Period: March 2014 - April 2014
Draft Submission Date: June 12, 2014
Final Submission Date: July 15, 2014
Prepared for:
LT, fall 'CI1 11
rwaGe
NCDENR, NCEEP
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652

Prepared by:
wim,
WILDLANDS
CNG- NCCRING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 S. Mint Street, # 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
P - 704 - 332 -7754
F - 704 - 332 -3306
Kirsten Y. Gimbert
kgimbert @wildlandseng.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering (Wildlands) restored and enhanced a total of 10,891 linear feet (LF) of stream on
a full - delivery mitigation site in Union County, NC. The project streams consist of Norkett Branch, a third
order stream, two unnamed first order tributaries to Norkett Branch (UT1 and UT2), and two
intermittent tributaries to Norkett Branch (UT2A and UT3). Stormwater Best Management Practices
(BMPs) are proposed to treat water quality on the non - jurisdictional headwaters of UT3 and an adjacent
ephemeral drainage feature. The project will provide 10,098 stream mitigation units (SMUs).
The Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Site) is located in southeastern Union County, NC,
approximately ten miles southeast of the City of Monroe and five miles north of the South Carolina state
line. The site is located in the Yadkin River Basin; eight digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 03040105 and the 14-
digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040105081020 (Figure 1). This CU was identified as a targeted local
watershed in NCEEP's 2009 Lower Yadkin- Pee Dee River Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan. This
RBRP plan identifies agricultural practices and runoff as the probable major sources of water quality
impairment in the Middle Lanes Creek watershed. The 2008 North Carolina Division of Water
Resource's (NCDWR) Basinwide Water Quality Report (BWQR) lists turbidity and nutrient concentrations
of nitrogen and phosphorus as specific concerns in the Rocky River watershed portion of the Yadkin- Pee
Dee River basin. Other pollutants of concern cited in this report are fecal coliform bacteria, iron, and
copper. The project reaches flow off -site, directly into Lanes Creek, which is included on the NCDWR
303d list of impaired streams. The section of Lanes Creek downstream of the project site is listed as
impaired due to turbidity (NCDWR, 2012). The project goals established in the mitigation plan
(Wildlands, 2013) were completed with careful consideration of goals and objectives that were
described in the RBRP and NCDWR BWQR and to meet the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program's (NCEEP) mitigation needs while maximizing the ecological and water quality uplift within the
watershed. The following project goals established include:
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat within the riparian corridor and provide habitat corridor
extension from adjacent downstream forested habitat;
• Improve additional water quality aspects within stream channels on site;
• Decrease sediment inputs to the stream channels and decrease turbidity in receiving Lanes
Creek; and
• Decrease phosphorus, nitrogen, and fecal coliform inputs to the stream channels.
The Site construction and as -built surveys were completed between December 2013 and May 2014.
Adjustments were made during construction, where needed, based on field evaluation at the designer's
discretion due to shallow bedrock found during construction. In general, adjustments were made within
the Site due to the design features' proximity to vernal pools or existing wetlands, proximity to the old
channel fill, or proximity to shallow bedrock. Grade control structures were added or removed due to
the presence of bedrock and bioengineered bank armoring structures were shortened. Specific changes
are detailed in Section 5.1. Baseline (MY -0) profiles and cross - section dimensions closely match the
design parameters. The Site appears to have been built as designed and is on track to meeting the
upcoming monitoring year's success criteria.
w
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —DRAFT Page i

NORKETT BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION SITE
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report
EXECUTIVESUMMARY .................................................................................................... ............................... i
1.0
Project Goals, Background and Attributes ......................................................... ...............................
1
1.1
Project Location and Setting .......................................................................... ............................... 1
1.2
Project Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... ...............................
2
1.3
Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach ....................................... ............................... 3
1.4
Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data ................................................. ..............................4
2.0
Success Criteria ................................................................................................... ..............................4
2.1
Streams ........................................................................................................... ..............................5
2.2
Vegetation ....................................................................................................... ..............................6
3.0
Monitoring Plan .................................................................................................. ..............................6
3.1
Stream ............................................................................................................. ..............................6
3.2
Vegetation ....................................................................................................... ..............................8
3.3
Schedule and Reporting ................................................................................. ............................... 8
4.0
Maintenance and Contingency Plans .................................................................. ..............................9
5.0
As -Built Condition (Baseline) ............................................................................. ............................... 9
5.1
As -Built /Record Drawings ............................................................................... ..............................9
5.2
Baseline Data Assessment ........................................................................... ...............................
12
6.0
References ......................................................................................................... .............................13
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Component /Asset Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Project Information and Attributes
Appendix 2 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 5a -c Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 6a -c Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Cross - Section Plots
Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Stream Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7 Planted and Total Stem Counts
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix 4 Baseline Drawings
W
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —DRAFT Page ii

1.0 Project Goals, Background and Attributes
1.1 Project Location and Setting
The proposed stream mitigation site is located in southeastern Union County along Philadelphia Church
Road approximately three miles east of NC Highway 601 (Figure 1). The site is located on tracts owned
by Marie S. Autry (PIN 03060001A), Kay A. and Lane Haigler (PIN 03081007C; PIN 03081013; PIN
03081014), The Cox Farms Irrevocable Trust (PIN 03081010), John H. and Peggy S. Autry (3081007D),
and Marion, Delano, Ruth, and John (Sr.) Cox (PIN 03081012). A conservation easement was recorded
on 31.6 acres within the seven parcels (Deed book 06095, Pages 0530 - 0589). To access the site from
Charlotte, NC, take US -74 south approximately 25 miles to US -601 in Monroe, NC. Turn right on US -601,
South and continue approximately 10.5 miles and then turn left onto Landsford Road. Travel
approximately 3 miles and take a left onto Philadelphia Church Road. Travel 2 miles and cross over UT2
to Norkett Branch. Both portions of the site can be accessed on either side of Philadelphia Church Road.
The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont physiographic province. (USGS, 1998). The
project watershed consists primarily of agricultural land, pasture, and forest. No recent disturbances
were noted beyond land tillage associated with agriculture operations. The drainage area for the
project site is 2,034 acres (3.18 sqmi) at the lower end of Norkett Branch Reach 2.
The Site is located within the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWR) subbasin 03- 07 -14.
Norkett Branch (DWQ Index No. 13- 17 -40 -8) is the main tributary of the project and is classified as WS -V
waters. Class WS -V waters are protected as water supplies draining to Class WS -IV waters or waters
used by industry to supply drinking water or waters formerly used as water supply. These waters are
also protected for Class C uses. Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife
and aquatic life, maintenance of biotic integrity, and agriculture. The Site is approximately 2 miles
upstream from the outlet of Norkett Branch to Lane's Creek, which is listed as impaired for aquatic life
on the North Carolina 303(d) list (NCDWR, 2009). The section of Lanes Creek downstream of the project
site is listed as impaired due to turbidity (NCDWR, 2012). The 2008 NCDWR Basinwide Water Quality
Report lists turbidity and nutrient concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus as specific concerns in the
Rocky River watershed portion of the Yadkin- Pee Dee River basin. Other pollutants of concern cited in
this report are fecal coliform bacteria, iron, and copper.
The Site is located in the eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 03040105, in the Yadkin River Basin, otherwise
known as the Yadkin 05 CU. The 14 -digit hydrologic unit, or "Targeted Local Watershed," within the
03040105 CU (Yadkin 05) that includes the project site is Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
03040105081020 (Middle Lane's Creek). The River Basin Restoration Priorities Plan (RBRP) identifies
agricultural practices and runoff as the probable major sources of water quality impairment in the
Middle Lane's Creek watershed. Restoration goals for the entire Yadkin 05 basin outlined in the 2009
RBRP document (NCEEP, 2009) include the following:
• improved management of stormwater runoff to these waters;
• protection of valuable threatened and endangered wildlife resources;
• continued mitigation of impacts resulting from rapid urbanization of the area; and
• restoration of water quality in DWQ- identified impaired streams.
klvv
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 1

Prior to construction activities, the streams had been routinely maintained to provide drainage for
agricultural purposes. Impacts to the stream included straightening and ditching, eroding banks, and a
lack of stabilizing riparian vegetation. The stream was used as a water source for cattle in some areas,
resulting in over - widened, unstable trampled banks. Algal blooms, presumably from agricultural
nutrient loading, were observed during site visits.
Trampled stream banks, over - widened channels, and banks illustrating signs of instability were a
common occurrence throughout the Site. The alterations of the Site to promote farming resulted in
impairment of the ecological function of Site's streams. Specific functional losses at the Site include
degraded aquatic habitat, altered hydrology, and reduction of quality of in- stream and riparian wetland
habitats and related water quality benefits. Table 4 in Appendix 1 and Tables 5a -c in Appendix 2 present
the pre- restoration conditions in detail.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The mitigation project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits such as pollutant removal
and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Expected improvements to water quality and ecological
processes are outlined below as project goals and objectives. The agricultural stressors and pollutants
have been specifically addressed by the site design. The major goals of the stream mitigation project are
to provide ecological and water quality enhancements to the Norkett Branch, Rocky River and Yadkin
River Basins while creating a functional riparian corridor at the site level and restoring a Piedmont
Bottomland Forest as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). These project goals were established
with careful consideration of goals and objectives that were described in the RBRP and to meet the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program's (NCEEP) mitigation needs while maximizing the
ecological and water quality uplift within the watershed.
The following project specific goals and objectives established in the mitigation plan include:
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat within the riparian corridor and provide habitat corridor
extension from adjacent downstream forested habitat. By restoring appropriate channel
cross - section and profile, including riffle and pool sequences, coarse substrate zones for
macro inve rte brates and deep pool habitat for fish will also be restored. Introduction of large
woody debris, rock structures, brush toe, and native stream bank vegetation will provide
additional habitat and cover for both fish and macro invertebrates. Adjacent buffer areas will be
restored by planting native vegetation which will provide habitat and forage for terrestrial
species. These areas will be allowed to receive more regular inundating flows, and vernal pools
may develop over time increasing habitat diversity. A watershed approach, restoring riparian
corridor functions on multiple interconnected tributaries as well as treating agricultural drainage
from headwater features with Best Management Practices (BMPs), will allow for large -scale
riparian corridor connectivity.
• Improve additional water quality aspects within stream channels on site. Riffle /pool sequences
will be restored to provide re- aeration for oxygen levels to be maintained in the perennial
reaches. Creation of deep pool zones will lower temperature, helping to maintain dissolved
oxygen concentrations. Establishment and maintenance of riparian buffers will create long -term
shading of the stream to minimize thermal heating. Water quality BMPs situated in the
headwaters of jurisdictional streams will treat agricultural runoff before it reaches project
stream reaches.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 2

• Decrease sediment inputs to the stream channels and decrease turbidity in receiving Lanes
Creek. Cattle will be fenced out of the riparian corridor, eliminating bank trampling. Sediment
input from eroding stream banks will be reduced by installing bioengineering and in- stream
structures while creating a stable channel form using geomorphic design principles. Sediment
from off -site sources will be captured by deposition on restored floodplain areas where native
vegetation will slow overland flow velocities. By allowing for more overbank flooding and by
increasing channel roughness, in- channel velocities can be reduced. This will lower bank shear
stress and decrease bank erosion.
• Decrease phosphorus, nitrogen, and fecal coliform inputs to the stream channels. Nitrogen and
phosphorus chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and cattle waste will be decreased by buffering
adjacent agricultural operations from the restored channels. Cattle will be fenced out to
eliminate in- channel fecal pollution. Off -site nutrient input will be absorbed on -site by filtering
flood flows through restored floodplain areas, water quality BMPs, and vernal pools positioned
to treat concentrated overland flow. Flood flows will be allowed to disperse through native
vegetation across the reconnected floodplain. Increased surface water residency time will
provide contact treatment time and groundwater recharge potential.
1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
The design streams were restored to the appropriate type based on the surrounding landscape, climate,
and natural vegetation communities but also with strong consideration to existing watershed conditions
and trajectory. Specially, the site design was developed to address stream degradation caused primarily
by livestock access, agricultural practices, and anthropogenic modifications. Other key factors
addressed in the design were to create stable habitats, and improve riparian buffers. Figure 2 and Table
1 in Appendix 1 present the stream mitigation components for the Site.
The final mitigation plan was submitted and accepted by the NCEEP in July of 2013. Construction
activities were completed by Land Mechanic Designs, Inc in April 2014. The planting was completed by
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. in April 2014. The baseline as -built survey was completed by Kee Mapping
and Surveying between March 2014 and April 2014. There were a few deviations reported in the as-
built project elements compared to the design plans. Adjustments were made during construction,
where needed, based on field evaluation at the designer's discretion due to shallow bedrock found
during construction. In general, adjustments were made within the Site due to the design features'
proximity to vernal pools or existing wetlands, proximity to old channel fill, or the proximity to shallow
bedrock. Grade control structures were added or removed due to the presence of bedrock, and
bioengineered bank armoring structures were shortened. Field adjustments made during construction
are described in detail in section 5.1. Appendix 1 provides more detailed project activity, history,
contact information, and watershed /site background information for this project.
1.3.1 Project Structure
The project will provide 10,098 stream mitigation units (SMUs). Please refer to Figure 2 for the
project component /asset map for the stream restoration feature exhibits and Table 1 for the project
component and mitigation credit information for the Site.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 3

1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach
The design streams have been restored to the appropriate type based on the surrounding
landscape, climate, and natural vegetation communities but also with strong consideration to
existing watershed conditions and trajectory. The project includes stream restoration and
enhancement as well as water quality treatment BMPs. The specific proposed stream types are
described below.
The stream restoration portion of this project includes seven reaches:
• Norkett Branch Reach 1 from the southern portion of the property to the confluence with
UT2;
• Norkett Branch Reach 2 from the confluence with UT2 to the northern boundary of the
property ;
• UT1 from the eastern portion of the Cox Farms property to the confluence with Norkett
Branch;
• UT2 Reach 1 from its origin at a farm pond to station 310 +80;
• UT2 Reach 2 from station 310 +80 to the confluence with UT2A;
• UT2 Reach 3A from the confluence with UT2A to the culvert at Philadelphia Church Road;
and
• UT2 Reach 3B from the culvert at Philadelphia Church Road to the confluence with Norkett
Branch.
Enhancement II was implemented on two intermittent channels: UT2A, which runs from the western
portion of the Haigler property to its confluence with UT2, and UT3 which runs from the eastern portion
of the Haigler property to its confluence with Norkett Branch. Stormwater BMPs have been
implemented to treat agricultural drainage upstream of UT3 and agricultural drainage in the right
floodplain of Norkett Branch Reach 2.
The project design was developed based on similar reference conditions representing small Piedmont
streams within the Carolina Slate Belt and on the border between the Triassic Basin Lithologic Belt and
the Carolina Slate Belt. These reference streams were chosen because of similarities to the project
streams including drainage area, valley slope and morphology, bed material, and location within or
closely bordering the Carolina Slate Belt region of the Piedmont. The streams on the Site are all gravel
bed channels and the design incorporates woody structures that will drive scour pool formation and
provide aquatic habitat.
1.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data
The Site was restored by Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) through a full - delivery contract with
NCEEP. Tables 2, 3, and 4 in Appendix 1 provide detailed information regarding the Project Activity and
Reporting History, Project Contacts, and Project Baseline Information and Attributes.
2.0 Success Criteria
The stream restoration performance criteria for the project site follow approved performance criteria
presented in the NCEEP Mitigation Plan Template (version 2.1, 09/01/2011), the NCEEP Monitoring
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 4

Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation (11/7/2011), and the
Stream Mitigation Guidelines issued in April 2003 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE)
and NCDWQ. Annual monitoring and semi - annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of
the finished project. The stream restoration and enhancement sections of the project have been
assigned specific performance criteria components for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation.
Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the seven year post- construction monitoring. If all
performance criteria have been successfully met and two bankfull events have occurred during separate
years, Wildlands may propose to terminate stream and /or vegetation monitoring after Year 5, in
accordance with the Early Closure Provision in the NCEEP Monitoring Requirements and Performance
Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation (November 7, 2011). These success criteria are
covered in detail in the following paragraphs.
2.1 Streams
2.1.1 Dimension
Riffle cross - sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Per NCEEP guidance, bank height
ratios shall not exceed 1.2 and entrenchment ratios shall be at least 2.2 for restored channels to be
considered stable. All riffle cross - sections should fall within the parameters defined for channels of
the appropriate Rosgen stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be evaluated to
assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability include a
vertically incising thalweg or eroding channel banks. Changes in the channel that indicate a
movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -to -depth ratio in
meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken if channel
changes indicate a movement toward stability.
2.1.2 Pattern and Profile
The as -built survey includes a longitudinal profile for the baseline monitoring report. Longitudinal
profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven year monitoring period unless other
indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral instability. If a
longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will follow standards as described in the NCEEP
Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation
(11/7/2011) and the 2003 USACE and NCDWQ Stream Mitigation Guidance for the necessary
reaches.
2.1.3 Substrate
Substrate materials in the restoration reaches should indicate a progression towards or the
maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the pool features.
2.1.4 Photo Reference Points
Photographs should illustrate the site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis.
Cross - section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks.
Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of persistent bars within the channel or vertical
incision. Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 5

vane arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
Reference photos will also be taken for each of the vegetation plots.
2.1.5 Bankfull Documentation
Two bankfull flow events must be documented on the restoration and enhancement reaches within
the seven -year monitoring period. The two bankfull events must occur in separate years. Stream
monitoring will continue until success criteria in the form of two bankfull events in separate years
have been documented. Bankfull events will be documented using submerged pressure
transducers, crest gages, photographs, and visual assessments such as debris lines.
2.2 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridor along restored and enhanced reaches at the end of the required monitoring period (year
seven). The interim measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 planted
stems per acre at the end of the third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the
fifth year of monitoring. Planted vegetation must average 10 feet in height in each plot at the end of the
seventh year of monitoring. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem density is
trending towards success (i.e., no less than 260 five year old stems /acre), monitoring of vegetation on
the site may be terminated provided written approval is provided by the USACE in consultation with the
NC Interagency Review Team. The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and
controlled as necessary throughout the required monitoring period.
3.0 Monitoring Plan
Monitoring will consist of collecting morphological, vegetative, and hydrological data to assess the
project success based on the restoration goals and objectives on an annual basis or until success criteria
is met. The success of the project will be assessed using measurements of the stream channel's
dimension, substrate composition, permanent photographs, vegetation, and surface water hydrology.
Any areas with identified high priority problems, such as streambank instability, aggradation/
degradation, or lack of vegetation establishment will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. The problem
areas will be visually noted and remedial actions will be discussed with NCEEP staff to determine a plan
of action. A remedial action plan will be submitted if maintenance is required.
3.1 Stream
Geomorphic assessments follow guidelines outlined in the Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994), methodologies utilized in the Rosgen
stream assessment and classification document ( Rosgen, 1994 and 1996), and in the Stream
Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al, 2003). Please refer to Appendix 4 for
monitoring locations discussed below.
3.1.1 Dimension
A total of 20 cross - sections were installed along the stream restoration reaches. One permanent
cross - section was installed per 20 bankfull widths along stream restoration reaches, with riffle and
pool sections in proportion to NCEEP guidance. Each cross - section was permanently marked with
pins to establish its location. Annual cross - section survey will include points measured at all breaks
W
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 6

in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg. Photographs will be taken
annually of the cross - section looking upstream and downstream.
3.1.2 Pattern and Profile
During the as -built survey, seven separate longitudinal profiles were conducted on project streams;
2,313 LF on Norkett Branch Reach 1; 1,513 LF on Norkett Branch Reach 2; 1,212 LF on UT1; 1,033 LF
on UT2 Reach 1; 1,416 LF on UT2 Reach 2; 1,041 LF on UT2 Reach 3A; and 668 LF on UT2 Reach 3B.
Longitudinal profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven year monitoring period unless
other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral instability.
Stream pattern and profile will be assessed visually as described below.
3.1.3 Substrate
A reach -wide pebble count was conducted in all restoration reaches (Norkett Branch Reach 1,
Norkett Branch Reach 2, UT1, UT2 Reach 1 UT2 Reach 2, UT2 Reach 3A and UT2 Reach 36) for
classification purposes. A wetted perimeter pebble count was conducted at each permanent riffle
cross - section to characterize the pavement. Subsequent sampling will be performed annually at the
same locations for the duration of the monitoring.
3.1.4 Photo Reference Points
A total of 51 permanent photograph reference points were established within the project area after
construction. Photographs will be taken once a year to visually document stability for seven years
following construction. Permanent markers were established so that the same locations and view
directions on the site are monitored each year. Photographs will be used to monitor stream
restoration and enhancement reaches. Photographs will also be taken along Norkett Branch Reach
1 where the old channel was filled in to document the transition in to a wetland complex. The
photographer will make every effort to maintain the same view in each photo over time. The
representative digital photo(s) will be taken on the same day(s) the surveys are conducted.
3.1.5 Bankfull Documentation
Three crest gages and three pressure transducers were installed on the Site (Appendix 4). The gages
and transducers were installed onsite in surveyed riffle cross - sections XS6 (Norkett Branch), XS9
(UT1), and XS18 (UT2 Reach 3A), and will be checked during each site visit to determine if a bankfull
event has occurred since the last visit. Photographs will be used to document the occurrence of
debris lines and sediment deposition as evidence of bankfull events. Additionally, the pressure
transducer data will be plotted and included in the annual monitoring reports.
3.1.6 Visual Assessment
Visual assessments will be performed along all stream and water quality BMP areas on a semi-
annual basis during the seven year monitoring period. Problem areas will be noted such as channel
instability (i.e. lateral and /or vertical instability, in- stream structure failure /instability and /or piping,
headcuts), vegetated buffer health (i.e. low stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species or
encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock access. Areas of concern will be mapped and
photographed accompanied by a written description in the annual report. Problem areas with be re-
evaluated during each subsequent visual assessment. Should remedial actions be required,
recommendations will be provided in the annual monitoring report.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 7

3.1.7 Water Quality BMP Assessment
Water quality grab samples will be collected during the monitoring period to assess the functionality
of the step pool conveyance BMP and the pocket wetland BMP and to compare to published
predicted pollutant removal rates. This sampling will not be part of the success criteria for the
project. Please refer to Figure 2 for a location map of these BMPs.
3.2 Vegetation
A total of 26 vegetation monitoring plots were installed and evaluated within the restoration and
enhancement areas to measure the survival of the planted trees during April 2014. Vegetation plots
were randomly established within the planted corridor of the restoration areas to capture the
heterogeneity of the designed vegetative communities. The number of monitoring quadrants required
is based on the NCEEP monitoring guidance documents (version 1.4, 11/7/11). The size of individual
quadrants will be 100 square meters for woody tree species and shrubs. Vegetation assessments will be
conducted following the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation
(2006). The vegetation plot corners have been marked and are recoverable either through field
identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference photographs at the origin looking diagonally
across the plot to the opposite corner were taken in April 2014. Subsequent annual assessments
following baseline survey will capture the same reference photograph locations.
The first annual vegetation monitoring activities will commence during the month of September 2014.
The restoration and enhancement sites will then be evaluated each subsequent year between June 1
and September 31. Species composition, density and survival rates will be evaluated on an annual basis
by plot and for the entire site. Individual plot data will be provided and will include diameter, height,
density, vigor, damage (if any), and percent survival. Planted woody stems will be marked annually as
needed, based off of a known origin, so they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality
will be determined from the difference between the baseline year's living planted stems and the current
year's living planted stems.
3.3 Schedule and Reporting
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to
NCEEP. Based on the NCEEP Monitoring Report Template (version 1.3, 01/15/2010), the monitoring
reports will include the following:
• Project background which includes project objectives, project structure, restoration type and
approach, location and setting, history and background;
• As -built topographic plans of major project elements including such items as grade control
structures, vegetation plots, permanent cross - sections, crest gages, and pressure transducers;
• Photographs showing views of the restored stream site taken from fixed point stations;
• Assessment of the stability of the stream site based on the cross - sections;
• Vegetative data as described above including the identification of any invasion by undesirable
plant species;
• BMP water quality sampling and assessment;
• Hydrologic assessment, including bankfull documentation;
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 8

• A description of damage by animals or vandalism;
• Maintenance issues and recommended remediation measures will be detailed and documented;
and
• Wildlife observations.
4.0 Maintenance and Contingency Plans
Project maintenance will be performed as described above (Section 2.0 and 3.0) in this document. If,
during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve site performance
standards are jeopardized, NCEEP will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of Corrective
Action. The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in -house technical staff or may require
engineering and consulting services. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized NCEEP
will:
• Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions;
• Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and /or required by the USACE;
• Obtain other permits as necessary;
• Implement the Corrective Action Plan; and
• Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the
extent and nature of the work performed.
5.0 As -Built Condition (Baseline)
The Site construction and as -built survey were completed between December 2013 and April 2014. The
survey included developing an as -built topographic surface, locating the channel boundaries, structures,
longitudinal profiles, and cross - sections. For comparison purposes, the baseline monitoring divided the
reach assessments in the same way they were established for design parameters.
5.1 As -Built /Record Drawings
A half size baseline plan is located in Appendix 4 with the post- construction locations and alignments for
the project. A record drawing has also been provided to NCEEP as a separate document that redlines
any significant field adjustments made during construction that were different from the design plans.
Adjustments were made during construction, where needed, based on field evaluation at the designer's
discretion due to shallow bedrock found during construction. In general, adjustments were made within
the Site due to the design features' proximity to vernal pools or existing wetlands, proximity to old
channel fill, or the proximity to shallow bedrock. Additional riffle material was supplied to UT2A and at
the end of UT2 Reach 3A. Grade control structures were added or removed due to the presence of
bedrock, and bioengineered bank armoring structures were shortened. Rather than spanning the entire
curve of a meander bend, brush toe and brush mattress was installed on the lower one third of the arc
length into the bend. This change was made because protection is not as useful in the first third of the
curve. Brush toe in close proximity to riparian wetlands or former channels were built as juncus sod
matting or brush mattress to reduce excavation and seepage. In addition, changes were made to the
species selection in the planting plan. Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) and ninebark (Physocarpus
opulifolius) replaced redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea) as a source for live- stakes due to the availability
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 9

of nursery stock at the time of planting. Also, live stakes were added to vernal pool areas at Norkett
Branch and UT2, and rock was added at the outlet of the vernal pools to reduce floodplain erosion.
Specific changes are detailed below:
5.1.1 Norkett Branch Reach 1
• STA 103 +16 woody riffle built as constructed riffle;
• STA 103 +82 brush toe built as juncus sod mats;
• STA 105 +20 added log grade control J -hook;
• STA 109 +60 sod matting removed;
• STA 110 +70 riffle material added;
• STA 112 +94 riffle material added;
• STA 114 +75 brush toe replaced with brush mattress due to proximity with UT1;
• STA 116 +05 brush mattress built as brush toe;
• STA 117 +70 brush toe shortened, rip rap added at culvert inlet;
• STA 118 +70 brush toe shortened at culvert outfall;
• STA 119 +65 riffle material added;
• STA 122 +02 sod matting removed due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 122 +57 log sill removed due to shallow bedrock; and
• STA 123 +06 brush toe removed due to shallow bedrock.
5.1.2 Norkett Branch Reach 2
• STA 124 +91 sod mat built as brush mattress due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 132 +57 log J -hook removed due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 135 +30 log J -hook removed due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 135 +30 brush toe built as brush mattress with live whips;
• STA 136 +92 log J -hook removed due to shallow bedrock
• STA 137 +50 constructed riffle removed due to bedrock within channel;
• STA 138 +14 brush toe at built as brush mattress; and
• STA 139 +97 constructed riffle shortened.
5.1.3 UT1
• STA 200 +71 riffle shortened;
• STA 201 +08 riffle material added;
• STA 209 +20 brush mattress removed; and
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 10

• STA 211 +45 rock and roll riffle built as constructed riffle.
5.1.4 UT2 Reach 1
• added rock to outlets of vernal pools to stabilize floodplain;
• STA 301 +16 brush toe built as juncus sod mat due to proximity of wetland;
• STA 310 +52 log sill removed; and
• STA 305 +50 riffle extended.
5.1.5 UT2 Reach 2
• STA 312 +50 brush mattress removed due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 313 +22 brush mattress removed due to shallow bedrock;
• STA 316 +79 juncus sod matting built instead of brush toe due to proximity of old channel fill;
• STA 320 +63 juncus sod matting built instead of brush toe due to proximity of old channel fill;
• STA 322 +05 brush mattress removed;
• STA 325 +48 riffle material added;
• STA 327 +48 log vane removed because of existing rock protecting outer bank;
• STA 328 +90 brush toe removed due to proximity of old channel fill;
• STA 329 +40 brush toe removed;
• STA 330 +40 brush mattress removed due to proximity of old channel fill;
• STA 330 +75 brush toe removed due to proximity of wetland; and
• STA 332 +44 constructed riffle built as jazz riffle.
5.1.6 UT2 Reach 3A
• STA 335 +25 boulder sill added.
5.1.7 UT2 Reach 38
• STA 337 +25 boulder toe ends at bedrock;
• STA 337 +50 log vane removed due to bedrock;
• STA 339 +87 jazz riffle built as constructed riffle;
• STA 340 +02 brush mattress removed due to shallow bedrock; and
• STA 341 +00 log vane removed due to shallow bedrock.
5.1.8 UT2A
• All banks were graded and bench was cut in left floodplain;
• Laid back banks at 3:1 to 5:1 slope;
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 11

• Placed matting in disturbed areas; and
• Riffle material added to riffles throughout reach.
5.1.9 UT3
• STA 505 +25 added step pool.
5.2 Baseline Data Assessment
Baseline monitoring was conducted between April 2014 and May 2014. The first annual monitoring
assessment (MY -1) will be completed in the fall of 2014. The streams will be monitored for a total of
seven years, with the final monitoring activities conducted in 2020. The close -out for the Site will be
conducted in 2021 given the success criteria is met. As part of the closeout process, NCEEP will evaluate
the site at the end of the fourth year monitoring period to determine whether or not the site is eligible
to closeout following monitoring year five. If the Site is meeting success criteria, NCEEP will propose to
the interagency review team (IRT) to proceed with the closeout process. If the Site is not meeting
success criteria, then an additional two years of monitoring will be conducted by Wildlands.
5.2.1 Morphological State of the Channel
Morphological data for the as -built profile was collected in April 2014. Please refer to Appendix 2
for summary data tables, morphological plots, and stream photographs.
Profile
The MY -0 profiles closely match the profile design parameters. On the design profiles, riffles were
depicted as straight lines with consistent slopes. However, at some locations the as -built survey
riffle profiles are not consistent in slope due to a backwater effect from downstream bedrock.
Dimension
The MY -0 dimension numbers closely match the design parameters with minor variations in all
reaches. This is primarily due to variation in bankfull width. Summary data and cross - section plots
of each project reach can be found in Appendix 2.
Pattern
The MY -0 pattern metrics fell within the design parameters for all seven reaches. No major design
changes were made to alignments during construction. Pattern data will be evaluated in monitoring
year five if there are any indicators through the profile or dimensions that significant geomorphic
adjustments have occurred.
Sediment Transport
As -built shear stresses and velocities are similar to design parameters and should reduce the risk of
further erosion along all seven restoration reaches. The as -built condition for each of these reaches
indicates an overall increase in substrate particle size (Table 5a — 5c). The substrate data for each
constructed reach were compared to the design shear stress parameters from the mitigation plan to
assess the potential for bed degradation. The shear stresses calculated for the constructed channels
are generally within the allowable range, which indicates that the channel is not at risk to trend
toward channel degradation.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 12

5.2.2 Vegetation
The MY -0 planted density is 696 stems /acre, which exceeds the MY -5 and MY -7 density
requirement. Summary data and photographs of each plot can be found in Appendix 3.
5.2.4 Hydrology
Several bankfull events have been observed following completion of construction. Bankfull events
recorded will be included in the year 1 monitoring report.
6.0 References
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, Cheryl 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. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2006. CVS -NCEEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Version 4.0. Retrieved from http: / /www.nceep.net /business/
monitoring /veg /datasheets.htm.
Multi- Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC). 2001. National Land Cover Database.
http: / /www.mrlc.gov /nlcd.php
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2009. Lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP).
http: / /www.nceep. net / services /restplans/ Yadkin _Pee_Dee_RBRP_2009_Final.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Basinwide Planning Program, 2008. Yadkin Pee -Dee
River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
http: / /h2o.enr. state. nc. us /basinwide /Neuse /2008 /Yadkin2008.htm
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWR). 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http: // portal. ncdenr. org /web /wq /ps /csu /classifications
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWR), 2012. North Carolina 303(d) List - Category 5.
August 24, 2012. http://porta1.ncdenr.org/c/ document_ library /get_file ?uuid= 9d45b3b4 -d066-
4619- 82e6- ea8eaOe01930 &groupld =38364
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2009. Lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP).
http: / /www.nceep. net / services /restplans/ Yadkin _Pee_Dee_RBRP_2009_Final.pdf
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.
qwv
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 13

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, 3rd
approx. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1998. North Carolina Geology.
http://www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/usgs/coastalp.htm
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (2013). Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan. NCEEP,
Raleigh, NC.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Baseline Monitoring Document and As -Built Baseline Report —FINAL Page 14

APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures

0105070050
03040105070030
J'J a
03040105070020
Monroe
I a
a.
ff�n
1 03040105070010 .
r
u
0304
L
j --
lk�o
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
✓Y
i
03040105070060 030401050700701
-
7S .IMshtille
Winkate - L
� r
03040105070040
03040105081030
e
:e
03040105081040
1 - i
r 03040105081020
� _ 1
03040105081010 ° 030401040'j1010
ci c
�?�� Hydrologic Unit Code (14) 0
k F
N(jRTffi C . EEP Targeted Local Watershed
A
-' 03040202020010 .,j41(Gpl4nt}'. - Project Location
5011 1H ('\ROI_l1VA
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the
NCDENR Ecoysystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) and is
encompassed by a recorded conservation easement,
but is bordered by land under private ownership. Accessing the
site mayrequire 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 activites
requires prior coordination with NCEEP.
�Y Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 1 2 Miles NCEEP Project No.95360
Lcosystem I I I I I Monitoring Year 0
Union County, NC

Figure 2 Project Component / Asset Map
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 300 600 Feet NCEEP Project No.95360
W I L D L A N D S F stem I I I I I
ENGINEERING l,l lla 0110 1 Monitoring Year 0
L, RR4GR'hM
Union County, NC

Table t. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen Nutrient
Nutrient
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non - Riparian Wetland
Buffer
Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Totals
9,196
902
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Design /As -Built
Existing
Alignment
Footage/
Restoration or Restoration
Restoration
Mitigation
Reach ID
Stationing'
Acreage
Approach
Equivalent
Footage/ Acreage 2
Ratio
Credits (SMU)2
Streams
100 +31 - 117 +60
Norkett Branch Reach 1
& 118 +60 -
1,980 LF
P1
Restoration
2,313
1:1
2,313
124 +00
124 +00 - 131 +84
Norkett Branch Reach 2
& 132 +25 -
1,505 LF
P1
Restoration
1,513
1:1
1,513
138 +99
UT1
200 +00 - 211 +98
840 LF
P1
Restoration
1,212
1:1
1,212
UT2 Reach 1
300 +41 - 310 +80
820 LF
P1
Restoration
1,033
1:1
1,033
310 +80 - 321 +71
UT2 Reach 2
& 322 +06 -
1,272 LF
P1
Restoration
1,416
1:1
1,416
325 +20
UT2 Reach 3A
325 +20 - 335 +58
923 LF
P1
Restoration
1,041
1:1
1,041
UT2 Reach 3B
336 +90 - 343 +48
380 LF
P1/2
Restoration
668
1:1
668
401 +53 - 411 +46
UT2A
& 411 +84 -
1,296 LF
Ell
Enhancement II
1,340
2.5:1
536
415 +31
UT3
505 +42 - 507 +12
163 LF
Ell
Enhancement II
170
2.5:1
68
Upstream of UT3 intermittent
Step Pool
WQ BMP 1
WQ BMP
29.7 ac treated
1:8
238 3
drainage
Conveyance
non - jurisdictional drainage in
Pocket
WQ BMP 2
eastern Norkett Branch
WQ BMP
19.9 ac treated
1:3
603
Wetland
floodplain
Component Summation
Non - Riparian
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Wetland
Buffer
Upland
Restoration Level
(LF)
(acres)
(acres)
(square feet)
(acres)
Riverine
Non - Riverine
Restoration
9,196
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
1,510
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Preservation
Alternative Mitigation
1 49.6 ac treated
N /A: not applicable
1. Stationing based off of centerline as -built alignment which matched with the design alignment.
2. Credits are based off of the as -built thalweg alignment.
3. Credits determined for the BMPs were established in the mitigation plan (2013).

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Completion or Scheduled
July 2012 - October
1403 S Mint St. Suite 104
Mitigation Plan
July 2013
Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
2012
704.332.7754
Construction Contractor
July 2013-November
Land Mechanic Designs, Inc.
Final Design - Construction Plans
November 2013
2013
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Planting Contractor
December 2013- April
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Construction
April 2014
2014
Fremont, NC 27830
Seeding Contractor
December 2013- April
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area'
April 2014
2014
Fremont, NC 27830
December 2013- April
Green Resource, Colfax, NC
Permanent seed mix applied to reach /segments
Nursery Stock Suppliers
April 2014
2014
Dykes Nursery, McMinnville, TN
March 2014 - April
Foggy Bottom Nursery, Lansing, NC
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach /segments
April 2014
Monitoring, POC
2014
Kirsten Gimbert
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
April 2014 - May 2014
June 2014
Year 1 Monitoring
2014
December 2014
Year 2 Monitoring
2015
December 2015
Year 3 Monitoring
2016
December 2016
Year 4 Monitoring
2017
December 2017
Year 5 Monitoring
2018
December 2018
Year 6 Monitoring
2019
December 2019
Year 7 Monitoring
2020
December 2020
1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Designer
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1403 S Mint St. Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
704.332.7754
Construction Contractor
Land Mechanic Designs, Inc.
126 Circle G Lane
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Planting Contractor
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
Seeding Contractor
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource, Colfax, NC
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Bare Roots
Dykes Nursery, McMinnville, TN
Live Stakes
Foggy Bottom Nursery, Lansing, NC
Monitoring Performers
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Monitoring, POC
Kirsten Gimbert
704.332.7754, ext. 110

Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Norkeft Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Project Information
Project Name
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
County
Union County
Project Area (acres)
31.6
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
34 °52'47.56 "N, 80 °22'9.19 "W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040105081020
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -07 -14
Project Drainiage Area (acres)
2,034
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
43% forested, 29% managed herbaceous cover, 28% cultivated land
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Norkett
Branch
Reach 1
Norkett
Branch
Reach 2
UT3
UT2
UT2A
UT3
Length of reach (linear feet) - Post - Restoration'
2,369
1,499
1,198
4,175
1,378
170
Drainage area (acres)
1490
1 2034
1 48
1 457
72
28
Drainage area (sqmi)
2.3
3.2
0.08
0.72
0.11
0.04
NCDWQ stream identification score
43.75
41.5
32.25
35.75
23;30.75
25.75
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
WS -V
Morphological Desription (stream type)
P
P
P
P
I
I
Evolutionary trend (Simon's Model) -Pre- Restoration
III
III /IV
II /III
II, IV
IV
11/111
Underlying mapped soils
Floodplain Soil Types for Site
Badin channery silt loam
Badin channery, silt clay
loam
Cid channery silt
loam
Secrest -Cid
complex
Drainage class
well- drained
well- drained
I
well- drained with
moderate shrink-
swell potential
well- drained
Soil Hydric status
N
N
N
Y
Slope
2 -8%
2 -8%
1 -5%
0 -3%
FEMA classification
AE AE
N/A I N/A
N/A
N/A
Native vegetation community
Piedmont Bottomland Forest
Percent composition exotic invasive vegetation -Post -
Restoration
0%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
X
X
USACE Nationwide Permit No.27 and DWQ 401 Water
Quality Certification No. 3885.
Waters of the United States - Section 401
X
X
Division of Land Quality (Dam Safety)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
X
X
Norkett Branch Mitigation Plan; Wildlands determined
"no effect" on Union County listed endangered
species.
Historic Preservation Act
X
X
No historic resources were found to be impacted
(letter from SHPO dated 8/20/2012).
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) /Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA)
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
I X
X
CLOMR Approved, LOMR in process
Essential Fisheries Habitat
I N/A
N/A
N/A
1. Total stream length does not exclude easement crossings.

APPENDIX 2. Morphological Summary and Data Plots

Table 5a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Norkett Branch Reaches 1 & 2
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
' Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
( - - -): Data was not provided
N /A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt /Clay
Pre - Restoration Condition
Reference Reaches
Design
As -Built /Baseline
Parameter
Gage
Norkett Branch
Reach 1
Norkett Branch
Reach 2
Spencer
Creek
UT to Spencer Creek
UT Richland Creek Reach 2
Norkett
Branch Reach 1
Norkett
Branch Reach 2
Norkett Branch
Reach 1
Norkett Branch
Reach 2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.8
21.5
22
29.5
10.7
11.2
7.0
13.3
15.2
22.0
23.0
22.5
26.6
25.6
25.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
35
58
72
85
60.0
114+
>81
>50
48.4
>110
60.5
>115
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.7
1.8
1.4
2.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
1.1
1.3
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.8
1.8
2.0
Bankfull Max Depth
3.1
3.2
2.3
2.9
2.1
2.6
1.1
1.8
2.1
2.75
2.75
2.6
3.3
3.0
3.3
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ftZ
n/a
28.1
35.6
40.6
52.8
17.8
19.7
7.7
16.5
17.5
40.6
43.2
38.8
44.6
46.7
50.8
Width /Depth Ratio
5.9
13
9.2
21.4
5.8
7.1
6.4
10.1
13.9
11.9
12.2
13.1
16.7
13.0
14.1
Entrenchment Ratio
2.1
4.5
2.9
3.3
5.5
10.2
>11.6
>2.5
2.2
>5
2.2
>5
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
8.6
0.4
- --
1
- --
1 18.4
59.6
7.3
9.9
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
14
84
19
111
Riffle Slope (ft /ft)
0.0036
0.0039
0.0032
0.0120
0.0130
0.0140
0.0183
0.0355
0.0018
1
0.0120
0.0023
1
0.0180
0.0000
0.0152
0.0009
0.0163
Pool Length (ft)
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
12
88
51
102
Pool Max Depth (ft)
n/a
4.0
4.0
2.9
4.0
3.3
2.5
1.8
2.8
7.8
2.8
7.9
3.3
5.1
3.5
4.8
Pool Spacing (ft)^
62
300
60
300
71.0
19 42
33.0
F 93.0
29
163
30
170
67
183
98
172
Pool Volume ft3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
I N/A
N/A
38
41
11
27
N/A
35
161
37
168
38
147
38
155
Radius of Curvature (ft)
N/A
N/A
11
15
6
16
N/A
40
66
41
69
38
65
40
64
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft /ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.3
0.8
2.3
N/A
1.8
3
1.8
3
1.7
2.4
1.6
2.5
Meander Length (ft)
N/A
N/A
46
48
37.7
43
N/A
66
264
69
276
167
263
181
277
Meander Width Ratio
N/A
N/A
3.6
3.7
1.6
3.8
N/A
1.6
7.3
1.6
7.3
1.7
5.5
1.5
6.0
Substrate, Bed and Transport
Parameters
Ri % /Ru % /P % /G % /S%
7
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
J
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
SC/4.6/8.7/28.5/64/2048
SC/SC/0.4/21.1/ >2048/ >2048
-
--
- --
-
--
ReachShearStress (Competency) lb/ft'
n/a
0.41
0.44
0.17
0.38
0.28
0.4
0.27
0.29
0.30
0.32
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
15 -25
20 -35
15 -25
20 -35
Stream Power (Capacity) W /mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
2.3
3.2
0.96
0.01
0.28
2.3
3.2
2.3
3.2
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate ( %)
<1 %t
<1 %t
- --
- --
- --
<1 %t
<1 %t
<i %t
<1 %t
Rosgen Classification
E4
C /E5
E4
ES
C4 /E4
C4
C5
C4
C4 /E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
3.5
1 4
2.5
1 3.5
4.9
F
5.4
3.2
3.5
4.1
2.8
3.3
2.6
2.8
2.8
2.9
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
110
140
97
25
29.1
32.0
110
140
105
124
130
148
Q -NFF regression
Q -USGS extrapolation
n/a
Q- Mannings
Valley Length (ft)
-
--
-
--
-
--
- --
-
--
1910
1249
1910
1249
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)2
1,980
1,505
-
--
- --
-
--
2,369
1,499
2,369
1,499
Sinuosity (ft)'
1.1
1.1
2.30
2.50
1.00
1.24
1.20
1.24
1.20
Water Surface Slope ft /ftZ
0.004
0.001
0.005
-
--
- --
---
0.0025
0.0036
0.003
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft /ft)
- --
- --
1 0.003
0.003
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
' Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
( - - -): Data was not provided
N /A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt /Clay

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Norkett Branch (Reach 1) - Sta 100 +31 - 117 +60 & 118 +60 - 124 +00
470
470
469
468
469
467
468
!!! �■
�..'?
�'
� !*���
®��l��i���ili�iii�.il�iili
467
E��
i,7E1i�^
1■ t.' 7l
��Ii�.
465
��Jli�ii�w•l
����'-
:�I_r�!'�ii�����A111■���■
466
MEW
■■
■�
464
a
465
463
464
462
■Q.ii:.f���w►��
a 463
c
�
irate
��a■r�■r�
.��?�w�a�■�a��
461
'w
462
460
461
MM
459
458
w 460
459
457
458
456
457
455
11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300 11350 11400 11450 11500 11550 11600 11650 11700 11750 11800 11850 11900 11950 12000
Station (feet)
—� TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
456
455
10000 10050 10100 10150 10200 10250 10300 10350 10400 10450 10500 10550 10600 10650 10700 10750 10800 10850 10900 10950 11000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
470
469
468
467
!!! �■
�..'?
�'
� !*���
®��l��i���ili�iii�.il�iili
E��
i,7E1i�^
1■ t.' 7l
��Ii�.
465
��Jli�ii�w•l
����'-
:�I_r�!'�ii�����A111■���■
MEW
■■
■�
464
a
463
462
■Q.ii:.f���w►��
�
irate
��a■r�■r�
.��?�w�a�■�a��
461
'w
460
MM
459
458
457
456
470
469
468
467
466
465
MEW
464
a
463
462
■Q.ii:.f���w►��
�
irate
��a■r�■r�
.��?�w�a�■�a��
461
'w
460
MM
459
458
457
456
455
11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300 11350 11400 11450 11500 11550 11600 11650 11700 11750 11800 11850 11900 11950 12000
Station (feet)
—� TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
■Q.ii:.f���w►��
�
irate
��a■r�■r�
.��?�w�a�■�a��

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Norkett Branch (Reach 2) - Sta 124 +00 - 131 +84 & 132 +25 - 138 +99
465
465
464
464
463
461
462
460
461
459
v
A
AA
460
458
c
459
v
457
458
456
v
X
457
0
455
D
Norkett Branch
End Reach 1
Begin Reach 2
456
v
454
455
454
453
452
451
450
453
13000 13050 13100 13150 13200 13250 13300 13350 13400 13450 13500 13550 13600 13650 13700 13750 13800 13850 13900 13950 14000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) • LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
452
451
450
12000 12050 12100 12150 12200 12250 12300 12350 12400 12450 12500 12550 12600 12650 12700 12750 12800 12850 12900 12950 13000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014). ------- WSF (MYO-04/2014) • LBKF /LTOB(MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB(MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE(MYO- 04/2014)
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
v
458
c
457
456
v
X
455
D
Norkett Branch
End Reach 1
Begin Reach 2
454
453
452
451
450
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
v
458
c
457
456
v
455
D
454
453
452
451
450
13000 13050 13100 13150 13200 13250 13300 13350 13400 13450 13500 13550 13600 13650 13700 13750 13800 13850 13900 13950 14000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) • LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)

Table 6a. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross - Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Norkett Branch Reach 1 and 2
Cross - Section 1 (Pool)
Cross - Section 2 (Riffle)
I Cross - Section 3 (Pool)
I Cross - Section 4 (Riffle)
Dimension
I Base I MYl I MY21 MY31 MY41 MYS
I Base I MYl I MY21 MY31 MY41 MY.51
Base I MY1 I MY21 MY31 MY41 MYS
I Base I MY3 I MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
33.2
26.6
26.7
25.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
**
>200
**
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.8
1.6
2.3
1.8
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
3.6
2.9
3.9
3.3
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftz)
58.4
42.6
60.3
44.6
Bankfull Width /Depth Ratio
18.9
16.7
11.8
14.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
**
>7.5
**
11
1 >8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross - Section 5 (riffle)
Cross- Section 6 (Riffle)
Cross- Section 7 (Riffle)
Cross- Section 8 (Pool)
Dimension
Base MY3 I MY21 MY31 MY4 MYS
Base I MY3 I MY21 MY31 MY41 MYS
Base I MYI I MY21 MY31 MY41 MY51
Base I MY3 I MY21 MY31 MY41 MYS
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
22.5
25.7
25.6
30.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
**
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.7
2.0
1.8
2.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.6
3.3
3.0
4.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftz)
38.8
50.8
46.7
72.5
Bankfull Width /Depth Ratio
13.1
13.0
14.1
12.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>8.9
>7.8
1
>7.8
**
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1
1.0
1.0

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 1- Norkett Branch Reach 1
108+82 pool
476
474
472
470
468
0
466
v
w
464
462
460
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Width (ft)
tMYO (04/2014) — Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
58.4 x- section area (ft.sq.)
33.2 width (ft)
1.8 mean depth (ft)
3.6 max depth (ft)
_
34.4 wetted parimeter (ft)
1.7 hyd radi (ft)
- --a*
18.9 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
`
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 2- Norkett Branch Reach 1
109+30 riffle
47s
476
474
c 468
0
466 -
u+ -
464
462
472
470
460
i
458
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Width (ft)
tMYO(04 /2014) - Bankfull FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
42.6 x- section area (ft.sq.)
26.6 width (ft)
1.6 mean depth (ft)
2.9 max depth (ft)
27.7 wetted parimeter (ft)
`
1.5 hyd radi (ft)
16.7 width -depth ratio
>200 W FPA (ft)
>2.2 ER
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
c 468
0
466 -
u+ -
464
462
460
i
458
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Width (ft)
tMYO(04 /2014) - Bankfull FloodproneArea

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 3- Norkett Branch Reach 1
113+70 pool
470
468
466
0
464
w
�
462
460
458
-40 -20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
60.3 x- section area (ft.sq.)
26.7 width (ft)
2.3 mean depth (ft)
3.9 max depth (ft)
28.4 wetted parimeter (ft)
2.1 hyd radi (ft)
11.8 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
w
�
460
458
-40 -20
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 4- Norkett Branch Reach 1
114+30 riffle
476
474
472
470
468
FloodproneArea
c
0
466
464
- -
w
462
460
458
456
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Width (ft)
— �MYO(04/2014)
— Bankfull —
Bankfull Dimensions
44.6 x- section area (ft.sq.)
25.1 width (ft)
1.8 mean depth (ft)
3.3 max depth (ft)
26.2 wetted parimeter (ft)
-
1.7 hyd radi (ft)
-
14.1 width -depth ratio
>200 W FPA (ft)
>2.2 ER
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
FloodproneArea

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section S- Norkett Branch Reach 1
122+84 riffle
474
472
470
468
466
464
462
460
458
456
Bankfull Dimensions
38.8 x- section area (ft.sq.)
22.5 width (ft)
1.7 mean depth (ft)
2.6 max depth (ft)
23.5 wetted parimeter (ft)
1.6 hyd radi (ft)
13.1 width -depth ratio
>200 W FPA (ft)
>2.2 ER -
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
0
—
w
454
452
450
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Width (ft)
+MYO(04 /2014) — Bankfull —
FloodproneArea

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Partic le Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Norkett Branch Reach 1 Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
139.4
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
3
8
11
11
11
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
0
11
Fine
0.125
0.250
1
1
1
12
Medium
0.250
0.500
5
5
5
17
Coarse
0.5
1.0
80
3
3
3
20
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
1
5
6
6
26
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
5
5
5
31
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
5
6
6
37
Fine
4.0
5.7
1
8
9
9
46
E
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
3
5
5
51
Medium
Medium
Coarse
Coarse
Very Coarse
8.0
11.3
16.0
22.6
32
11.3
16.0
22.6
32
45
4
3
4
6
6
3
3
1
7
6
5
6
6
7
6
5
6
6
58
64
69
75
81
Very Coarse
45
64
7
7
7
88
Small
64
90
4
4
4
92
Small
90
128
2
2
2
94
Large
128
180
4
4
4
98
Large
180
256
0
0
98
■ ■■
Small
256
1 362
2
2
2
100
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■�
■ m m ■ n
Medium
Large/Very Larg
512
1024
1024
2048
20
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.4
D35 =
3.6
D50 =
7.4
D84 =
52.3
D95 =
139.4
D100 =
362.0
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
m 60%
a
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti?� yo ti6 3ti b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .510'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
100
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rave
Cob
le
Milder
a
80
v
70
E
60
U
50
40
`m
u
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
m 60%
a
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti?� yo ti6 3ti b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .510'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross- Section 2
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 2 Summary
min
max
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
107.3
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
6
6
6
Very fine
0.062
0.125
40%
6
30%
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
10%
Medium
0.250
0.500
2
2
8
le
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
10
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
10
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
10
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
v
10
Fine
Fine
4.0
5.7
5.7
8.0
4
4
10
14
Medium
8.0
11.3
2
2
16
Medium
11.3
16.0
4
4
20
Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
6
26
Coarse
22.6
32
16
16
42
Very Coarse
32
45
10
10
52
Ver Coarse
Y
45
64
14
14
66
Small
64
90
14
1 14
80
Small
90
128
8
8
88
Large
128
180
2
2
90
Large
180
256
4
4
94
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
6
6
100
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■
Medium
512
1024
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
20
10
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 2
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
11.0
D35 =
27.5
Dso =
42.0
Ds4 =
107.3
D95 =
271.2
1310o =
362.0
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 2
Individual Class Percent
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
90%
80%
�
70%
iu
60%
�3
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
rave
I
ob
le
1 e
80
v
70
E
60
U
50
c
U
v
40
a
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 2
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
iu
60%
�3
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
00 oy o. o• ti• h• .�v titi• ti ti ti 3 h ,,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross- Section 3
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 3 Summary
min
max
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
128.0
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
256.0
60%
�3
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
Ider
0
30%
Fine
0.125
0.250
2
2
2
10%
Medium
0.250
0.500
2
2
4
le
Coarse
0.5
1.0
80
4
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
4
4
8
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
8
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
70
8
Fine
Fine
4.0
5.7
5.7
8.0
2
2
10
10
Medium
8.0
11.3
1
10
Medium
11.3
16.0
4
4
14
Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
6
20
Coarse
22.6
32
8
8
28
Very Coarse
32
45
14
14
42
Ver Coarse
Y
45
64
10
10
52
Small
64
90
12
12
64
Small
90
128
20
20
84
Large
128
180
14
14
98
Large
180
256
2
2
1 100
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
30
100
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■
Medium
512
1024
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very Large
1024
2048
20
10
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 2
Channel materials (mm)
D1s =
18.0
D35 =
37.9
D50 =
59.6
D84 =
128.0
D95 =
167.3
D10a =
256.0
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 3
Individual Class Percent
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
90%
80%
�
70%
iu
60%
�3
50%
Ider
30%
20%
10%
rave
b
le
0 6ti ye tih e 1 ti 3 tie ,,� oy o� oo yw �o y�
3 o41, yo o-
p0 pti O• p' ti• �' y,'' �'1'' ti 1 ti h Il ,10 'O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
80
v
70
E
60
U
50
c
U
40
i
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 3
Individual Class Percent
l00%
90%
80%
�
70%
iu
60%
�3
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
o%
0 6ti ye tih e 1 ti 3 tie ,,� oy o� oo yw �o y�
3 o41, yo o-
p0 pti O• p' ti• �' y,'' �'1'' ti 1 ti h Il ,10 'O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross - Section 5
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 5 Summary
min
Tmax
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
37.9
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
362.0
60%
u
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
a 40%
0
30%
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
rav
Medium
0.250
0.500
le
0
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
10
10
10
Fine
4.0
5.7
6
6
16
Fine
5.7
8.0
8
8
24
Medium
Medium
8.0
11.3
11.3
16.0
12
10
12
10
36
46
Coarse
16.0
22.6
10
10
56
Coarse
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
22.6
32
45
32
45
64
20
16
6
20
16
6
76
92
98
Small
64
90
98
Small
90
128
98
Large
128
180
98
Large
180
256
98
■■■■■
Small
256
362
2
2
100
■■
Small
362
512
■ ■
■ ■■
Medium
512
1024
■ ■■■
La ge/Very LargE
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Totall
100
1 100
100
Cross - Section 5
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
5.6
D35 -
10.7
D50 =
18.4
D84 =
37.9
D95 =
53.7
D100 =
362.0
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
60%
u
Ider
a 40%
30%
20%
10%
rav
I
Cob
le
80
00 p p o 6ti yti ,b �0
00 p1 p• p' ti' S' titi' titi' 1 ti ti 3 h 4,11 .LO
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
70
v
60
E
so
U
40
30
a
20
Ll
10
0
H
__A
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 5
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
60%
u
50%
a 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
00 p p o 6ti yti ,b �0
00 p1 p• p' ti' S' titi' titi' 1 ti ti 3 h 4,11 .LO
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 6- Norkett Branch Reach 2
131+6 riffle
472
470
468
0
460
466
v
w
464
458
456
454
462
452
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Width (ft)
—
t MYO (04/2014) — Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
50.8 x- section area (ft.sq.)
25.7 width (ft)
2.0 mean depth (ft)
3.3 max depth (ft)
27.0 wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9 hyd radi (ft)
13.0 width -depth ratio
>200 W FPA (ft)
>2.2 ER
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
"r-
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
0
460
v
w
458
456
454
452
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Width (ft)
—
t MYO (04/2014) — Bankfull Floodprone Area

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 7- Norkett Branch Reach 2
135+13 riffle
468
466
464
462
460
c 458
0
456
v
M 454
452
450
448
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Width (ft)
tMYO(04/2014)
— Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
46.7 x- section area (ft.sq.)
25.6 width (ft)
1.8 mean depth (ft)
3.0 max depth (ft)
26.7 wetted parimeter (ft)
1.7 hyd radi (ft)
14.1 width -depth ratio
, s
>200 W FPA (ft)
>2.2 ER
1.0 BHR
gilt- rE
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 8- Norkett Branch Reach 2
�
135+73
pool
466
464
458
0
456
v
w
454
452
462
450
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull
460
Bankfull Dimensions
72.5 x- section area (ft.sq.)
30.1 width (ft)
2.4 mean depth (ft)
4.5 max depth (ft)
32.2 wetted parimeter (ft)
^ -
2.3 hyd radi (ft)
12.5 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4122114
�
458
0
456
v
w
454
452
450
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Partic le Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Norkett Branch Reach 2 Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
210.9
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
4
4
4
4
Very fine
0.062
0.125
.L-
0
0
4
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
0
4
Medium
0.250
0.500
Cob
0
0
4
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
2
3
3
7
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
4
6
6
13
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
2
4
4
17
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
3
4
7
7
24
Fine
4.0
5.7
5
2
7
7
30
E
Fine
5.7
8.0
3
6
9
9
39
Medium
Medium
Coarse
Coarse
Very Coarse
8.0
11.3
16.0
22.6
32
11.3
16.0
22.6
32
45
4
3
5
7
3
2
8
2
4
3
6
11
7
11
6
6
11
7
11
6
45
56
63
74
79
Very Coarse
45
64
2
3
5
5
84
Small
64
90
5
2
7
7
91
Small
90
128
2
1
3
3
94
Large
128
180
0
0
94
Large
180
256
1
1
2
2
96
■ ■■
Small
256
362
1
1
1
97
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
97
■ ■�
■ m m ■ m
Medium
Large/VeryLarg
512
1024
1024
2048
20
97
97
Bedrock
2048
>2048
3
3
3
100
Total
52
50
102
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
2.6
D35 =
6.7
D50 =
13.0
D84 =
62.6
D95 =
210.9
D100 =
>2048
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
m 60%
a
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti?� yo ti6 3ti b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .510'1' yyti O,yb CIO
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
100
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
.L-
90
;ravel
Cob
le
I er
a
80
v
70
E
60
U
50
40
`m
u
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
m 60%
a
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti?� yo ti6 3ti b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .510'1' yyti O,yb CIO
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross - Section 6
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 6 Summary
min
max
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
14
14
14
Very fine
0.062
0.125
14
Fine
0.125
0.250
14
Medium
Coarse
Very Coarse
0.250
0.5
0.500
1.0
14
14
1.0
2.0
4
4
17
• Very Fine
2.0
2.8
6
6
23
Very Fine
Fine
2.8
4.0
4.0
5.7
6
8
6
8
29
37
Fine
5.7
8.0
18
17
54
Medium
Medium
8.0
11.3
11.3
16.0
14
1 8
14
8
68
76
Coarse
16.0
22.6
10
10
85
♦��������
Coarse
Very Coarse
22.6
32
32
45
6
6
6
6
91
97
������� ♦��
Ver Coarse
Y
45
64
97
60
E
Small
64
1 90
97
Small
90
128
97
Large
128
180
97
Large
180
256
97
■■■■■
Small
256
362
97
■■ *■
Small
362
512
40
97
■ ■�
Medium
512
1024
97
■ ■ ■■
Large/Very Larg
1024
2048
97
Bedrock
2048
>2048
3
3
100
Total
103
100
100
Cross - Section 1
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
1.5
D35 =
5.2
D50 =
7.3
D84 =
21.5
D95 =
J 39.8
D100 =
>2048
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90%
80%
70%
v
60%
0 50%
'0
40%
30%
20%
10%
90
0%
o ti e h oy ti ti tiw � h^ � tig y0 ti� 3ti oy e° �o ,yw �o e6 6ti yti tio. sro
000 Otiti Oti 'y ti 1 ti ti 3 h .y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
rave
Cobble
Ider
80
a
70
v
60
E
50
u'
40
a 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
100%
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 6
Individual Class Percent
90%
80%
70%
v
60%
0 50%
'0
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
o ti e h oy ti ti tiw � h^ � tig y0 ti� 3ti oy e° �o ,yw �o e6 6ti yti tio. sro
000 Otiti Oti 'y ti 1 ti ti 3 h .y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross - Section 7
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 7 Summary
min
max
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
2
2
2
Very fine
0.062
0.125
2
2
4
Fine
0.125
0.250
4
Medium
Coarse
Very Coarse
0.250
0.5
0.500
1.0
2
2
4
6
1.0
2.0
6
6
12
• Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
2
14
Very Fine
Fine
2.8
4.0
4.0
5.7
8
14
8
14
22
36
Fine
5.7
8.0
10
10
46
Medium
Medium
8.0
11.3
11.3
16.0
6
8
6
8
52
60
Coarse
16.0
22.6
16
16
76
♦��������
Coarse
Very Coarse
22.6
32
32
45
6
8
6
8
82
90
������� ♦��
Ver Coarse
Y
45
64
6
6
96
Small
64
90
2
2
98
Small
90
128
2
2
100
Large
128
180
100
50
u'
Large
180
256
100
Small
256
362
100
■■ *■
Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/VeryLarge
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
a 30
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 1
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
3.1
D35 =
5.5
D50 =
9.9
D84 =
34.8
D95 =
60.4
D100 =
128.0
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 7
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90%
80%
�
70%
v
60%
0 50%
'0
40%
30%
20%
90
10%
0%
00 oy o. o ti. h by titi• ti ti ti 3 h ,,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
rav
Cobble
Ider
80
a
70
v
60
E
50
u'
40
a 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Norkett Branch Cross - Section 7
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
v
60%
0 50%
'0
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
00 oy o. o ti. h by titi• ti ti ti 3 h ,,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Table 5b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UTl and UT2 Reaches 1 and 2
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
' Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
( - -): Data was not provided
N /A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt /Clay
Pre - Restoration Condition
Reference Reaches
Design
As Built/ Baseline
Parameter
Gage
UT1
UT2 Reach 1
UT2 Reach 2
UT3
Qt 1
UT2 Reach 2
UT3
UT2 Reach 1
UT2 Reach 2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Min
Max
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
n/a
2.9
8.2
13.6
7.1
See Table 5a
7.5
8.0
8.0
10.5
9.4
9.0
9.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
6
40
29
53
16.5 1 >38
>40
>40
176
169
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.9
1
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth
1.2
2
1
1.5
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.8
1.2
1.1
1.2
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area (ftZ)
2.6
8.6
7.9
5.1
4.6
4.6
5.3
4.5
4.5
5.2
5.3
Width /Depth Ratio
2.6
8.6
23.4
9.8
12.2
13.9
12.1
24.5
19.8
15.3
17.6
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2
4.9
>7
>8
2.2 >5
>5
>5
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.5
2.4
1
1 1.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
SC
7.3
7.3
20.9
19.5
20.1
27.4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
n/a
See Table 5a
-
--
- --
-
--
7
39
7
34
6
27
Riffle Slope (ft /ft)
0.017
0.054
0.009
0.032
0.006
0.013 1 0.045
0.01 1 0.032
0.013 1 0.028
0.007
0.044
0.006
0.037
0.009
0.039
Pool Length (ft)
- --
- --
- --
12
69
11
35
11
45
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.4
1.7
1.3
2.5
0.9
2.6
0.9 2.4
1.0
2.8
1.2
2.5
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.5
Pool Spacing (ft)^
61
295
190
51 130
10
56
10 56
10
56
30
58
21
64
22
71
Pool Volume ft3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
N/A
26.9
49.5
See Table Sa
12
55
13
44
13
44
13
49
10
42
12
52
Radius of Curvature (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.92
33.39
12
23
13.0
24.0
13
24
14
23
15
21
14
22
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft /ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.98
4.73
1.6
3
1.6
3.0
1.6
3
1.3
2.2
1.6
2.2
1.6
2.3
Meander Length (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
83.5
141.4
23
90
24.0
96.0
24
96
61
88
45
92
44
83
Meander Width Ratio
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.8
7.01
1.6
7.3
1.6
5.5
1.6
5.5
1.2
4.7
1.0
4.4
1.3
5.4
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri % /Ru % /P % /G % /S%
SC % /Sa % /G % /C% /B % /Be%
d16 /d35 /d50 /d84 /d95 /d 100
SC /SC/SC/SC/0.77/9.38/>2048
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/ >2048
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/ >2048
See Table Sa
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib /ftZ
n/a
0.57
0.82
0.14
0.42
0.38
0.18
0.27
0.27
0.16
0.21
0.23
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
20 -35
10 -20
15 -25
15 -2S
10 -20
15 -25
Stream Power (Capacity) W /mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
0.08
0.40
0.48
See Table 5a
0.08
0.15
0.22
0.08
0.15
0.22
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate ( %)
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
<1 %t
Rosgen Classification
E6
C /E4
E4
C /E6
C /E4
C /E4
C4
C4
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
3.3 1 4.2
1.4
3.4
2.6
2.4
3.2
2.1
1.6
1.9
2.0
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
12
11
17
12
11
17
10
7
10
11
Q -NFF regression
n/a
ir
Q -USGS extrapolation
IL
Q- Mannings
Valley Length (ft)
840
820
1156
See Table 5a
998
866
1108
998
866
1108
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)2
840
820
1,272
1,198
1,039
1,440
1,198
1,039
1,440
Sinuosity (ft)'
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.20
1.20
1.30
1.20
1.20
1.30
Water Surface Slope ft /ftZ
0.15
0.004
0.012
0.010
0.005
0.007
0.011
0.006
0.007
Bankfull Slope (ft /ft)
0.011
0.006
0.007
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
' Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
( - -): Data was not provided
N /A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt /Clay

Table 5c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT2 Reaches 3A and 3B
Parameter
Gage
Pre - restoration Condition
Reference Reaches
Design
As Built /Baseline
UT2 Reach 3
UT2 Reach 3A
UT2 Reach 3B
UT2 Reach 3A
UT2 Reach 3B
FIlin
Min
Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
n/a
7.5
See Table 5a
9.0
11.0
10.5
13.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
24
45+
55+
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.1
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.8
Bankfull Max Depth
1.6
1.2
1.5
1.2
1.6
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ft2
8.3
6.9
10.8
7.2
11.8
Width /Depth Ratio
6.7
11.7
11.2
15.3
16.5
Entrenchment Ratio
1 3.2
5.0+
5.0+
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.3 1.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
7.32
32.0
33.4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
n/a
See Table Sa
- --
-
--
8
25
13
28
Riffle Slope (ft /ft)
0.014
0.025
0.011 1 0.032
0.008 1 0.017
0.010
0.046
0.001
0.024
Pool Length (ft)
- --
- --
10
42
32
45
Pool Max Depth (ft)
2
1.20 3.20
1.50 4.10
1.77
2.98
2.45
3.32
Pool Spacing (ft)^
26 53
12 63
14 77
26
66
38
72
Pool Volume ft3
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
See Table 5a
14
50
18
61
8
37
20
61
Radius of Curvature (ft)
15
63.4
14
27
20
33
14
27
24
31
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft /ft)
2
8.45
1.6
3.0
1.8
3.0
1.3
2.6
1.7
2.2
Meander Length (ft)
N/A
N/A
27
108
33
132
58
88
87
105
Meander Width Rat-
N/A
1.6
5.5
1.6
5.5
0.8
3.5
1.4
4.4
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri % /Ru % /P %/G % /S%
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
d16 /d3S /d50 /d84 /d9S /d100
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/ >2048
See Table 5a
22.6/27.4/32/53.7 /69.7/128
SC/4.9/13.3/67.2/89.9/128
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib /ft2
n/a
0.29
0.23
0.23
0.14
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
15
25
12
F 20
17
10
Stream Power (Capacity) W /m2
_
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
n/a
0.71
See Table 5a
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate ( %)
<1 %'
<1 %'
<1 %'
<1 %'
<1 %'
Rosgen Classification
E4
C /E4
C /E4
E4
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
3.7
3.7
3.0
2.1
1.7
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
26 33
26
33
15
20
Q -NFF regression
il
V
Q -USGS extrapolation
Q- Mannings
Valley Length (ft)
1184
See Table 5a
830
548
830
548
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)'
1,303
1,038
658
1,038
658
Sinuosity (ft)'
1.1
1.25
1.20
1.25
1.20
Water Surface Slope ft /ft 2
0.009
0.006
0.004
0.006
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft /ft)
- --
- --
0.007
0.002
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
2 Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
( - -): Data was not provided
N /A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt /Clay

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT1Sta- 200 +00 - 211 +98
477
469
476
468
475
467
474
466
473
465
♦�
y
4
472
464
a
- --
A
471
v
463
470
c
462
469
461
a
468
w
460
467
466
459
458
465
457
456
ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■�
iw
464
■
ww ■
ww ■
ww ■
ww ■
ww■ww■
463
455
21000 21050 21100 21150 21200 21250 21300 21350 21400 21450 21500 21550 21600 21650 21700 21750 21800 21850 21900 21950 22000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 4/2014)
462
20000 20050 20100 20150 20200 20250 20300 20350 20400 20450 20500 20550 20600 20650 20700 20750 20800 20850 20900 20950 21000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 4/2014)
470
469
468
467
466
465
♦�
y
4
464
a
- --
A
463
462
461
a
460
459
458
457
456
ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■�
iw
www■ww■ww■ww■ww
■
ww ■
ww ■
ww ■
ww ■
ww■ww■
470
469
468
467
466
465
♦�
y
4
464
a
- --
A
463
462
461
a
460
459
458
457
456
455
21000 21050 21100 21150 21200 21250 21300 21350 21400 21450 21500 21550 21600 21650 21700 21750 21800 21850 21900 21950 22000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 4/2014)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT2 (Reach 1)- Sta 300 +41 - 310 +80
UT2 Reach 2)- Sta 310 +80 - 321 +71 & 322 +06 - 325 +20
490
485
489
484
488
483
487
482
486
481
�i►".
����`:
� "it���Y�iiii�i>:i�'R!�111_����w
485
�����
480
484
v
479
v 478
ww■
ww���wNWwi:
�ii�.
"'ri�i!�!�►ii.�r�.�1�C?�1'�Tiir
l���111��1■w���
483
482
0
477
ww
. ww����ww■������
481
w 480
i.`�..'�;
1
w■�����ww■ww■
w■
r-
wirir��llr:
®1
w
1 ®w■��������a�
479
w 475
474
ww�ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■w
478
■■
�ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■
w■w■ww■■w■ww■ww■■■■w■■■ww
■ w■■w■■■w
■
ww■■■w■■www
i■w
ww■■■■w■■■ww■ww
477
473
■ w■■w■
476
472
475
30000 30050 30100 30150 30200 30250 30300 30350 30400 30450 30500 30550 30600 30650 30700 30750 30800 30850 30900 30950 31000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
UT2 Reach 2)- Sta 310 +80 - 321 +71 & 322 +06 - 325 +20
485
484
483
482
481
�i►".
����`:
� "it���Y�iiii�i>:i�'R!�111_����w
�����
480
479
v 478
ww■
ww���wNWwi:
�ii�.
"'ri�i!�!�►ii.�r�.�1�C?�1'�Tiir
l���111��1■w���
477
ww
. ww����ww■������
i►i��.a'�
i.`�..'�;
1
w■�����ww■ww■
w■
r-
wirir��llr:
®1
w
1 ®w■��������a�
w 475
474
ww�ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■w
■■
�ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■
w■w■ww■■w■ww■ww■■■■w■■■ww
■ w■■w■■■w
UT2 Reach 2)- Sta 310 +80 - 321 +71 & 322 +06 - 325 +20
485
484
483
482
481
�i►".
����`:
� "it���Y�iiii�i>:i�'R!�111_����w
�����
480
479
v 478
ww■
ww���wNWwi:
�ii�.
"'ri�i!�!�►ii.�r�.�1�C?�1'�Tiir
l���111��1■w���
477
ww
. ww����ww■������
476
w■
r-
wirir��llr:
'..��'.L.
w 475
474
w■w■ww■■w■ww■ww■■■■w■■■ww
■ w■■w■■■w
■
ww■■■w■■www
i■w
ww■■■■w■■■ww■ww
473
■ w■■w■
472
471
470
31000 31050 31100 31150 31200 31250 31300 31350 31400 31450 31500 31550 31600 31650 31700 31750 31800 31850 31900 31950 32000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
�i►".
����`:
� "it���Y�iiii�i>:i�'R!�111_����w
�����
ww■
ww���wNWwi:
�ii�.
"'ri�i!�!�►ii.�r�.�1�C?�1'�Tiir
l���111��1■w���
ww
. ww����ww■������
w■
r-
wirir��llr:
'..��'.L.
w■w■ww■■w■ww■ww■■■■w■■■ww
■ w■■w■■■w
■
ww■■■w■■www
i■w
ww■■■■w■■■ww■ww
■ w■■w■

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT2 (Reach 2)- Sto 310 +80 - 321 +71 & 322 +06 - 325 +20 (Reach 3A) Sta 325 +20 - 335 +58
480
419
Easement Break
478
477
ii�����1�li�i�I�R�
■���
���rirl
■I
�v���������
�:'!!���iiLi<i�sl��f�������
476
• I
�
1 -
��
1
NN
475
474
v
�����
■
����lil�lii�i>,�iii+l���■
473
�
��
���N����w
472
°
■I
I■�alaw►.���_
f�iiiliiZi�1ls�lww��
471
v
470
6
469
468
loll
ww■ww■
ww■
■
■■
ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■fiww
467
■wf�ww■ww■
■■
466
465
32000 32050 32100 32150 32200 32250 32300 32350 32400 32450 32500 32550 32600 32650 32700 32750 32800 32850 32900 32950 33000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
UT2 Reach 3B)- Sta 336 +90 - 343 +57
470
469
468 UT2 End Reach 3A
467
466
465
464
v 463
c 462
° 461
w 460
459
458
457
456
455
33000 33050 33100 33150 33200 33250 33300 33350 33400 33450 33500 33550 33600 33650 33700 33750 33800 33850 33900 33950 34000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) A LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) 9 STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
ii�����1�li�i�I�R�
■���
���rirl
■I
�v���������
�:'!!���iiLi<i�sl��f�������
• I
�
1 -
��
�����
■
����lil�lii�i>,�iii+l���■
�
��
���N����w
■I
I■�alaw►.���_
f�iiiliiZi�1ls�lww��
UT2 Reach 3B)- Sta 336 +90 - 343 +57
470
469
468 UT2 End Reach 3A
467
466
465
464
v 463
c 462
° 461
w 460
459
458
457
456
455
33000 33050 33100 33150 33200 33250 33300 33350 33400 33450 33500 33550 33600 33650 33700 33750 33800 33850 33900 33950 34000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) A LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) 9 STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
�:i'!
���rirl
�:r
�:'!!���iiLi<i�sl��f�������
• I
�
1 -
��
�����
■
����lil�lii�i>,�iii+l���■
�
��
ww■ww■
ww■
■
■■
ww■ww■ww■ww■ww■fiww
■wf�ww■ww■
■■

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT2 f Reach 3B1- Sta 336 +90 - 343 +57
465
464
463
462
461
460
459
v 458
457
0 456
'v 455
454
453
452
451
450
3
4000 34050 34100 34150 34200 34250 34300 34350 34400 34450 34500 34550 34600 34650 34700 34750 34800 34850 34900 34950 35000
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO- 04/2014) - - - - - -- WSF (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ RBKF /RTOB (MYO- 04/2014) ♦ LBKF /LTOB (MYO- 04/2014) • STRUCTURE (MYO- 04/2014)
� A
A f� t
t♦♦ AA A
At ♦
♦ ♦ ♦♦
U
End Reach 3B

Table 6b. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross - Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT7 and UT2 Reaches 1 and 2
Cross - Section 9 (Riffle)
Cross - Section 10 (Pool)
Cross - Section 11 (Pool)
Cross - Section 12 (Riffle)
Dimension
Base MYl I MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYi I MY2 I MY3 I MY4 MYS
I Base I MY3 I MY21 MY31 MY41 MY51
Base I MY3 I MY21 MY31 MY41 MYS
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
18.1
10.6
9.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
200.0
N/A
N/A
0.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
0.8
1.S
1.9
1.2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft')
4.5
9.8
7.5
4.5
Bankfull Width /Depth Ratio
24.5
33.3
15.2
19.8
M1.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
19.1
N/A
N/A
0.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0_L
1.0
1.0
1
1
1
Cross - Section 13 (Riffle)
Cross - Section 14 (Pool)
Cross - Section 15 (Riffle)
Cross - Section 1U(Pool)
Dimension
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Base MY3 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYI MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Base MY3 MY2 M
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.0
13.9
9.6
9.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
200.0
**
>200
N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.2
2.1
1.1
1.8
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft')
5.3
11.7
5.2
7.0
Bankfull Width /Depth Ratio
15.3
16.4
17.6
13.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
22.1
**
>15
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 9 -UT1
204+8 riffle
478
476 -
474
FloodproneArea
0
472
470
468
466
-80 -60 -40 -20 0
20 40
60 80 100 120
Width (ft)
�MYO(04 /2014)
— Bankfull —
Bankfull Dimensions
4.5 x- section area (ft.sq.)
10.5 width (ft)
0.4 mean depth (ft)
0.8 max depth (ft)
mot.
10.7 wetted parimeter (ft)_
- ....:.".
0.4 hyd radi (ft)
–,
24.5 width -depth ratio"
200 W FPA (ft)£'�
>2.2 ER
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
FloodproneArea

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 30 -UT1
204+30
pool
478
472
0
m 470
w
476
468
474
466
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Width (ft)
C
­"IV
Bankfull Dimensions
9.8 x- section area (ft.sq.)
18.1 width (ft)
0.5 mean depth (ft)
1.8 max depth (ft)
- -
19.0 wetted parimeter (ft)
_.,.
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
:.
33.3 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
472
0
m 470
w
468
466
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UTI, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
UT1 Reach Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
90.0
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
2
32
34
34
34
Very fine
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
35
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
0
35
Medium
0.250
0.500
I er
0
0
35
8o
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
0
35
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
2
37
♦ - - - -
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
1
1
1
38
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
2
40
Fine
4.0
5.7
2
2
2
42
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
1
3
3
45
Medium
8.0
11.3
2
2
2
47
Medium
11.3
16.0
2
6
8
8
55
Coarse
16.0
22.6
3
3
6
6
61
Coarse
22.6
32
5
5
5
66
4111
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
32
45
45
64
10
12
1
11
12
11
12
77
89
Small
64
90
4
2
6
6
95
Small
90
128
3
3
3
98
Large
128
180
1
1
1
99
Large
180
256
1
1
1
100
■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
10
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■ ■
Medium
512
1024
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014.
■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt /Clay
D35 -
1.0
D50 =
12.7
D80. =
55.3
D95 =
90.0
D100 =
256.0
100
UT1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rav
Cob
le
I er
8o
Be
r
0 70
v
60
50
V
40
v 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014.
UT1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
v 60%
d
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O 06ti yti5 by O� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti'?� yo ,tiro „�'L b5 6A oi0 41" y00 �y6 .5ro'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT1, Cross - Section 10
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 30 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
86.2
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
3
3
3
Very fine
0.062
0.125
3
30%
Fine
0.125
0.250
3
10%
Medium
0.250
0.500
0%
3
Coarse
0.5
1.0
4
4
7
Ider
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
9
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
9
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ice
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
10
♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Fine
4.0
5.7
10
10
20
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Fine
5.7
8.0
6
6
26
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦� ♦♦
Medium
8.0
11.3
6
6
32
♦ ♦ ♦
♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Medium
11.3
16.0
8
8
40
Coarse
16.0
22.6
13
13
53
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Coarse
22.6
32
3
3
56
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Very Coarse
32
45
8
8
64
♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Coarse
45
64
6
6
70
Small
64
90
16
16
86
Small
90
128
11
11
97
Large
128
180
1
1
98
Large
180
256
98
■ ■ ■■ ■■Small
256
362
2
2
100
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■
Medium
512
1024
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Large/Very Larg
1024
2048
20
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Totall
100
100
100
Cross - Section 10
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
4.9
D35 =
12.7
D50 =
20.9
D84 =
86.2
D95 =
120.1
D10o =
362.0
UT1 Cross- Section 10
Individual Class Percent
UT1 Cross - Section 10
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
90%
80%
�
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O 6'L .L5 by 5 1 'L 0 b 1 qs 3 ,y6 �0 3'L by 6A 00 ,ti�b �O 56 0ti 1ti ti� A�
00 oti o. o• ti' S• 1v titi• ti ti ti 3 h ,,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO- 04/2014
rav
I
Cobble
Ider
S0
v
70
60
E
U
50
U
40
a
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO04 /2014
UT1 Cross- Section 10
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O 6'L .L5 by 5 1 'L 0 b 1 qs 3 ,y6 �0 3'L by 6A 00 ,ti�b �O 56 0ti 1ti ti� A�
00 oti o. o• ti' S• 1v titi• ti ti ti 3 h ,,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO- 04/2014

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Section 11 -UT2 Reach 1
304+70 pool
491
—
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
11.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
15.2
width -depth ratio
489
487
485
c
0
483
>
v
481
479
477
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) — Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
7.5
x- section area (ft.sq.)
10.6
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
11.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
15.2
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Section 12 -UT2 Reach 1
304+92 riffle
491
9.4
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
489
max depth (ft)
9.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.5
hyd radi (ft)
19.8
width -depth ratio
180
487
>2.2
Entrenchement Ratio
1.0
BHR
485
c
483
481
479
477
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
tMYO(04/2014) - Bankfull -Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
4.5
x- section area (ft.sq.)
9.4
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
1.2
max depth (ft)
9.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.5
hyd radi (ft)
19.8
width -depth ratio
180
width FPA (ft)
>2.2
Entrenchement Ratio
1.0
BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream
AA

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Partic le Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
UT2 Reach 1 Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
1 42.9
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
4
20
24
24
24
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
0
24
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
0
24
Medium
0.250
0.500
I er
0
0
24
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
0
24
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
0
24
♦���♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
0
24
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
1
25
Fine
4.0
5.7
2
6
8
8
33
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
1
3
3
36
Medium
8.0
11.3
5
5
10
10
46
Medium
11.3
16.0
7
7
14
14
60
Coarse
16.0
22.6
13
1
14
14
74
Coarse
22.6
32
8
7
15
15
89
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
32
45
45
64
6
2
1
1
7
3
7
3
96
99
Small
64
90
1
1
1
100
Small
90
128
Large
128
180
Large
180
256
■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
10
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■ ■
Medium
512
1024
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Totall
50
1 50
100
100
I 100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt /Clay
D35 -
7.1
D50 =
12.2
D84 =
28.5
D95 =
1 42.9
D100 =1
90.0
100
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rav
Cob
le
I er
80
0 70
v
60
50
V
40
v 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
v 60%
d
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti'?� yo ,tiro 'S'1' b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .6ro'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 1, Cross - Section 12
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 12 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
39.6
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
180.0
Ci 50%
'0 40%
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
Ider
0
20%
10%
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
Medium
0.250
0.500
I
0
le
Coarse
0.5
1.0
$�
0
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
•
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
2
Fine
4.0
5.7
4
4
6
Fine
5.7
8.0
8
8
14
����••
Medium
8.0
11.3
14
14
28
Medium
11.3
16.0
14
14
42
Coarse
16.0
22.6
14
14
56
Coarse
22.6
32
18
18
74
Very Coarse
32
45
16
16
90
•
Very Coarse
45
64
90
Small
64
90
4
4
94
Small
90
128
2
2
96
Large
128
180
4
4
100
Large
180
256
a
30
■ ■ ■ ■■ ■Small
256
362
■ ■ ■Small
362
512
� � ■ � �
Medium
512
1024
20
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 12
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
8.4
D35 =
13.3
D50 =
19.5
D84 =
39.6
D95 =
107.3
D100 =
180.0
100%
UT2 Cross - Section 12
Individual Class Percent
UT2 Cross - Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
80%
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
Ider
20%
10%
rave
I
Cob
le
$�
v
70
60
E
U
50
c
40
a
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO- 04/2014
100%
UT2 Cross - Section 12
Individual Class Percent
90%
80%
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O 6'L .y5 ti� 5 1 'L 'b b 1 W 3 1�O 0 .5'L by 6A 00 ,ti�b �O 56 0ti titi ti� A�
00 Oti O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO- 04/2014

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 13 -UT2 Reach 2
316+66 riffle
484
482
480
478 OWN
c
0
476
v
w 474
472
470
-120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40
60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Width (ft)
+MYO(04 /2014)
— Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
5.3 x- section area (ft.sq.)
9.0 width (ft)
0.6 mean depth (ft)
1.2 max depth (ft)
9.5 wetted parimeter (ft)
} z
0.6 hyd radi (ft)
-
15.3 width -depth ratio
¢°
200 width FPA (ft)
—
>2.2 Entrenchement Ratio.
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 14 -UT2 Reach 2
316+98 pool
484
482
480
478
c
476
so S
v
w 474
472
_
470
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
11.7 x- section area (ft.sq.)
13.9 width (ft)
0.8 mean depth (ft)
2.1 max depth (ft)
'=. -�.,-
14.9 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.8 hyd radi (ft)
16.4 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
-
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying'k
4 _-
t,
ew ownstream

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 15 -UT2 Reach 2
316+98 riffle
477
475
473
0
471
M
469
467
465
-60 -50 -40 -30
-20 -10 0
10 20 30
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
+MYO(04 /2014)
— Bankfull
— FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
5.2 x- section area (ft.sq.)
9.6 width (ft)
0.5 mean depth (ft)
1.1 max depth (ft)-
..�,,� _
9.9 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
17.6 width -depth ratio"
r
'
>N59 width FPA (ft)
+► `*
>2.2 Entrenchement Ratio
e
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 16 -UT2 Reach 2
324+55 pool
477
475
473
0 471
w 469
467
465
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) - Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
7.0 x- section area (ft.sq.)
9.6 width (ft)
0.7 mean depth (ft)
1.8 max depth (ft)
10.6 wetted parimeter (ft)
R-
0.7 hyd radi (ft)
_
13.3 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 2, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Partic le Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
UT2 Reach 2 Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
1 86.7
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
2
13
15
15
15
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
0
15
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
0
15
Medium
0.250
0.500
I er
0
0
15
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
0
15
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
0
15
♦���♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
2
2
17
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
3
3
3
20
Fine
4.0
5.7
60
50
2
2
2
22
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
4
6
6
28
Medium
8.0
11.3
2
4
6
6
34
Medium
11.3
16.0
2
5
7
7
41
Coarse
16.0
22.6
7
5
12
12
53
Coarse
22.6
32
4
7
11
11
64
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
32
45
45
64
12
7
3
1
15
8
15
8
79
87
Small
64
90
9
9
9
96
Small
90
128
2
2
2
98
Large
128
180
1
1
2
2
100
Large
180
256
■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
10
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■ ■
Medium
512
1024
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
■ ENE
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
2.4
D35 =
11.6
D50 =
20.7
D84 =
56.1
D95 =
1 86.7
D100 =
180.0
100
UT2 Reach 2, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rav
Cob
le
I er
80
Be
r
0 70
v
60
50
V
40
v 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
UT2 Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
v 60%
d
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti'?� yo ,tiro .,�'L b5 6A oi0 y.10 y00 �y6 .6ro'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 2, Cross - Section 13
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 13 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
D100 =
1 128.0
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
60%
Ed
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
Medium
0.250
0.500
30%
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
Cob
le
0
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
2
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
ti ti w w 3 ti6 3ti oh ba oo tiro yo e6 bti titi ti� 0`6
ti h tiv titi ti ti ti 16 h ,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
2
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
4
♦��������� Fine
Fine
4.0
5.7
5.7
8.0
6
6
10
10
Medium
Medium
8.0
11.3
11.3
16.0
8
8
8
8
18
26
Coarse
16.0
22.6
14
14
40
Coarse
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
22.6
32
45
32
45
64
18
12
10
18
12
10
58
70
80
Small
64
90
14
14
94
Small
90
128
1 6
6
100
Large
128
180
100
Large
180
256
E
V
100
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Small
256
362
100
■ ■� Small
362
512
100
■ ■ Medium
512
1024
100
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 13
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
10.2
D35 =
20.0
D50 =
27.4
D84 =
70.5
D95 =
J 95.4
D100 =
1 128.0
UT2 Cross - Section 13
Individual Class Percent
UT2 Cross - Section 13
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
90%
80%
c
70%
v
60%
Ed
Ider
U 50%
40%
°
30%
rav
1
Cob
le
10%
$�
0%
o eti ye tih 5
00 oy o. o
ti ti w w 3 ti6 3ti oh ba oo tiro yo e6 bti titi ti� 0`6
ti h tiv titi ti ti ti 16 h ,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014
jE
v
70
60
E
V
50
c
40
a
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
UT2 Cross - Section 13
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
c
70%
v
60%
Ed
U 50%
40%
°
30%
20%
10%
0%
o eti ye tih 5
00 oy o. o
ti ti w w 3 ti6 3ti oh ba oo tiro yo e6 bti titi ti� 0`6
ti h tiv titi ti ti ti 16 h ,o ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 2, Cross - Section 15
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross- Section 15 Summary
min
max
Total
Class Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
69.7
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
362.0
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
30%
0
20%
10%
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
rav
Medium
Coarse
0.250
0.5
0.500
1.0
le
0
0
80
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
4
4
4
• •
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
4
Very Fine
Fine
2.8
4.0
4.0
5.7
8
10
8
10
12
22
Fine
5.7
8.0
10
10
32
Medium
Medium
8.0
11.3
11.3
16.0
4
1 6
4
6
36
42
Coarse
16.0
22.6
12
12
54
Coarse
Very Coarse
Ver Coarse
Y
22.6
32
45
32
45
64
8
10
8
8
10
8
62
72
80
Small
64
90
16
16
96
Small
90
128
2
2
98
Large
128
180
98
Large
180
256
98
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Small
256
362
2
2
100
■ • Small
362
512
100
��■■ Medium
512
1024
100
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Large/Very Larg
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
a 30
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 15
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
4.6
D35 =
10.2
D50 =
20.1
D84 =
69.7
D95 =
J 88.1
D100 =
362.0
UT2 Cross - Section 15
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
90%
­71
80%
70%
v
60%
Ci 50%
Ider
30%
20%
10%
T
rav
1
0%
Cob
le
80
70
v
60
E 50
U
c 40
U
a 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
100%
UT2 Cross - Section 15
Individual Class Percent
90%
80%
70%
v
60%
Ci 50%
40%
°
30%
20%
10%
0%
0 6ti by tih 5 ti ti w w 3 tie o 3ti ay o� oo yw �o yo oti titi ya n�
00 oy o. o• ti 5• titi. ,yv ti ti ti 3 h yo ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Table 6c. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross - Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
UT2 Reaches 3A and 3B
Cross - Section 17 (Pool)
Cross - Section 18 (Riffle)
Cross - Section 19 (Riffle)
Cross - Section 20 (Pool)
Dimension
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MY3 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MY3 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
10.5
13.9
14.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
N/A
200.0
161.8
**
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.7
0.8
1.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
1.2
1.6
2.6
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
10.7
7.2
11.8
21.2
Bankfull Width /Depth Ratio
10.2
15.3
16.5
10.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
19.1
11.6
**
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 17 -UT2 Reach 3A
332+3
pool
472
-
470
468
a 466
w 464
462
460
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10
0 10 20 30
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Width (ft)
tMYO (04/2014)
- Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
10.7 x- section area (ft.sq.)
10.5 width (ft)
1.0 mean depth (ft)
MI. _
2.0 max depth (ft)
11.4 wetted parimeter (ft)
K.
A..
w-
0.9 hyd radi (ft)
y
10.2 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 18 -UT2 Reach 3A
332+20
riffle
472
470
468
0
466
—,,,
464
462
460
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
20 30
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Width (ft)
+MYO(04 /2014)
— Bankfull —
Bankfull Dimensions
7.2 x- section area (ft.sq.)
FloodproneArea
10.5 width (ft)
0.7 mean depth (ft)
1.2 max depth (ft)
10.8 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.7 hyd radi (ft)
_- -
15.3 width -depth ratio
Nam—
>97 width FPA (ft)
-
>2.2 Entrenchement Ratio
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
f}
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
FloodproneArea

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 3a, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Partic le Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
UT2 Reach 3A Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
1 64.0
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
2
4
6
6
6
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
0
6
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
0
6
Medium
0.250
0.500
I er
0
0
6
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
0
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
0
6
♦���♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
0
6
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
0
0
6
Fine
4.0
5.7
60
2
2
2
8
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
2
2
10
Medium
8.0
11.3
3
3
6
6
16
Medium
11.3
16.0
3
10
13
13
29
Coarse
16.0
22.6
11
6
17
17
46
Coarse
22.6
32
11
10
21
21
67
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
32
45
45
64
15
2
8
3
23
5
23
5
90
95
Small
64
90
1
1
1
96
Small
90
128
1
1
2
2
98
Large
128
180
1
1
1
99
Large
180
256
1
1
1
100
■ ■ ■ ■
Small
256
362
10
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■ ■ ■
Medium
512
1024
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 03/2014
■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very LargE
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
11.0
D35 -
18.1
D50 =
24.1
D84 =
41.2
D95 =
1 64.0
D100 =1
256.0
100
UT2 Reach 3A, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rav
Cob
le
I er
80
Be
r
0 70
v
60
50
V
40
v 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 03/2014
UT2 Reach 3A, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
v 60%
d
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti'?� yo ,tiro .,�'L b5 6A oi0 y,10 y00 �y6 .5ro'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 03/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross - Section 18
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross-Section 1 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
53.7
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
128.0
80%
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
Ider
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
Medium
0.250
0.500
I
'0 40%
0
le
Coarse
0.5
1.0
80
0
30%
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ice
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
70
0
♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Fine
4.0
5.7
"p, by 6O 00 ,v% O 56 b- titi ,lb A�
00 py p• p' ti' y' y1'' ��'' 'y ti ti 3 h ,y0 ,10
0
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Fine
5.7
8.0
0
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦� ♦♦
Medium
8.0
11.3
1 2
2
2
♦ ♦ ♦
♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Medium
11.3
16.0
4
4
6
Coarse
16.0
22.6
10
10
16
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Coarse
22.6
32
34
34
50
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Very Coarse
32
45
24
24
74
♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Coarse
45
64
20
20
94
Small
64
90
4
4
98
Small
90
1 128
2
2
100
Large
128
180
Large
180
256
a
30
■ ■ ■ ■■ ■Small
256
362
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
■
Medium
512
1024
Ll
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Large/Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
100
1 100
Cross - Section 18
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
22.6
D35 =
27.4
D50 =
32.0
Dfl0. =
53.7
D95 =
69.7
D100 =
128.0
UT2 Cross - Section 18
UT2 Cross - Section 18
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
Individual Class Percent
100
90
90%
80%
�
Ider
60%
Ci 50%
rave
I
'0 40%
Cob
le
80
30%
20%
10%
v
70
0%
"p, by 6O 00 ,v% O 56 b- titi ,lb A�
00 py p• p' ti' y' y1'' ��'' 'y ti ti 3 h ,y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 03/2014
60
E
U
50
c
40
a
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 03/2014
UT2 Cross - Section 18
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
"p, by 6O 00 ,v% O 56 b- titi ,lb A�
00 py p• p' ti' y' y1'' ��'' 'y ti ti 3 h ,y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 03/2014

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 19 -UT2 Reach 36
338+70 riffle
468
466
464
462
c
0
460
v
458
456
454
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
20 30 40 50
60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Width (ft)
tMYO(04 /2014)
- Bankfull
FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
11.8 x- section area (ft.sq.)
13.9 width (ft)
`
0.8 mean depth (ft)
1.6 max depth (ft)
14.4 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.8 hyd radi (ft)
16.5 width -depth ratio
132 width FPA (ft)
>2.2 Entrenchement Ratio
1.0 BHR
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14
c
0
v
456
454
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
20 30 40 50
60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Width (ft)
tMYO(04 /2014)
- Bankfull
FloodproneArea

Cross - Section Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Project No. 95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross Section 20 -UT2 Reach 3B
339+1 pool
468
— —
466
464
"'
462
c
460
w
u 458
456
454
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Width (ft)
t MYO (04/2014) — Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
21.2 x- section area (ft.sq.)
14.7 width (ft)
1.4 mean depth (ft)
2.6 max depth (ft)
15.8 wetted parimeter (ft) T _
1.3 hyd radi (ft)...=
10.2 width -depth ratio
Survey Date: April 2014
Field Crew: Kee Mapping and Surveying
View Downstream 4/22/14

Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 3b, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
BC2 Reach Summary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
1 89.9
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
8
20
28
28
28
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
0
28
Fine
0.125
0.250
4
4
4
32
Medium
0.250
0.500
I er
0
0
32
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
0
32
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
0
32
♦���♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
1
1
1
33
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
0
0
33
Fine
4.0
5.7
2
2
4
4
37
Fine
5.7
8.0
3
1
4
4
41
Medium
8.0
11.3
5
5
5
46
Medium
Coarse
11.3
16.0
16.0
22.6
7
1
2
2
9
3
9
3
54
57
Coarse
22.6
32
3
4
7
7
64
Very Coarse
Very Coarse
32
45
45
64
4
5
6
3
10
8
10
8
74
82
Small
64
90
10
3
13
13
95
Small
90
128
2
3
5
5
100
t
Large
128
180
Large
180
256
MEN ■
Small
256
362
■ ■ ■
Small
362
512
10
■ ■ ■
Medium
512
1024
■ ■ ■ ■
Large /Very LargE
1024
2048
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
51
50
101
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt /Clay
D35 =
4.9
D50 =
13.3
D84 =
67.2
D95 =
1 89.9
D100 =1
128.0
100
UT2 Reach 3b, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
rav
Cob
le
I er
80
Be
r
0 70
v
60
50
V
40
v 30
t
20
-1
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 10000.00
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 04/2014
UT2 Reach 3b, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
v
v 60%
d
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
O �6ti yti5 by �� 1 ti ,L0 b 5^ 0 ti'?� yo ,tiro .,�'L b5 6A oi0 y,10 y00 �y6 .6ro'1' yyti O,yb OP'b
o. o. o• ti ti ti ti
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 04/2014

Reachwide and Cross- Section Substrate Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95360)
UT2 Reach 3b, Cross - Section 19
Monitoring Year 0
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross-Section 1 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
87.8
Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
2
2
2
Very fine
0.062
0.125
4
4
6
30%
Fine
0.125
0.250
2
2
8
rave
Medium
0.250
0.500
le
8
$�
Coarse
0.5
1.0
4
4
12
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
12
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
12
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ice
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
14
♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Fine
4.0
5.7
2
2
16
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Fine
5.7
8.0
2
2
18
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦� ♦•
Medium
8.0
11.3
2
2
20
♦ ♦ ♦
♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�
Medium
11.3
16.0
14
14
34
Coarse
16.0
22.6
4
4
38
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Coarse
22.6
32
12
12
50
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
Very Coarse
32
45
4
4
53
♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Very Coarse
45
64
16
16
69
Small
64
90
16
16
85
Small
90
128
9
9
94
Large
128
180
6
6
100
Large
180
256
■■■■■NSmall
256
362
No 0
Small
362
512
0 Urn :
Medium
512
1024
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ E
Large /Very Larg
1024
2048
Bedrock
2048
>2048
Total
101
100
100
Cross - Section 18
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
5.8
D35 =
18.0
D50 =
33.4
D84 =
87.8
D95 =
135.1
D100 =
180.0
Cross - Section 19
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
a,
60%
Ider
30%
20%
10%
rave
I
Cob
le
$�
0%
"0 0 ,5'L o 6P 00 ,ti�b %O 56 b- titi ,ib �0
00 Oti O• O. .y. `'�' tiy. 'y ti ti 3 h ,y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 03/2014
70
v
60
E
50
U
c 40
U
a 30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO- 03/2014
Cross - Section 19
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
�
70%
a,
60%
Ci 50%
'0 40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
"0 0 ,5'L o 6P 00 ,ti�b %O 56 b- titi ,ib �0
00 Oti O• O. .y. `'�' tiy. 'y ti ti 3 h ,y0 ,10
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO- 03/2014

Stream Photographs

Photo Point 1— looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 1— looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 2 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 2 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 3 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 3 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 4 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 4 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
WF
Photo Point 5 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 5 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 7 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 7 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 8 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 8 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 9 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 9 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 10 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 10 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
ONEWRWOMOr IQEEF_ — _,_
Photo Point 11— looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 11— looking downstream (04/23/2014)
SFr
Photo Point 12 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 12 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 15 — looking upstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 13 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
_ s
Photo Point 14 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 16 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 16 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
A
W.
Photo Point 17 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 17 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 18 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 18 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 19 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 19 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 20 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 20 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 21— looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 21— looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 22 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 22 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 23 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 23 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 24 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 24 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 25 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 25 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 26 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 26 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 27 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 27 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 28 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 28 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 29 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 29 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 30 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 30 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) I
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 31— looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 31— looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 33 — looking upstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 32 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
's
Photo Point 33 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 34 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 34 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 35 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) Photo Point 35 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 36 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 36 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Photo Point 37 — looking upstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 37 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Photo Point 38 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) 1 Photo Point 38 — looking downstream (04/23/2014) 1
Photo Point 39 — looking upstream (04/23/2014) I Photo Point 39 — looking downstream (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Morphological Summary Data and Plots— Stream Photographs

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 7. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.95360)
Monitoring Year 0
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems
Current Plot Data (MYO 2014)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360 -WEI -0001
95360 -WEI -0002
95360 -WEI -0003
95360 -WEI -0004
95360 -WEI -0005
95360 -WEI -0006
95360 -WEI -0007
95360 -WEI -0008
95360 -WEI -0009
95360 -WEI -0010
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
9
9
9
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
1 4
11
1
1 1
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
4
4
1 4
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
common elderberry
Shrub
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
1
Stem count
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
7
7
7
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
6
6
8
8
8
6
6
6
7
7
7
9
9
9
9
9
9
7
7
7
Stems per ACRE
728
728
728
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
1 688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Table 7. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.9536C
Monitoring Year 0
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems
Current Plot Data (MYO 2014)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360 -WEI -0011
95360 -WEI -0012
95360 -WEI -0013
95360 -WEI -0014
95360 -WEI -0015
95360 -WEI -0016
95360 -WEI -0017
95360 -WEI -0018
95360 -WEI -0019
95360 -WEI -0020
95360 -WEI -0021
95360 -WEI -0022
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
6
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
3
11
2
2
1 2
4
1 4
4
4
1 4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
3
3
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
4
4
4
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
1
1
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
3
3
1 3
1
1
1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
common elderberry
Shrub
2
2
2
I
I
Stem count
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
21
t 21
21
16
16
1 16
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
7
7
7
7
7
7
9
9
9
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
7
7
7
6
6
6
Stems per ACRE
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
728
728
728
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
849
849
1 849
6471
6471
647
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Table 7. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No.9536C
Monitoring Year 0
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems
Current Plot Data (MYO 2014)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360 -WEI -0023
95360 -WEI -0024
95360 -WEI -0025
95360 -WEI -0026
MYO (2014)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
32
32
32
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
1
1
7
7
7
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
42
42
42
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
75
75
75
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
3
3
1 3
3
3
1 3
3
5
5
1 5
1 67
67
67
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
1
1
1
8
8
8
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
59
59
59
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
57
57
57
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
36
36
36
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
27
27
27
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
1
24
24
24
Sambucus canadensis
common elderberry
Shrub
I
I
I
I
1
13
13
13
Stem count
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
1 17
17
17
17
17
447
447
447
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
26
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.64
Species count
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
7
7
7
12
12
12
Stems per ACRE
1 688
1 688
1 688
1 688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
688
696
696
696
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Vegetation Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 3: Vegetation Plot Data — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs

Vegetation Plot 7 — (04/22/2014) 1 Vegetation Plot 8 — (04/09/2014) 1
Vegetation Plot 9 — (04/09/2014) 1 Vegetation Plot 10 — (04/22/2014) 1
Vegetation Plot 11— (04/22/2014) 1 Vegetation Plot 12 — (04/23/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 3: Vegetation Plot Data — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 3: Vegetation Plot Data — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs

A
77 -
Vegetation Plot 23 — (04/08/2014) Vegetation Plot 24— (04/08/2014)
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 3: Vegetation Plot Data — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs

Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Appendix 3: Vegetation Plot Data — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs

APPENDIX 4. Baseline Drawings

Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 03040105
Vicinity Map
Not to Scale
Site Directions:
From Charlotte take US -74 E.
Turn Right onto US 601 S.
Turn Left onto Land 'ford Rd.
Turn Right onto Philadelphia Church Rd.
Norkett Branch, UT1, UT3 and BMPS are on the right. UT2 and U72A are on the left.
Union County, North Carolina
for
North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program
E n os stein
agenient
BEFORE YOU DIOI
CALL 1 -800- 632 -4949
N.C. ONE —CALL CENTER
ITS THE LAWI
BASELINE DRAWINGS
ISSUED JULY 15, 2014
Sheet Index
Title Sheet 0.1
General Notes and Symbols 0.2
Project Overview 1.0
Norkett Branch, UT3, BMPS 1.1 -1.4
UT1 1.5
UT2 1.6 -1.9
UT2A 1.10
Project Directory
Engineering:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
License No. F -0831
1430 South Mint Street
Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Emily G. Reinicker, PE
704 - 332 -7754
Surveying:
Kee Mapping and Survey
111 Central Avenue,
Asheville, NC 28801
Brad Kee, PLS
828 - 645 -8275
Owner:
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
EEP Project ID: 95360
DENR Contract No. 004673
Q
zz�o?
�pazM�o
awYZmM=
a 2"i =g;
C)
—r
c�
U
�z
Qi
i�
0
U
..,
x
0
z
bA
_Q
n�
«ax
�o �
WHITE STORE RD
e
N
ROGTF
N34 °52'47.56"
s °22'09.19"
W80
Tg41
w
Z �
LL Y
N �
O]
w
SM�rH D
WN
SITE
RD
a0
Z
QJ
y U
2�
o�
F�
as �PNOSEOR�
3
o
a
2
Vicinity Map
Not to Scale
Site Directions:
From Charlotte take US -74 E.
Turn Right onto US 601 S.
Turn Left onto Land 'ford Rd.
Turn Right onto Philadelphia Church Rd.
Norkett Branch, UT1, UT3 and BMPS are on the right. UT2 and U72A are on the left.
Union County, North Carolina
for
North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program
E n os stein
agenient
BEFORE YOU DIOI
CALL 1 -800- 632 -4949
N.C. ONE —CALL CENTER
ITS THE LAWI
BASELINE DRAWINGS
ISSUED JULY 15, 2014
Sheet Index
Title Sheet 0.1
General Notes and Symbols 0.2
Project Overview 1.0
Norkett Branch, UT3, BMPS 1.1 -1.4
UT1 1.5
UT2 1.6 -1.9
UT2A 1.10
Project Directory
Engineering:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
License No. F -0831
1430 South Mint Street
Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Emily G. Reinicker, PE
704 - 332 -7754
Surveying:
Kee Mapping and Survey
111 Central Avenue,
Asheville, NC 28801
Brad Kee, PLS
828 - 645 -8275
Owner:
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
EEP Project ID: 95360
DENR Contract No. 004673
Q
zz�o?
�pazM�o
awYZmM=
a 2"i =g;
C)
—r
c�
U
�z
Qi
i�
0
U
..,
x
0
z
bA
_Q
n�
«ax
�o �

II I I
I — END NORKETT BRANCH REACH 2 —
IF STA: 138 +99 -
- _ LAT: N34 °53'13.22"
LONG: W80 °21'57.42"
— —
/ 1— — — — — 1.4 "9 POCKET WETLAND BMP
—
xs
I I— -- -- -- -- — — — — m , BEGIN UT3
I NORKETT REACH 2 STA:505 +42
REACH BREAK I X57 U T: G: N34 °53'07.75"
( STA: 131 +84 - 132 +25 LON W80 °21'56.92" _
�—
I _ — v E d� BEGIN 3 BMP
BEGIN UT2A z `I\ STA:5 N3 +73 {
STA: 401 +53 S 6 I cF ONG: W80 21 55 1/9"
( LAT: N34 °53'03.99" _ N w
( LONG: W80 °22'28.25"
— 20' EA5EMENT DB+�-
T3
1.3
I ww 1
1.16 � f GIN UT2
UT21 EACH 3A
ST A. 336 +90 REACH 36
END
R /
/ A. 335+
� \ \ c UT2A END RKETT BRANCH REACH 1
REACH BREAK I �XS 20 f XS 5 / BEGI NORKETT BRANCH REACH 2
UT2A STA: 411 +46- 411 +84 / (I/ TA UT2 RE
(cRio riE) �yo ' XS 19 N : 343 +48 CH 3B
END UT2 REACH 2
ceem e9sa si n I 3 i
BEGIN UT2 REACH 3A
CuND: 6955.62' STA: 325 +20 ND UTl
2 C.
z�roa��
Z «Nnm�
W a c
11 «zmmv
~Z�`On °rw
A �.2 o
Z
�"292E
Hw� LL
o
-0-- O cd
END UT A
\ \
STA: 211 +98
STA: 415 +31 S� ` CE 1.5 bo (I3
/ \ o S 8 / 0 BEGIN UTl .} U
CE CE — CE — CE CE __ CE TA: 200 +00
- ^X517 ap I I 1.9 c XS— �^ T: N34 °52'56.34" 5
l,/-_ -
SIB / ONG: W80 °21'47.93" ^ �V .,.•i
/
S19-- 30 -30 I ( `� CE J 30
p NORKETT REACH
3o w x is REACH BREA 1.2
STA: 117 +60- 118 +60 \ i-I
14 1.8 \ J X54 30
x53 0 P�-I
x513 i-i
aE UT2 REACH 2 — — —
REACH BREAK
i TA: 321 +71 - 322+06 om O
1.7 �����
XS
`xs 1
END UT2 REACH 1
i BEGIN UT2 REACH 2
STA: 310 +80
V
/ I \�+ m 51
xs 1 1.6 1\
O m BEGIN NORKETT BRANCH REACH 1
U /
STA: 100 +31
ONG: W80 2154 97"
N
30 AT
L -- -- - - -__ _
BEGIN UT2 REACH 1 /
STA: 300 +41
LAT: N34 °52'41.45" \
LONG: W80 °22'29.52" /
200' 400' 600' E W
w 3 ry
(HORIZONTAL) d o V

I�
rl
I+
N
� c-I
IQ
1
Q
z�roa��
�WV
awYzmm=
�ZOUFLLE
H wm� LL
C)
a-j
rr.l
V J
W.J
4 U
�z
U
O
U
� O
• r-I
O
Z
0' 40' 80' 120' E W
w 3 ry
(HORIZONTAL) d o V
O
.F/
3
Q
/
,
I�
rl
I+
N
� c-I
IQ
1
Q
z�roa��
�WV
awYzmm=
�ZOUFLLE
H wm� LL
C)
a-j
rr.l
V J
W.J
4 U
�z
U
O
U
� O
• r-I
O
Z
0' 40' 80' 120' E W
w 3 ry
(HORIZONTAL) d o V
O
.F/
3
Q

CE
Ot
33 % 30 - 3] 3J 33 - 33
m
91
A-
VP #5
i
i
i
L�
CE
\ ¢ V
_ CE
1
/yam
U mm
/
/
Q
z�roa��
�WV
awYzmm=
�ZOUFIE
H wm� LL
C)
rr.l
V J
o
0
4 U
�z
U �
� U
0
Z
0' 40' 80' 120' E W
w 3 ry
(HORIZONTAL) d o V
Ull
r-1
3
�Q
C�
v�
z�
N
_ V 1
CE
\ ¢ V
_ CE
1
/yam
U mm
/
/
Q
z�roa��
�WV
awYzmm=
�ZOUFIE
H wm� LL
C)
rr.l
V J
o
0
4 U
�z
U �
� U
0
Z
0' 40' 80' 120' E W
w 3 ry
(HORIZONTAL) d o V
Ull
r-1
3
�Q
C�
v�
z�

Y / \
340 +00
460
O 1 f
QSS R
.'741
I
I
N
PP #9
�RFgc�� gNcy
X22
I
Q I
^ N
E a
c NI Ce
cE I � Ce
w
cE Z
J
I
I
I
STA:124 +00
NORKETT BRANC
END REACH 1
BEGIN REACH 2
END UT2 REACH 3B
STA:343 +48
Ce
\ Ce
\ ee - 17��
Ce \
CE CE
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
33 33
33
3J� �
129 #p0 ,�� — — —
9 � +S
N
VP #6
CE CE CE SCE SCE SCE
S S
SCE SCE
CE � CE
CE CE
-- -
I BEGIN SPSC BMP 1
STA:503 +74
I LAT: N34 °53'06.62" o°
470 LONG: W80 °21'55.19' y$'
p'10 na
O
\ +
M
Vs
\ Z
\ Z
\3J /
3 _-
10 /
/ 3J \ PP #13-\
VP #7
1 STA:507 +12 \ ti
END UT3
CR.TC- 133.00
°o VP #27
j I BEGIN UT \
STA: 505 +42
LAT: N34 °53'07.75" \
LONG: W80 °21'56.92"
PP 94
%h
\
0' 40' 80' 120'
(HORIZONTAL)
Q
z�roa��
=���m°
�WV
awYzmm=
Z=���v
..0
H m� LL
W
r4-j--I
V J
Q
O
U
�z
r�
V J 4-j
4
v O
M� U
w
0
i-
7O
Iti
E w
N �
O �
z�

__--j
cE �
CE
CE E 477 —�
a
1 cE
GE
1 a
Q\
2\
5�\
r2\
CE
STA: 414 +87 \ CE
END UT2A 471 cE
L // 326 +pp � cE
\ CF
yf �R UT2 REACH 3A �E
o �F
STA: 325 +20 d
END UT2 REAL 2 �OB.B�
0.Ff ICI I R9 RFAf41 �� n 328 +00
.... 37
/
/
/
I /
O
1+ rn
m
Iz /
1= /
la
�/ I— CE
_ GE
p6h
!li
0' 40' 80' 120'
(HORIZONTAL)
Q
z�roa��
=���m°
�WV
awYzmm=
Z=���v
�ZOUFLLE
H wm� LL
C)
{� O
VN (�
U
�z
.I.d
('
U
� U
� o
7�
1�
w ^ x
E w
m
� 3
�Q
N
N G�

I /
O /
ti
N I
M/ /
WI /
Z
J I /
U /
�ce �I /
CE CE Cl CE r CE CE CE CE - CE CE CE CE
I
I
/
/
/
/
a /
37
CE / 37 33
3J
/ 37
�a
END UT2 REACH 3A
STA:335 +58
33S 336 +00� ! / BEGIN UT2 REACH 3B .YS\ 00—
0 STA:336 +90 I9 339
PP +158 338 +00 `R=
3J -
/
/
/ G
/
/
l
/
/
D
VP #21
O
T�j
CE \
CE
� CE
SCE �
C
CE
, CE
Q
z�roa��
=���m°
�WV
awYzmm=
Z=���v
..0
H m� LL
111 470 470
37 3J 3 33 465 STA: 124 +00 --
33 NORKETT BRANCH
END REACH 1
BEGIN REACH 2
END UT2 REACH 3B
VP #22 STA:343 +48
3400 100
1lp0.
� x
\ �
\ U O
NORKETT BRANCH \
REAOH
PP —y122 +00 ♦ \ .O
I '
�I L VP #5
J I
I o
JN
0' 40' 80' 120'
(HORIZONTAL)
� o
E w
m
v Q
D
VP #21
O
T�j
CE \
CE
� CE
SCE �
C
CE
, CE
Q
z�roa��
=���m°
�WV
awYzmm=
Z=���v
..0
H m� LL
111 470 470
37 3J 3 33 465 STA: 124 +00 --
33 NORKETT BRANCH
END REACH 1
BEGIN REACH 2
END UT2 REACH 3B
VP #22 STA:343 +48
3400 100
1lp0.
� x
\ �
\ U O
NORKETT BRANCH \
REAOH
PP —y122 +00 ♦ \ .O
I '
�I L VP #5
J I
I o
JN
0' 40' 80' 120'
(HORIZONTAL)
� o
E w
m
v Q