The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20181274 Ver 1_Lyon Hills_100085_MY2_2022_20230224ID#* 20181274 Version* 1 Select Reviewer: Ryan Hamilton Initial Review Completed Date 04/17/2023 Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/24/2023 Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* Yes No Type of Mitigation Project:* Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset (Select all that apply) Project Contact Information Contact Name: * Email Address: Kelly Phillips kelly.phillips@ncdner.gov Project Information ID#: * 20181274 Version:* 1 Existing ID# Existing Version Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank Project Name: Lyon Hills Mitigation Site County: Wilkes Document Information Mitigation Document Type:* Mitigation Monitoring Report File Upload: Lyon Hills _100085_MY2_2022.pdf 21.52MB Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted... Signature Print Name:* Kelly Phillips Signature: * ,�e% PhllPs MONITORING YEAR 2 ANNUAL REPORT Final January 2023 LYON HILLS MITIGATION SITE Wilkes County, NC Yadkin River Basin HUC 03040101 DMS Project No. 100085 NCDEQ Contract No. 7620 USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2018‐01784 DWR Project No. 2018‐1274 v1 Data Collection Dates: January‐November 2022 DMS RFP No. 16‐007406 June 19, 2018 PREPARED FOR: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699‐1652 Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704‐332‐7754  fax 704‐332‐3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 January 16, 2023 Mr. Kelly Phillips Project Manager NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 RE: Lyon Hills Mitigation Site – Monitoring Year 2 Report Yadkin River Basin – CU# 03040101 Wilkes County DMS Project ID No. 100085 Contract #7620 Dear Mr. Phillips: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments from the Draft MY2 Monitoring Report for the Lyon Hills Mitigation Site. The report has been updated accordingly. The Final MY2 Report and digital files are included. Wildlands’ responses to DMS’ report comments are noted below in italics. DMS comment: Section 2 ‐ Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment: The Table 2 goal of protecting the site from harmful uses includes visual inspection of the perimeter as the measurement criteria. Please summarize the monitoring activities and results associated with this goal and indicate if the entire easement boundary was observed during MY2 and marked in accordance with the marking specifications. Wildlands’ response: Throughout the year several portions of the site boundary were visually inspected and during MY3 a full boundary inspection will be completed. DMS comment: 2.2 Stream Areas of Concern: Please reference if the in‐stream vegetation treatment and the perched culvert repair were coordinated with IRT. Wildlands’ response: The MY1 Report noted the culvert on Hanks Branch became perched shortly after construction. During MY2 the perched culvert was repaired. In‐Stream vegetation was treated during MY2 and will continue to be monitored in subsequent years. Any future in‐stream vegetation treatments will be coordinated with DMS and the IRT. DMS comment: 2.5 Hydrology Assessment: Barometric gage data was used from a nearby site due to a malfunction of the onsite gage. Please indicate the approximate difference in accuracy expected by using this substitution. Wildlands’ response: The approximate difference in atmospheric pressure between the two sites is expected to be very minimal. The sites are approximately two miles apart and the difference in elevation range is approximately 200 feet. DMS comment: Table 4 Visual Assessment: Thank you for including the data collection dates in the table. Wildlands’ response: Noted. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone 704‐332‐7754  fax 704‐332‐3306  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203 DMS comment: Digital Deliverable: There is a discrepancy in the summary table for bankfull events likely due to gauge malfunction associated with Ut 1 gauge 2; the report table indicated a single bankfull event in MY 2 on 8/06, the digital summary table indicates 9 bankfull events. Please verify the single event is the intended data submission. Wildlands’ response: Only one bankfull event could be verified for MY2. The gauge had erratic readings during the winter, most likely due to freezing water. It is possible that some of these readings could have been due to a bankfull event; however, we cannot verify them. The spreadsheet has been manually updated to show one bankfull event for the year. As requested, Wildlands has included two hard copies of the Final Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report, with a copy of our comment response letter inserted after the report’s cover page. In addition, a USB drive with the full final electronic copy of the report, our response letter, and all the electronic support files has been included. Sincerely, Jason Lorch Monitoring Coordinator jlorch@wildlandseng.com PREPARED BY: 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 Jason Lorch jlorch@wildlandseng.com Phone: 919.851.9986 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final i LYON HILLS MITIGATION SITE Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits ................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1‐3 1.3 Project Attributes ....................................................................................................................... 1‐4 Section 2: Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment ................................................................................ 2‐1 2.1 Vegetative Assessment .............................................................................................................. 2‐1 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern ..................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.3 Stream Assessment .................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern ........................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.5 Hydrology Assessment ............................................................................................................... 2‐2 2.6 Monitoring Year 2 Summary ...................................................................................................... 2‐2 Section 3: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 3‐1 TABLES Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ..................................................................................................... 1‐1 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements ...................................................... 1‐3 Table 3: Project Attributes ......................................................................................................................... 1‐5 FIGURES Figure 1 Current Condition Plan View Key Figure 1a‐c Current Condition Plan View APPENDICES Appendix A Visual Assessment Data Table 4 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Stream Photographs Culvert Crossing Photographs Vegetation Plot Photographs Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data Table 6 Vegetation Plot Data Table 7 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data Cross‐Section Plots Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 9 Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Appendix D Hydrology Data Table 10 Bankfull Events Table 11 Rainfall Summary Recorded Bankfull Event Plots Table 12 Recorded In‐Stream Flow Events Summary Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final ii Recorded In‐Stream Flow Events Plots Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Info Table 13 Project Activity and Reporting History Table 14 Project Contact Table Appendix F Additional Documentation Repair Photographs Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 1‐1 Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW The Lyon Hills Mitigation Site (Site) is located in Wilkes County, approximately eleven miles northwest of the Town of Elkin. The Site contains a network of streams that range in drainage area from five acres to 9.58 square miles. These include a portion of Sparks Creek, Hanks Branch (tributary to Sparks Creek), five unnamed tributaries to Hanks Branch; four of which originate within the project limits, and two unnamed tributaries to Sparks Creek. Sparks Creek and its tributaries are located within the East Prong Roaring River 12‐digit HUC (030401010600). The site is within a targeted local watershed (TLW) but is not in a local watershed planning (LWP) area. The HUC is described in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee‐Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document (NC EEP, 2009). 1.1 Project Quantities and Credits A conservation easement was recorded on 20.72 acres. Mitigation work within the Site included restoration, enhancement I, and enhancement II of 9,363 linear feet of perennial and intermittent stream channels. The project is expected to provide 5,304.783 stream credits at closeout. Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES Project Segment Mitigation Plan Footage As‐Built Footage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments STREAMS Spark Creek ‐ Not For Credit 215 215 Cool EII 2.5 0 No buffer on right side Sparks Creek 405 405 Cool EII 2.5 162.000 Fenced Out Cattle, Planted Buffer Sparks Creek ‐ Not For Credit 42 42 Cool EII 2.5 0 Ford Crossing Sparks Creek 332 332 Cool EII 2.5 132.800 Fenced Out Cattle, Planted Buffer Hanks Branch Reach 1 1,678 1,659 Cool EII 2.5 671.200 Localized Bank Repairs, Floodplain Bench at Upstream End, Fenced Out Cattle Hanks Branch Reach 2 1,065 1,012 Cool EII 2.5 426.000 Fenced Out Cattle, Localized Bank Repairs, Planted Buffer, Add Wood to Channel Hanks Branch Reach 2 ‐ Not for Credit 42 42 Cool EII 2.5 0 Culvert Crossing Hanks Branch Reach 3 581 585 Cool EI 1.5 387.333 Fenced Out Cattle, Floodplain Bench, Planted Buffer UT1 ‐ Not for Credit 60 57 Cool R 1 0 TCE to work above property line UT1 659 657 Cool R 1 659.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT1 ‐ Not for Credit 40 40 Cool R 1 0 Culvert Crossing UT1 106 105 Cool R 1 106.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 1‐2 UT2 78 78 Cool EII 3 26.000 Fenced Out Cattle UT3 Reach 1 655 652 Cool R 1 655.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT3 Reach 2 447 436 Cool EII 2.5 178.800 Fenced Out Cattle, Localized Bank Repairs, Planted Buffer UT3 Reach 3 513 512 Cool R 1 513.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT3 Reach 3 ‐ Not for Credit 45 45 Cool R 1 0 Culvert Crossing UT3 Reach 3 74 74 Cool R 1 74.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT3 Reach 4 272 271 Cool EII 4 68.000 Fenced Out Cattle, Planted Buffer UT3A 253 252 Cool EII 2.5 101.200 Fenced Out Cattle, Planted Buffer UT4 Reach 1 233 233 Cool R 1 233.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT4 Reach 2 323 319 Cool EII 2.5 129.200 Fenced Out Cattle, Stabilize Headcuts, Planted Buffer UT4 Reach 3 140 139 Cool R 1 140.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT4 Reach 3 ‐ Not for Credit 40 40 Cool R 1 0 Culvert Crossing UT4 Reach 3 100 100 Cool R 1 100.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT5 Reach 1 437 437 Cool EII 4 109.250 Fenced Out Cattle UT5 Reach 2 220 221 Cool R 1 220.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer, Removed Impoundment UT5 Reach 2 ‐ Not for Credit 35 35 Cool R 1 0 Culvert Crossing UT5 Reach 2 107 107 Cool R 1 107.000 Restored Dimension, Pattern, and Profile, Planted Buffer UT5A 318 318 Cool EII 3 106.000 Fenced Out Cattle Total 5,304.783 Restoration Level Stream Warm Cool Cold Restoration 2,807.000 Enhancement I 387.333 Enhancement II 2,110.450 Preservation ‐‐‐ Totals 5,304.783 Total Stream Credit 5,304.783 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 1‐3 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives The project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits within the Yadkin River Basin. While benefits such as habitat improvement and geomorphic stability are limited to the Site, reduced nutrient and sediment loading have farther reaching effects. Table 2 below describes expected outcomes to water quality and ecological processes associated with the project goals and objectives. These goals were established and completed with careful consideration of goals and objectives described in the RBRP and to meet the DMS mitigation needs while maximizing the ecological and water quality uplift within the watershed. Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Improve the stability of stream channels Construct stream channels that will maintain a stable pattern and profile considering hydrologic and sediment inputs to the system; install bank revetments and grade control; install bank vegetation. Reduce erosion and sediment inputs; maintain appropriate bed forms and sediment size distribution. ER stays over 2.2 and BHR below 1.2 with visual assessments showing progression towards stability. Cross‐section monitoring and visual inspections. Minor deviations from design due to in‐stream vegetation. Will continue to be treated in MY3. Reconnect channels with floodplains and riparian wetlands Reconstruct stream channels with appropriate bankfull dimensions and depth relative to the existing floodplain. Reduce shear stress on channel; hydrate adjacent wetland areas; filter pollutants out of overbank flows; provide surface storage of water on floodplain; increase groundwater recharge while reducing outflow of stormwater; support water quality and habitat goals. Four bankfull events in separate years within monitoring period. 30 consecutive days of flow for intermittent channel. Crest gauges and/or pressure transducers recording flow elevations. Hanks Branch Reach 3 and UT4 Reach 3 had no bankfull events, UT1, UT3 Reach 3, and UT5 Reach 2 all obtained bankfull events in MY2. UT4 Reach 1 obtained 130 days of consecutive flow during MY2. Improve instream habitat Install habitat features such as cover logs, log sills, and brush toes into restored/enhanced streams. Add woody materials to channel beds. Construct a variety of riffle features and pools of varying depth. Fence out livestock. Support biological communities and processes. Provide aquatic habitats for diverse populations of aquatic organisms. There is no required performance standard for this metric. N/A N/A Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 1‐4 Goal Objective/ Treatment Likely Functional Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement Cumulative Monitoring Results Improve water quality Stabilize stream banks. Plant riparian buffers with native trees. Construct BMPs to treat pasture runoff. Fence out livestock. Reduce sediment and nutrient inputs from stream banks; reduce sediment, nutrient, and bacteria inputs from pasture runoff; keep livestock out of streams, further reducing pollutants in project streams. There is no required performance standard for this metric. N/A N/A Restore/improve riparian buffers Plant native tree species in riparian zone where currently insufficient. Provide a canopy to shade streams and reduce thermal loadings; stabilize stream banks and floodplain; support water quality and habitat goals. Survival rate of 320 stems per acre at MY3, 260 planted stems per acre at MY5, and 210 stems per acre at MY7.Height requirement is 7 feet at MY5 and 10 feet at MY7. One hundred square meter vegetation plots are placed on 2% of the planted area of the Site and monitored annually. All 9 vegetation plots have a planted stem density greater than 320 stems per acre. Permanently protect the project site from harmful uses Establish conservation easements on the Site. Ensure that development and agricultural uses that would damage the Site or reduce the benefits of the project are prevented. Prevent easement encroachment. Visually inspect the perimeter of the Site to ensure no easement encroachment is occurring. No easement encroachments. Several portions of the Site boundary were visually inspected. A full boundary inspection will be completed in MY3. 1.3 Project Attributes According to the RBRP, agricultural land use, including 30 animal operations, is a major stressor to aquatic resources in the lower portion of the HUC. Degraded riparian buffers are also noted as a significant stressor. Stressors described for the 8‐ digit CU include erosion and sedimentation (including erosion from pasture lands), which lead to aquatic habitat degradation. Turbidity and fecal coliform bacteria violations have been documented across the CU. The Site is located in DWR Subbasin 03‐07‐01. The 2008 Yadkin Pee‐Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (NC DWR, 2008) indicates that fecal coliform concentrations often exceeded the maximum regulatory limit in the CU which creates a potential health risk. The plan also notes major stressors in the Yadkin River Basin include excessive sedimentation and changes in hydrology and geomorphology due to urban development and agriculture. Agriculture was identified in the plan as the most significant stressor leading to water quality degradation in the Yadkin River basin. Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 1‐5 Table 3: Project Attributes PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name Lyon Hills Mitigation Site County Wilkes County Project Area (acres) 20.72 Project Coordinates 36.32924° N, 81.01018° W PROJECT WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION Physiographic Province Piedmont River Basin Yadkin USGS HUC 8‐digit 03040101 USGS HUC 14‐digit 03040101060030 DWR Sub‐basin 03‐07‐01 Land Use Classification 66% forested, 28% agriculture, 6%developed, Project Drainage Area (acres) 6,131 Percentage of Impervious Area <1% RESTORATION TRIBUTARY SUMMARY INFORMATION Parameters Hanks Branch UT1 UT3 UT4 UT5 Pre‐project length (feet) 3,384 930 2,112 836 793 Post‐project (feet) 3,298 802 1,990 831 800 Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined) Unconfined Confined Unconfined Drainage area (acres) 669 37 46 12 13 Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial DWR Water Quality Classification C Dominant Stream Classification (existing) C4 B4 B4 B4 B4 Dominant Stream Classification (proposed) C4 B4 B4 B4 C4b Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if applicable Stage I Stage IV REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Water of the United States ‐ Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Nationwide Permit No. 27 and DWQ 401 Water Quality Certification No. 4134. Water of the United States ‐ Section 401 Yes Yes Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion in Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2019) Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) N/A N/A N/A Essential Fisheries Habitat N/A N/A N/A Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 2‐1 Section 2: Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted during MY2 to assess the condition of the project. The vegetation and stream success criteria for the Site follow the approved success criteria presented in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2020). Performance criteria for vegetation, stream, and hydrologic assessment are located in Section 1.2 Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements. Methodology for annual monitoring is presented in the MY0 Annual Report (Wildlands, 2021). 2.1 Vegetative Assessment The MY2 vegetative survey was completed in August 2022. Vegetation monitoring resulted in a stem density range of 324 to 607 planted stems per acre which is well above the interim requirement of 320 stems per acre required at MY2. Average stem density was 459 planted stems per acre. All 9 vegetation plots exceeded the interim success criteria and are on track to meet the final success criteria required for MY7. Along with a successful tree growth, the herbaceous vegetation is dense and includes native pollinator species indicating a healthy riparian habitat. The riparian habitat is helping to reduce nutrient runoff from the cattle fields outside the easement and stabilizing the stream banks. Refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table and Appendix B for Vegetation Plot Data. 2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern No vegetation areas of concern were identified during MY2. 2.3 Stream Assessment Morphological surveys for MY2 were conducted in May 2022. All streams within the Site are stable and functioning as designed. All 11 cross‐sections at the Site show little to no change in the bankfull area and width‐to‐depth ratio, and bank height ratios are less than 1.2. Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table, and Stream Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for Stream Geomorphology Data. 2.4 Stream Areas of Concern During MY2 in‐stream vegetation was only observed sporadically along UT5 Reach 2 (Figure 1c). This area of in‐stream vegetation should continue to become less problematic as trees continue to grow and ultimately shade the stream and suppress the in‐stream vegetation. After a chemical and manual in‐ stream vegetation treatment in August 2022, most of the accumulated sediment flushed through UT5. Wildlands will continue to monitor in‐stream vegetation growth and will continue to treat it as necessary. There are no culvert crossing issues noted for MY2. The perched culvert on Hanks Branch Reach 3 that was noted in MY1 was repaired in August 2022. This culvert was repaired mechanically by building a series of boulder sills downstream in order to back water into the outlet of the culvert allowing for aquatic passage to occur. Wildlands will continue to monitor all six culverts on Site annually to assess their continued stability. While equipment was on Site, an unstable J‐Hook at approximately STA 219+80 along Hanks Branch Reach 2, was mechanically repaired. This J‐Hook is currently stable and functioning as intended. Refer to Appendix F for Repair Photographs and CCPV Figure 1b. The drum barrel that can be seen in photo point 9 was removed in April 2022 after the photo point picture was taken. Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 2‐2 2.5 Hydrology Assessment During a portion of MY2 the barotroll data logger malfunctioned; however, Wildlands was able to obtain barotroll data from the Bug Headwaters Mitigation Site located approximately five miles from Lyon Hills. Wildlands has ordered a replacement barotroll which will be installed for MY3. Bankfull events were recorded on UT1, UT3 Reach 3, and UT5 Reach 2. The crest gauges on Hanks Branch Reach 3 and UT4 Reach 3 did not receive any bankfull events in MY2. All channels have recorded at least one bankfull event during MY1 or MY2 and are on track to meet the hydrologic success criteria of four bankfull events in separate years. In addition, the presence of baseflow must be documented on restored intermittent reaches (UT4 Reach 1) for a minimum of 30 consecutive days during a normal precipitation year. In‐stream flow gauges equipped with pressure transducers were installed to monitor continuity of baseflow. UT4 Reach 1 maintained baseflow for 130 consecutive days. During MY1 this stream recorded 365 days of consecutive flow and is on track to meet baseflow success criteria. Refer to Appendix D for hydrologic data. 2.6 Monitoring Year 2 Summary All vegetation plots are on track to exceed the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems per acre, and all streams within the Site are stable and meeting project goals. In‐stream vegetation was noted sporadically on UT5 Reach 2 and will continue to be treated as necessary in MY3. The perched culvert noted in MY1 has now been repaired along with a J‐Hook on Hanks Branch Reach 2 in August 2022. Bankfull events were documented on three of the stream reaches in MY2; UT1, UT3 Reach 3, and UT5 Reach 2. Greater than 30 days of consecutive flow was recorded on the intermittent section of UT4 Reach 1 fulfilling MY2 success criteria. Overall, the Site is meeting its goals of preventing excess nutrients and sediment from entering the Yadkin River tributaries and is on track to meet final success criteria. Summary information and data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are available from DMS upon request. Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report ‐ Final 3‐1 Section 3: 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. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). 2017. Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance June 2017. North Carolina Division of Water Resources, 2008. Yadkin‐Pee Dee River Basin Plan. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), 2009. Upper Yadkin River Basin Restoration Priorities. North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169‐199. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR‐ DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (2020). Lyon Hills Mitigation Project Mitigation Plan. DMS, Raleigh, NC. Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (2021). Lyon Hills Mitigation Project Monitoring Year 0. DMS, Raleigh, NC. !P !P !P !P !P !P !P !P GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GFGF GF GF GFGF !A !A !A !A !A !A !A [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[ [[ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [[[[ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ ^_ ^_ ^_ Hank s B r a n c h Reach 2 UT5A Reach 1 UT3A Reach 1 UT1 UT2 S p a r k s C r e e k Hanks Branch Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 1 UT5 UT4 UT3 Reach 1 Reach 2 5 Figure 1c Figure 1b Figure 1a 0 300 600 Feet ¹ 2018 Aerial Photography Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View Key Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 -2022 Wilkes County, NC Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetland Vegetation Plot Condtion - MY2 Criteria Met - Fixed Criteria Met - Random Restoration (1:1) Enhancement I (1.5:1) Enhancement II (2.5:1) Enhancement II (3:1) Enhancement II (4:1) No Credit Non-Project Streams [[Fencing Cross-Section ^_BMP !P Reach Break !A Barotroll !A Crest Gauge !A Flow Gauge GF Photo Points [[[[ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !A ^_ Han k s B r a n c h UT1 Reach 1 1 2 3 4 XS3 XS4 2 1 1 + 0 0 2 1 4 + 0 0 2 0 3 + 0 0 2 0 1 + 0 0 302+ 0 0 2 0 0 + 0 0 304+00 2 1 3 + 0 0 21 6 + 0 0 2 0 9 + 0 0 306 + 0 0 305+ 0 0 307+00 2 0 7 + 0 0 210 + 0 0 301+0 0 2 0 6 + 0 0 2 1 2 + 0 0 20 4 + 0 0 308+ 0 0 21 5 + 0 0 303+00 2 0 5 + 0 0 300+0 0 202+ 0 0 2 0 8 + 0 0 3 2 1 4 PP5 PP6 PP7 PP4 PP3 PP14 PP16 PP15 0 150 300 Feet ¹ 2018 Aerial Photography Figure 1a. Current Condition Plan View Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Wilkes County, NC Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetland Structure Vegetation Plot Condtion - MY2 Criteria Met - Fixed Restoration (1:1) Enhancement II (2.5:1) No Credit Non-Project Stream As-Built Top of Bank [[Fencing Cross-Section ^_BMP !P Reach Break !A Crest Gauge GF Photo Point [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !A !A ^_ !P !P !P !P !P!P Han k s B r a n c h UT3A Reach 1 UT2 Hanks Branch Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 2 Reach 3 UT3 Reach 2 4 5 Hanks B r a n c h Reach 2 22 6 + 0 0 X S 1 XS6 XS7 XS10 XS8 XS5 2 1 1 + 0 0 511+ 0 0 516 + 0 0 603+ 0 0 2 1 4 + 0 0 22 3 + 0 0 50 6 + 0 0 5 1 8 + 0 0 607+ 0 0 21 8 + 0 0 2 1 3 + 0 0 21 6 + 0 0 502+00 508 + 0 0 507+00 2 0 9 + 0 0 2 2 8 + 0 0 220+ 0 0 227+0 0 605 + 0 0 2 2 9 + 0 0 513+00 550 + 0 0 606 + 0 0 210 + 0 0 510+0 0 512+00 222+00 604+0 0 515+00 2 1 2 + 0 0 50 1 + 0 0 5 1 7 + 0 0 2 2 4 + 0 0 500+0 0 21 5 + 0 0 509+00 608+00 505 + 0 0 5 5 1 + 0 0 2 1 7 + 0 0 5 5 2 + 0 0 21 9 + 0 0 5 1 9 + 0 0 2 0 8 + 0 0 503+00 221+00 514+00 504+00 !( !( 5 4 PP5 PP6 PP9 PP8 PP7 PP23 PP26 PP18 PP25 PP10 PP13 PP17 PP19 PP20 PP21 PP22 PP24 PP29 0 150 300 Feet ¹ 2018 Aerial Photography Figure 1b. Current Condition Plan View Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Wilkes County, NC Ly o n R i d g e R d Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetland Structure Vegetation Plot Condtion - MY2 Criteria Met - Fixed Restoration (1:1) Enhancement I (1.5:1) Enhancement II (2.5:1) Enhancement II (3:1) Enhancement II (4:1) No Credit Non-Project Stream As-Built Top of Bank [[Fencing Cross-Section ^_BMP !P Reach Break !A Crest Gauge GF Photo Point !(Repaired Structure [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[[[[[[ [ [ [[[[[[[ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF GF !A !A !A !A !A ^_ !P !P !P !P Reach 2 UT5A Reach 1 UT3A S p a r k s C r e e k Reach 3 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 1 UT5 UT4 9 8 Hanks B r a n c h Reach 2 22 6 + 0 0 X S 1 XS10 XS9 X S 2 XS 1 1 111+00 110 + 0 0 603+ 0 0 7 0 2 + 0 0 105+ 0 0 601+0 0 102+00 80 3 + 0 0 70 0 + 0 0 607+ 0 0 602+00 103 + 0 0 2 2 8 + 0 0 7 0 1 + 0 0 807+00 2 3 0 + 0 0 2 3 3 + 0 0 227+0 0 605+ 0 0 2 2 9 + 0 0 804+ 0 0 550 + 0 0 107+ 0 0 106+ 0 0 606 + 0 0 8 0 5 + 0 0 604+0 0 801+00 100 + 0 0 7 0 3 + 0 0 109+ 0 0 108 + 0 0 104+ 0 0 608+00 2 3 2 + 0 0 600+00 802+00 2 3 1 + 0 0 80 6 + 0 0 101+ 0 0 800+00 !( 6 7 1 2 PP2 PP1 PP28 PP34 PP31 PP30 PP27 PP12 PP11 PP29 PP33 PP32 0 150 300 Feet ¹ 2018 Aerial Photography Figure 1c. Current Condition Plan View Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Wilkes County, NC Conservation Easement Internal Crossing Existing Wetland Structure Vegetation Plot Condtion - MY2 Criteria Met - Fixed Criteria Met - Random Restoration (1:1) Enhancement I (1.5:1) Enhancement II (2.5:1) Enhancement II (3:1) Enhancement II (4:1) No Credit Non-Project Stream As-Built Top of Bank [[Fencing Cross-Section Stream Area of Concern - MY2 In-Stream Vegetation ^_BMP !P Reach Break !A Barotroll !A Crest Gauge !A Flow Gauge GF Photo Point !(Repaired Structure H a n k s S t APPENDIX A. Visual Assessment Data Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Hanks Branch Reach 3 585 1,170 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 0 0 0% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. UT1 802 1,604 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 25 25 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 15 15 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 UT3 Reach 1 625 1,250 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 36 36 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 11 11 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. UT3 Reach 3 586 1,172 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 31 31 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 10 10 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Totals: Bank Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 UT4 Reach 1 233 466 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 14 14 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 2 2 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. UT4 Reach 3 239 478 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 11 11 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: % Stable, Performing as Intended Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Structure % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Table 4. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 UT5 Reach 2 328 656 Surface Scour/ Bare Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse.0 100% 0 100% Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 15 15 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. 6 6 100% Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. % Stable, Performing as Intended Structure Major Channel Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-Built Amount of Unstable Footage Assessed Stream Length Assessed Bank Length Bank Totals: Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Planted Acreage 10.80 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Planted Acreage Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 0 0% Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria.0.10 0 0% 00% Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 0 0% 0.0 0% Easement Acreage 20.72 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold (ac) Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage Invasive Areas of Concern Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term or community structure for existing communities. Invasive species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. 0.10 0 0% Easement Encroachment Areas Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. none Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table Total Cumulative Total 0 Encroachments Noted / 0 ac Visual assessment was completed October 17, 2022. STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 1 Spark’s Creek – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 1 Spark’s Creek – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 2 Spark’s Creek – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 2 Spark’s Creek – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 3 Hank’s Branch R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 3 Hank’s Branch R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 4 Hank’s Branch R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 4 Hank’s Branch R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 5 Hank’s Branch R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 5 Hank’s Branch R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 6 Hank’s Branch R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 6 Hank’s Branch R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 7 Hank’s Branch R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 7 Hank’s Branch R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 8 Hank’s Branch R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 8 Hank’s Branch R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 9 Hank’s Branch R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 9 Hank’s Branch R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 10 Hank’s Branch R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 10 Hank’s Branch R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 11 Hank’s Branch R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 11 Hank’s Branch R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 12 Hank’s Branch R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 12 Hank’s Branch R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 14 UT1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 14 UT1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 15 UT1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 15 UT1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 16 UT1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 16 UT1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 19 UT3 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 20 UT3 R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 20 UT3 R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 21 UT3 R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 21 UT3 R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 22 UT3 R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 22 UT3 R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 23 UT3 R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 23 UT3 R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 24 UT3 R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 24 UT3 R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 25 UT3 R4 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 25 UT3 R4 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 26 UT3A – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 26 UT3A – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 27 UT4 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 27 UT4 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 28 UT4 R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 28 UT4 R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 29 UT4 R3 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 29 UT4 R3 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 30 UT5 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 30 UT5 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 31 UT5 R1 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 31 UT5 R1 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 32 UT5 R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 32 UT5 R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 33 UT5 R2 – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 33 UT5 R2 – downstream (3/24/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Stream Photographs PHOTO POINT 34 UT5A – upstream (3/24/2022) PHOTO POINT 34 UT5A – downstream (3/24/2022) CULVERT CROSSING PHOTOGRAPHS Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data - Culvert Crossing Photographs Hanks Branch R3 - Looking Upstream (10/17/2022) Hanks Branch R3 - Looking Downstream (10/17/2022) UT1 - Looking Upstream (10/17/2022) UT1 - Looking Downstream (10/17/2022) UT3 R3 - Looking Upstream (10/17/2022) UT3 R3 - Looking Downstream (10/17/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data - Culvert Crossing Photographs UT4 R3 - Looking Upstream (10/17/2022) UT4 R3 - Looking Downstream (10/17/2022) UT5 R2 - Looking Upstream (10/17/2022) UT5 R2 - Looking Downstream (10/17/2022) VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs FIXED VEG PLOT 1 (08/28/2022) FIXED VEG PLOT 2 (08/28/2022) FIXED VEG PLOT 3 (08/28/2022) FIXED VEG PLOT 4 (08/28/2022) FIXED VEG PLOT 5 (08/28/2022) FIXED VEG PLOT 6 (08/28/2022) Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data – Vegetation Plot Photographs FIXED VEG PLOT 7 (08/28/2022) RANDOM VEG PLOT 1 (08/28/2022) RANDOM VEG PLOT 2 (08/28/2022) APPENDIX B. Vegetation Plot Data Table 6. Vegetation Plot Data Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 10.80 2021-03-22 NA NA 2022-08-29 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 1 1 Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 332233 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1 1111 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 11 Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 1 1 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 22221133 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 11225533 Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU 1 1 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 33111133 Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 1 2211 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1 1 1122 Sum 13 13 8 8 15 15 14 14 13 8 15 14 526 324 607 567 8587 23 25 33 21 3524 0000 13 8 15 14 526 324 607 567 8587 23 25 33 21 3524 0000 Veg Plot 4 F Date of Initial Plant Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Performance Standard Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Indicator Status Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Planted Acreage Scientific Name Common Name Tree/ Shrub Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Table 6. Vegetation Plot Data Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 10.80 2021-03-22 NA NA 2022-08-29 0.0247 Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Total Total Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC Acer rubrum red maple Tree FAC 1 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 111133 2 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 1 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 2 Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 11111111 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 22332243 Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 221133 1 Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1122223 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 1122 2 Sum 9 9 10 10 12 12 11 10 9 10 121110 364 405 486 445 405 7 6 656 22 30 25 36 30 3 3 423 0 0 000 9 10 121110 364 405 486 445 405 7 6 656 22 30 25 36 30 3 3 423 0 0 000 Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/ Shrub Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Indicator Status Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Mitigation Plan Performance Standard Current Year Stem Count Table 7. Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 526 3 8 0 324 5 5 0 607 2 8 0 567 2 8 0 486 3 6 0 607 2 8 0 607 2 8 0 607 3 6 0 607 2 8 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 567 4 7 0 364 3 7 0 405 3 6 0 607 3 8 0 486 3 8 0 567 3 7 0 607 2 8 0 526 2 8 0 607 2 7 0 Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives 486 4 6 0 445 2 5 0 405 3 6 0 486 3 6 0 324 2 5 0 364 2 5 0 526 2 6 0 445 2 9 0 607 3 9 0 *Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. Monitoring Year 0 Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 2 Monitoring Year 1 Monitoring Year 0 APPENDIX C. Stream Geomorphology Data Cross-Section Plots Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 1,153.44 1,153.50 1,153.52 LTOB Elevation 1,157.57 1,157.39 1,157.29 LTOB Max Depth 4.13 3.89 3.77 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 44.10 41.91 39.27 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,153.89 1,153.82 1,153.78 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.00 1.01 Thalweg Elevation 1,151.24 1,150.96 1,151.00 LTOB Elevation 1,153.89 1,153.82 1,153.81 LTOB Max Depth 2.65 2.86 2.81 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 30.70 30.69 31.26 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 1,227.74 1,227.74 1,227.76 LTOB Elevation 1,228.70 1,228.86 1,228.90 LTOB Max Depth 1.00 1.12 1.14 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 3.20 4.30 4.53 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,224.06 1,224.15 1,224.15 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.09 1.03 Thalweg Elevation 1,223.19 1,223.27 1,223.27 LTOB Elevation 1,224.06 1,224.23 1,224.18 LTOB Max Depth 0.90 0.96 0.91 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 2.20 2.56 2.33 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 1,228.40 1,228.75 1,228.56 LTOB Elevation 1,230.54 1,230.60 1,230.60 LTOB Max Depth 2.10 1.85 2.04 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 10.20 8.30 10.18 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,222.82 1,222.79 1,222.78 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.90 0.90 Thalweg Elevation 1,222.18 1,222.17 1,222.15 LTOB Elevation 1,222.82 1,222.73 1,222.72 LTOB Max Depth 0.60 0.56 0.57 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 1.90 1.61 1.57 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 1,183.59 1,183.79 1,183.77 LTOB Elevation 1,185.20 1,185.21 1,185.15 LTOB Max Depth 1.60 1.43 1.38 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 4.90 4.45 3.82 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,180.95 1,180.94 1,180.91 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.94 0.96 Thalweg Elevation 1,180.36 1,180.17 1,180.12 LTOB Elevation 1,180.95 1,180.98 1,180.88 LTOB Max Depth 0.60 0.72 0.76 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 1.50 1.20 1.39 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,204.05 1,204.11 1,204.05 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.94 0.97 Thalweg Elevation 1,203.22 1,203.30 1,203.22 LTOB Elevation 1,204.05 1,204.06 1,204.03 LTOB Max Depth 0.80 0.76 0.81 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 2.20 1.95 2.08 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,170.57 1,170.61 1,170.59 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 1.01 1.00 Thalweg Elevation 1,169.68 1,169.89 1,169.77 LTOB Elevation 1,170.57 1,170.62 1,170.58 LTOB Max Depth 0.90 0.73 0.81 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 1.90 1.96 1.87 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data – Cross-Section Plots Downstream (05/03/2022) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1,163.95 1,164.03 1,164.12 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB-Bankfull Area 1.00 0.84 0.74 Thalweg Elevation 1,163.47 1,163.52 1,163.54 LTOB Elevation 1,163.95 1,163.95 1,163.97 LTOB Max Depth 0.50 0.43 0.43 LTOB Cross-Sectional Area 1.30 0.92 0.73 Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary DMS Project No. 100085 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 34 78 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.017 0.020 1 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 9 15 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 0.6 0.7 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.051 0.056 1 Other 0.5 3.2 1.06 7 ‐‐‐ 0.5 1.2 3.3 0.0210 145.0 10.0 4.3 12 0.5 0.9 2.2 8.4 2.9 1.0 117 >1.4 54 99 6.7 1.7 1.0 14.0 ‐‐‐ 1.10 1.05 1.05 B4 B4 13.0 0.051 B4 13.2 14.0 13.5 ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ UT1 6.6 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 2.7 4.8 C4 C4 68.8 85.0 95 79 93 C4 1.1 1.2 13.4 17.7 13 15.5 ‐‐‐ 1.7 1 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022 16 38 1.9 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) Hanks Branch Reach 3 12.6 14.0 1.2 0.052 0.012 30.7 8.4 2.3 1.0 ‐‐‐ Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary DMS Project No. 100085 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 8 13 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.036 0.040 1 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 10 15 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.042 0.053 1 Other 4.7 15 0.3 0.6 1.5 14.4 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 0.039 64 B4 B4 1.03 1.05 1.05 128 102 1.0 4.8 B4 27.5 15.0 7.5 13.0 1.4 >1.4 2.6 1.0 3.2 6.0 6.8 8.7 0.8 0.5 1.0 0.8 4.8 3.5 0.056 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ UT3 Reach 3 6.615.0 10.0 1.02 1.10 1.10 114 87 75 B4 B4 B4 17.5 13.0 12.5 1.4 1.7 2.7 1.0 1.0 >1.4 0.6 0.7 0.6 3.1 2.7 1.9 4.9 10.4 8 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.042 0.044 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT3 Reach 1 7.3 5.9 Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary DMS Project No. 100085 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 6 9 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.054 0.059 1 Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 7 11 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.045 0.049 1 Other 0.9 1.9 11.0 7.7 1.0 0.044 1.05 1.05 1.2 >1.4 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 86 B4 B4 B4 6.0 7.0 1.00 2.3 1.0 140 67 5.6 0.4 0.6 1.8 1.9 29.1 13.0 UT4 Reach 3 7.3 4.9 9.0 0.3 0.4 4.5 35 0.4 1.10 1.05 1.05 0.053 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ B4 B4 B4 15.5 4.0 11.3 1.7 1.0 1.0 122 74 159 12.5 13.0 10.2 1.2 >1.4 7.4 0.7 0.5 0.8 3.1 1.3 2.2 4.7 7.4 35 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.046 0.073 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT4 Reach 1 6.2 4.0 Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary DMS Project No. 100085 Parameter Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 Floodprone Width (ft)1 11 25 1 Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1 Bankfull Max Depth 1 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11 Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1 Bank Height Ratio 11 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs)1 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2 1 0.028 0.033 1 Other 1.10 1.20 1.20 0.051 ‐‐‐ 0.035 C4b C4b C4b 9.0 6.0 4.9 1.7 1.0 1.0 79 49 39 13.0 13.0 21.6 2.1 6.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 2.2 1.9 1.3 5.4 5.0 5.4 11.0 35 0.4 0.4 0.2 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022 PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE (MY0) UT5 Reach 2 DMS Project No. 100085 Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A 1,153.89 1,153.82 1,153.78 N/A N/A N/A Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A 1.00 1.00 1.01 N/A N/A N/A Thalweg Elevation 1,153.44 1,153.50 1,153.52 1,151.24 1,150.96 1,151.00 1,227.74 1,227.74 1,227.76 LTOB2 Elevation 1,157.57 1,157.39 1,157.29 1,153.89 1,153.82 1,153.81 1,228.70 1,228.86 1,228.90 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)4.13 3.89 3.77 2.65 2.86 2.81 1.00 1.12 1.14 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)44.10 41.91 39.27 30.70 30.69 31.26 3.20 4.30 4.53 Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1,224.06 1,224.15 1,224.15 N/A N/A N/A 1,222.82 1,222.79 1,222.78 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.09 1.03 N/A N/A N/A 1.00 0.90 0.90 Thalweg Elevation 1,223.19 1,223.27 1,223.27 1,228.40 1,228.75 1,228.56 1,222.18 1,222.17 1,222.15 LTOB2 Elevation 1,224.06 1,224.23 1,224.18 1,230.54 1,230.60 1,230.60 1,222.82 1,222.73 1,222.72 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.90 0.96 0.91 2.10 1.85 2.04 0.60 0.56 0.57 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2.20 2.56 2.33 10.20 8.30 10.18 1.90 1.61 1.57 Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A 1,180.95 1,180.94 1,180.91 1,204.05 1,204.11 1,204.05 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A 1.00 0.94 0.96 1.00 0.94 0.97 Thalweg Elevation 1,183.59 1,183.79 1,183.77 1,180.36 1,180.17 1,180.12 1,203.22 1,203.30 1,203.22 LTOB2 Elevation 1,185.20 1,185.21 1,185.15 1,180.95 1,180.98 1,180.88 1,204.05 1,204.06 1,204.03 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.60 1.43 1.38 0.60 0.72 0.76 0.80 0.76 0.81 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.90 4.45 3.82 1.50 1.20 1.39 2.20 1.95 2.08 Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1,170.57 1,170.61 1,170.59 1,163.95 1,164.03 1,164.12 Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.74 Thalweg Elevation 1,169.68 1,169.89 1,169.77 1,163.47 1,163.52 1,163.54 LTOB2 Elevation 1,170.57 1,170.62 1,170.58 1,163.95 1,163.95 1,163.97 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.90 0.73 0.81 0.50 0.43 0.43 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.90 1.96 1.87 1.30 0.92 0.73 UT4 Reach 1 Cross-Section 3 (Pool) UT1 Cross-Section 7 (Pool)Cross-Section 8 (Riffle)Cross-Section 9 (Riffle) UT3 Reach 1 1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. 2LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. Table 9. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Hanks Branch Reach 3 Cross-Section 1 (Pool)Cross-Section 2 (Riffle) Cross-Section 4 (Riffle)Cross-Section 5 (Pool)Cross-Section 6 (Riffle) UT4 Reach 3 Cross-Section 10 (Riffle) UT5 Reach 2 Cross-Section 11 (Riffle) UT1 UT3 Reach 3 APPENDIX D. Hydrology Data Reach MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027) Hanks Branch Reach 3 2/17/2021 2/20/2021 8/18/2021 --- UT1 * 8/6/2022 UT3 Reach 3 1/26/2021 8/15/2021 8/18/2021 1/3/2022 2/28/2022 8/6/2022 8/15/2022 8/25/2022 8/28/2022 UT4 Reach 3 8/15/2021 --- UT5 Reach 2 2/16/2021 2/21/2021 3/3/2021 3/20/2021 6/12/2021 7/26/2021 8/15/2021 8/17/2021 8/25/2021 9/1/2021 10/6/2021 1/3/2022 2/4/2022 2/18/2022 5/26/2022 7/5/2022 7/8/2022 7/13/2022 7/18/2022 8/6/2022 8/15/2022 MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027) Annual Precip Total 41.71 48.23* WETS 30th Percentile 43.05 42.70 WETS 70th Percentile 53.13 52.76 Normal L* Table 10. Bankfull Events Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Table 11. Rainfall Summary --- - No Bankfull events *Annual precipitation total was collected up until 11/1/2022. Data will be updated in MY3. Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 *Gauge malfunction Recorded Bankfull Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) Wa t e r L e v e l ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Bankfull Lyon Hills: Hanks Branch Reach 3 Recorded Bankfull Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) Wa t e r L e v e l ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Bankfull Lyon Hills: UT1 Gage malfunction; possible freezing Recorded Bankfull Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) Wa t e r L e v e l ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Bankfull Lyon Hills: UT3 Reach 3 Recorded Bankfull Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) Wa t e r L e v e l ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Bankfull Lyon Hills: UT4 Reach 3 Recorded Bankfull Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) Wa t e r L e v e l ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Bankfull Lyon Hills: UT5 Reach 2 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022)** MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027) UT4 Reach 1 365 Days/ 365 Days 130 Days/ 241 Days **Data colleted through August 29, 2022. *Success criteria is 30 consecutive days of flow. Table 12. Recorded In-Stream Flow Events Summary Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Reach Max Consecutive Days/Total Days Meeting Success Criteria* Recorded In-Stream Flow Events Plot Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Lyon Hills Mitigation Site DMS Project No. 100085 130 days of consecutive stream flow Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1,205 1,206 1,207 1,208 1,209 Pr e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n ) El e v a t i o n ( f t ) Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30-Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile Lyon Hills: In-Stream Flow Gauge - UT4 Reach 1 APPENDIX E. Project Timeline and Contact Info DMS Project No. 100085 DMS Project No. 100085 Monitoring, POC Jason Lorch 919.851.9986 Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Construction Contractor Wildlands Construction 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 Table 14. Project Contact Table Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Designer Nicole Macaluso Millns, PE Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 Raleigh, NC 27609 919.851.9986 Year 6 Monitoring December 2026 Year 7 Monitoring Stream Survey 2027 December 2027Vegetation Survey 2027 Year 4 Monitoring December 2024 Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey 2025 December 2025Vegetation Survey 2025 Year 3 Monitoring Stream Survey 2023 December 2023Vegetation Survey 2023 Year 2 Monitoring Stream Survey May 2022 November 2022 Vegetation Survey In-stream Vegetation Treatment J-Hook and Perched Culvert Repair August 2022 Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey September 2021 December 2021Vegetation Survey September 2021 Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)Stream Survey February 2021 June 2021Vegetation Survey March 2021 As-Built Survey Completed Febuary 2021 Febuary 2021 Construction (Grading) Completed NA January 2021 Planting Completed NA March 2021 Project Instituted NA June 2018 Mitigation Plan Approved July 2020 July 2020 Table 13. Project Activity and Reporting History Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2 - 2022 Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Complete Task Completion or Deliverable Submission APPENDIX F. Additional Documentation REPAIR PHOTOGRAPHS Lyon Hills Mitigation Site Appendix F: Additional Documentation - Repair Photographs Hanks Branch R2 – J-Hook Before (3/25/2022) Hanks Branch R2 – Repaired J-Hook (8/17/2022) Hanks Branch R3 – Perched Culvert Outlet (9/27/2021) Hanks Branch R3 – Repaired Culvert Outlet (10/17/2022)