20140704 Ver 1_Final Mitigation_Plan_05.21.2015_20150624

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
The Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Project
Johnston County, North Carolina
Neuse River Basin
CU 03020201
Prepared for: Prepared by:
P ebx
res COMPANY
EBX -Neuse I, LLC
909 Capability Drive, Suite 3100
Raleigh, NC 27606
919- 829 -9909
April 2015
T DICKSON
community Infrastructure consultants
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
919- 782 -0495

1 *14 Oil a I LVI &I0kyj IUV M'A'1
The Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Project is located within an agricultural watershed in Johnston
County, North Carolina, approximately four miles North of Selma. The project streams proposed for
restoration and/or enhancement have been significantly impacted by channelization and agricultural
practices. The project will involve the restoration and protection of streams and in the Buffalo Creek
watershed. The purpose of this restoration project is to restore and enhance a stream/wetland complex
located within the Neuse River Basin.
The project lies within USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201180050 (USGS, 1998) and within the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Neuse River Sub -basin 03 -04 -06 (NCDENR,
2005). The 2010 Neuse River Basin Plan identified HUC 03020201180050 as a Targeted Local
Watershed. The watershed is characterized by 44 percent agricultural land use area, and is identified
as a high priority watershed for projects that address flow restoration, reduction of impoundments,
and buffer restoration.
The proposed Buffalo Branch Stream mitigation project is located within the southern portion of the
TLW and includes streams that discharge into Buffalo Creek (303d listed). Due to its location and
proposed improvements, the project will provide numerous ecological and water quality benefits
within the Neuse River Basin. While many of these benefits are limited to the project area, others,
such as pollutant removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have more far - reaching effects.
The Buffalo Branch project consists of stream restoration and enhancement on tributaries that drain
directly to Buffalo Creek. The project presents 1,702 linear feet of Stream Restoration and 4,064
linear feet of Stream Enhancement generating 3,844 Stream Mitigation Units (SMU). Priority 2
restoration is proposed for one tributary, Priority 1 restoration along a portion of one tributary, Stream
Enhancement Level I along two tributaries, Stream Enhancement Level 11 along three tributaries. In
addition to the stream restoration, the mitigation design will preserve and enhance the hydrology of
six existing wetland seeps in the project area. These seeps include two linear seeps and four hillside
seeps. Wetland enhancement measures include planting hardwood trees and livestock exclusion on
5.08 acres. Wetland preservation includes 4.47 acres of riparian wetland along Reach A3. Benefits
include the storage of excess water during flood events, preventing erosion of stream banks, reducing
in- stream sedimentation, and nutrient reductions. No wetland mitigation credits will be generated
from the enhancement of these seeps, but using the buffer guidance document format additional
stream credit will be applied to individual reaches based on the width of the buffer.
The site consists of cattle pastures and wooded areas. The total easement area is 31.63 acres. The
wooded areas along the easement corridor designated for restoration and enhancement activities are
classified as mixed pines and hardwoods. Invasive species are prevalent throughout. Channels
proposed for restoration or enhancement are degraded to a point where they no longer access their
floodplain, lack riparian buffers, allow livestock access, and aquatic life is not supported. Little
aquatic habitat is available to support aquatic life, and the riparian buffers are not maximizing their
potential to filter nutrients.
The objective for this restoration project is to restore and design natural waterways through
stream/wetland complexes with appropriate cross - sectional dimension and slope that will provide
function and meet the appropriate success criteria for the existing streams. Accomplishing this
objective entails the restoration of natural stream characteristics, such as stable cross sections,
planform, and in- stream habitat. The floodplain areas will be hydrologically reconnected to the
channel to provide natural exchange and storage during flooding events. The design will be based on
reference conditions, USACE guidance ( USACE, 2005), and criteria that are developed during this
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan ii April 2015

project to achieve success. Additional project objectives, such as restoring the riparian buffer with
native vegetation, ensuring hydraulic stability, and eradicating invasive species, are listed in Section
1.
The design approach for the Buffalo Branch Site is to combine the analog method of natural channel
design with analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel
and floodplain. The analog method involves the use of a "template" stream adjacent to, nearby, or
previously in the same location as the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach are
replicated to create the features of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed
and boundary conditions are similar between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore, et al., 2001).
Hydraulic geometry was developed using analytical methods in an effort to identify the design
discharge.
Priority Levels 1 and 2 restoration is proposed on Reaches Al and A2 respectively. For the majority
of the restoration reaches, the channel will be rerouted from its current location to adjacent natural
valley features. Enhancement Level I is proposed for Reaches A2 and B2, and Level II is proposed
for Reaches A3, B1, and C.
The restoration approach on Reaches Al and A2 includes relocating the channel to either side of its
current location within the natural valley. The existing channels will be plugged and filled to prevent
continued flow within the ditches. By rerouting the channel and constructing floodplain benches, the
design will allow the channel frequent access to its floodplain and the opportunity for creating small
depressional areas within the buffer to enhance habitat for wildlife and aquatic organisms. Relocating
these channels will not impact any forested areas because the buffer along the restoration reaches is
currently active pasture and disturbed.
Enhancement Level I on Reaches B2 and A2 will include the installation of grade control structures,
bank stabilization treatments, habitat improvements and buffer improvements. Enhancement Level 11
is proposed for Reaches B1, C and A3, where buffer improvements are proposed.
After completion of all construction and planting activities, the site will be monitored on a regular
basis and a physical inspection of the site will be conducted at a minimum of twice per year
throughout the seven -year post - construction monitoring period, or until performance standards are
met. These site inspections will identify site components and features that require routine
maintenance. The measure of stream restoration success will be documented by bankfull flows and no
change in stream channel classification. Sand bed channels are dynamic and minor adjustments to
dimension and profile are expected. The measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival
of at least 210 seven -year old planted trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of
year seven of the monitoring period.
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation. They shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the
site to ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction
document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan iii April 2015

"Exams) s) arcelel I BhY K
1 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ........................... ............................... 7
2 SITE SELECTION .......................................................................................... ...............................
7
2.1 Directions to Site ..................................................................................... ...............................
7
2.2 Site Selection ........................................................................................... ...............................
8
2.2.1 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NC DWQ River Basin .............. ...............................
8
2.2.2 Project Components ......................................................................... ...............................
8
2.2.3 Historical Land Use and Development Trends ................................ ...............................
9
2.3 Soil Survey .............................................................................................. ...............................
9
2.4 Site Photographs ................................................................................... ...............................
11
3 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT .......................................................... ...............................
14
3.1 Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information ............................ ...............................
14
4 BASELINE INFORMATION ....................................................................... ...............................
15
4.1 Watershed Summary Information ......................................................... ...............................
15
4.1.1 Drainage Area .................................................................................. .............................15
4.1.2 Surface Water Classification ........................................................... .............................15
4.1.3 Endangered/Threatened Species ...................................................... .............................15
4.1.4 Cultural Resources ........................................................................... .............................16
4.2 Reach Summary Information ................................................................ ...............................
16
4.2.1 Channel Classification ..................................................................... .............................18
4.2.2 Discharge ......................................................................................... .............................18
4.2.3 Channel Morphology ....................................................................... .............................19
4.2.4 Channel Stability Assessment ....................................................... ...............................
20
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification ....................................................................... .............................21
4.2.6 Vegetation ........................................................................................ .............................21
4.2.7 Quantitative Habitat Assessment ................................................... ...............................
22
4.3 Wetland Summary Information ............................................................. ...............................
26
4.3.1 Existing Wetlands ............................................................................ .............................26
4.4 Regulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints ........................... ...............................
28
4.4.1 Property Ownership, Boundary, and Utilities ................................ ...............................
28
4.4.2 Site Access ..................................................................................... ...............................
29
4.4.3 FEMA/ Hydrologic Trespass ........................................................... .............................29
5 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS .............................................................. ...............................
29
6 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE ................................................................ ...............................
30
6.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits ................................................... ...............................
31
6.2 Subsequent Credit Releases ................................................................... ...............................
31
7 FUNCTIONAL RATIONALE ...................................................................... ...............................
32
8 MITIGATION WORK PLAN ...................................................................... ...............................
33
8.1 Reference Stream Studies ...................................................................... ...............................
33
8.1.1 Target Reference Conditions ......................................................... ...............................
33
8.2 Design Parameters ................................................................................. ...............................
37
8.2.1 Stream Restoration Approach ........................................................ ...............................
37
8.2.2 Natural Plant Community Restoration .......................................... ...............................
42
8.2.3 Best Management Practices ............................................................. .............................44
8.2.4 Soil Restoration ............................................................................. ...............................
44
8.3 Data Analysis ........................................................................................ ...............................
44
8.3.1 Stream Data Analysis .................................................................... ...............................
44
8.3.2 Mitigation Summary ........................................................................ .............................47
9 MAINTENANCE PLAN .............................................................................. ...............................
48
10 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ................................................................... .............................49
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan iv April 2015

List of Tables
Table 1. Buffalo Branch Site Project Components - Stream Mitigation ................ ............................... 8
10.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria ...................................................... ...............................
49
Table3. Mapped Soil Series .................................................................................... .............................10
10.1.1 Bankfull Events ............................................................................. ...............................
49
10.1.2 Cross Sections ................................................................................. .............................49
Table 6. Federally Protected Species in Johnston County ....................................... .............................16
10.1.3 Digital Image Stations ................................................................... ...............................
49
10.2 Vegetation Success Criteria ................................................................... ...............................
49
Table 9. Channel Stability Assessment Results ..................................................... ...............................
10.3 Scheduling/ Reporting .............................................................................. .............................49
Table 10. Natural Community Summary .............................................................. ...............................
11
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................. ...............................
51
Table 12. Small Woody Debris calculations for the reference and design reach .. ...............................
11.1 As -Built Survey ..................................................................................... ...............................
51
27
11.2 Visual Monitoring ................................................................................. ...............................
51
Table 15. Mitigation Credits .................................................................................. ...............................
11.3 Cross Sections ....................................................................................... ...............................
52
30
11.4 Vegetative Success Criteria ................................................................... ...............................
52
Table 18. Tree Communities at the Reference Reach for Buffalo Branch Site ..... ...............................
11.5 Remedial Actions .................................................................................. ...............................
52
12
LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................................................... ...............................
53
13
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................... ...............................
54
14
FINANCIAL ASSURANCES ....................................................................... ...............................
55
15
OTHER INFORMATION ............................................................................. ...............................
56
48
15.1 References ............................................................................................. ...............................
56
List of Tables
Table 1. Buffalo Branch Site Project Components - Stream Mitigation ................ ............................... 8
Table 2. Historical Land Use and Development Trends ......................................... ...............................
9
Table3. Mapped Soil Series .................................................................................... .............................10
Table 4. Project Parcel and Landowner Information ............................................... .............................14
Table 5. Project Watershed Summary Information ................................................. .............................15
Table 6. Federally Protected Species in Johnston County ....................................... .............................16
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics .......................................... .............................17
Table 8. Reach Summary Information .................................................................... .............................18
Table 9. Channel Stability Assessment Results ..................................................... ...............................
21
Table 10. Natural Community Summary .............................................................. ...............................
22
Table 11. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD structures used in the design reach ......................
23
Table 12. Small Woody Debris calculations for the reference and design reach .. ...............................
23
Table 13. Wetland Summary Information ............................................................. ...............................
27
Table 14. Regulatory Considerations .................................................................... ...............................
29
Table 15. Mitigation Credits .................................................................................. ...............................
29
Table 16. Credit Release Schedule ........................................................................ ...............................
30
Table 17. Functional Benefits and Improvements ................................................. ...............................
33
Table 18. Tree Communities at the Reference Reach for Buffalo Branch Site ..... ...............................
36
Table 19. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters ....................... ...............................
41
Table20. Proposed Plant List ................................................................................ ...............................
43
Table 21. Peak Flow Comparison ......................................................................... ...............................
45
Table 22. Stable Channel Design Output .............................................................. ...............................
46
Table 23. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses ....................... ...............................
46
Table 24. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities .............................. ...............................
47
Table25. Maintenance Plan .................................................................................. ...............................
48
Table 26. Monitoring Requirements ...................................................................... ...............................
51
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan v April 2015

Appendices
Appendix A — Figures and Site Protection Instrument(s)
List of FiLyures
Figure 1- Vicinity Map
Figure 2- USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3- Soils Map
Figure 4- National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 5- Current Conditions Map
Figure 6- FEMA Map
Figure 7- LIDAR Map
Figure 8a- 1950 Historical Conditions Map
Figure 8b- 1980 Historical Conditions Map
Figure 9- Conceptual Plan Map
Figure 10- Non - Standard Buffer Width Calculations
Appendix B — Baseline Information Data
Appendix C — Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
Appendix D — Design Plan Sheets (11 "x 17 ")
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan vi April 2015

I RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) develops River Basin Restoration
Priorities (RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units.
RBRPs delineate specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream
and riparian buffer restoration. These watersheds are called Targeted Local Watersheds (TLWs) and
receive priority for EEP planning and restoration project funds.
The 2010 Neuse River Basin RBRP identified HUC 03020201180050 as a Targeted Local
Watershed. The watershed is characterized by 44 percent agricultural land use area, and is identified
as a high priority watershed for projects that address flow restoration, reduction of impoundments,
and buffer restoration.
The 2010 Neuse River Basin RBRP identified degraded water quality likely from existing animal
operations as a major stressor within this TLW. The Buffalo Branch Stream Restoration Project was
identified as a stream restoration opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and hydrology within
the TLW.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
• Nutrient removal,
• Sediment removal,
• Invasive species removal,
• Filtration of runoff, and
• Improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Exclusion of livestock,
• Elimination and control of exotic invasive species,
• Restoration of forested riparian stream buffers,
• Stabilization of eroding stream banks due to lack of vegetation and livestock hoof shear,
• Addition of large woody debris, such as log vanes, log weirs, root wads,
• Preservation and enhancement of hydrology in existing riparian wetland seeps, and
• Restoration of appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile in stream channels.
The proposed Buffalo Branch Stream mitigation project is located within the southern portion of the
TLW and includes streams that discharge into Buffalo Creek (303d listed). Due to its location and
proposed improvements, the project will provide numerous ecological and water quality benefits
within the Neuse River Basin. While many of these benefits are limited to the project area, others,
such as pollutant removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have more far - reaching effects.
Many of the project design goals and objectives, including restoration of riparian buffers to filter
runoff from agricultural operations and improve terrestrial habitat, and construction of in- stream
structures to improve habitat diversity, will address the degraded water quality and nutrient input
from farming that were identified as major watershed stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP.
2 SITE SELECTION
2.1Directions to Site
The Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Project is located in Johnston County approximately four and
a half miles north of Selma, NC (Figure 1). To access the Site from the town of Selma, travel north
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 7 April 2015

approximately 4.9 miles on NC HWY 96, and turn right onto Little Divine Road. Turn left on the first
dirt road (Howard Road) in approximately 0.3 miles. Reach A2 crosses Howard Road 400 feet up
from Little Divine Road.
2.2 Site Selection
2.2.1 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NC DWQ River Basin
The site is located in the Neuse River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03020201 ( NCDWQ sub -basin
03- 04 -06). The project is located within the Neuse River Basin (8 -digit USGS HUC 03020201, 14-
digit USGS HUC 03020201180050 (USGS, 2012) and the NCDWQ Cape Fear 03 -04 -06 sub -basin
( NCDWQ, 2002) (Figure 2).
2.2.2 Project Components
The project area is comprised of a single easement area along three tributaries that flow into Buffalo
Creek. The easement is separated by a crossing at Howard Road. The western portion of the project
originates at the intersection of Hwy 96 and Little Divine Road and includes Reach Al, the upstream
portion of Reach A2, Reach B 1, Reach B2, and Reach C. The eastern portion of the project is located
east of Howard Road. This area includes the lower section of Reach A2 and the entire length of Reach
A3. Wetland delineations performed in September 2014 identified six wetlands seeps in the upstream
portion of the easement and a riparian bottomland hardwood forest wetland along the floodplain in
the downstream portion of the easement.
Based on consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the mitigation design will restore
buffers greater than the minimum 50 foot requirement. Buffers in the project area range from the
required 50 foot width to greater than 150 feet along some reaches. This additional buffer restoration
will preserve and enhance the hydrology of the six existing wetland seeps in the project area (5.08
acres). No wetland mitigation credits will be generated from the enhancement of these seeps, but
using the buffer guidance document format additional stream credit will be applied to individual
reaches based on the width of the buffer. The stream mitigation components are summarized in
(Table 1; Figures 9 & 10).
Table 1. Buffalo Branch Site Project Components — Stream Mitigation
A3 Enhancement II (low)
26 +00 to
Stationing
Existing
Proposed
Mitigation
366
Reach
Mitigation Type
(Existing)
Length
Length
Ratio
SMUs
B2 Enhancement I
5 +34 to
11 +22
(LF)
(LF)
1:1.5
460
Al
P2 Restoration
0 +75 to 13 +85
1,033
1,310
1:1.0
1580
A2
Enhancement I
13 +85 to 21 +17
732
732
1:1.5
575
A2
P1 Restoration
22 +08 to 26 +00
311
392
1:1.0
436
A3 Enhancement II (low)
26 +00 to
44 +30
1,830
1,830
1:5.0
366
BI Enhancement II
0 +0 to
5 +34
534
534
1:2.5
248
B2 Enhancement I
5 +34 to
11 +22
588
588
1:1.5
460
C Enhancement II
0 +17 to
3 +97
360
380
1:2.5
179
Total
5,388
5,766
3844
*See Appendix A- Figure 10 for SMU
adjustments
based on buffer widths
greater than 50 feet.
* *P2= Priority 2; P1 = Priority 1
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 8 April 2015

2.2.3 Historical Land Use and Development Trends
Aerial imagery indicates that the subject site has been used extensively for agricultural purposes, and
that the location of the stream has not changed in over 50 years (Figure 5 and Figure 8). Little has
changed since 1998 in regards to the development of the project site and nearby surrounding property.
The area remains in an agricultural community with some neighboring property forested. Several
watershed characteristics, such as groundwater, vegetation, surface drainage, and potentially soil
parameters have been modified. Soil structure and surface texture have been altered from intensive
agricultural operations. Historical land use and development trends on the Buffalo Branch Site are
summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Historical Land Use and Development Trends
Date Land Use and Development Observations*
1950 Conditions consist of agricultural fields throughout the project area, with the
exception of some wooded riparian areas on the target parcels.
1980 Land use conditions have changed very little. Vegetation along streams shows
regrowth.
1993 -2010 Land use conditions have changed very little.
2010 Depicts current site conditions.
* Observations based on aerial imagery
2.3 Soil Survey
The Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province.
The soils within the Coastal Plain region of Johnston County formed in sediments deposited several
million years ago by the oceans and streams. The flood plains along the Neuse River consist of
relatively recent deposits of sediments that are not as highly weathered as sediments in the Coastal
Plain Region. Much of the county is well drained, however several areas are poorly drained. The
Buffalo Branch site is shown to straddle two soil associations: the Norfolk- Goldsboro -Rains and the
Rains - Goldsboro - Lynchburg.
The Norfolk- Goldsboro -Rains association is found along the edges of broad interstream areas or on
moderately broad ridges in the uplands. The major soils are Norfolk, Goldsboro, and Rains. The
Norfolk and Goldsboro soils are moderately well to well drained and are well suited to most crops
and urban uses in the area. The Rains soils are poorly drained. All soils are well suited for woodlands
and most of the crops grown in the county. The Rains - Goldsboro - Lynchburg association is found in
broad, level interstream areas that are relatively undissected by streams. The major soils are Rains,
Goldsboro, and Lynchburg. The soils range from poorly to moderately well - drained. The soils are
well suited to cropland. The wetness is the main limitation affecting agricultural uses on the Rains
and Lynchburg soils.
The Johnston County Soil Survey shows eight mapping units across the project site. Map units
include seven soil series (Figure 3). The upland soils found in this area of the county formed in
sandy sediments from marine and fluviomarine deposits or loamy alluvium. The upland soils at this
site are on a river terrace above the active floodplain. The soil series found on the site are described
below and summarized in Table 3.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 9 April 2015

Rains sandy loam. This is a very deep, poorly drained soil that occurs on flats and depressions of the
Coastal Plain. They formed in fluviomarine deposits, and generally occur on slopes between 0 -2 %.
Runoff is negligible and permeability is moderate. Major uses are forest and cropland. Rains sandy
loam is the predominant soil throughout the project area occurring along the streambanks and
floodplains of all reaches with the exception of Reach A3.
Bibb sandy loam. This is a very deep, poorly drained soil found on flood plains of the Coastal Plain.
Slopes are generally less than 2 %. Soils formed in stratified sandy alluvium and have very slow
runoff with moderate permeability. The water table is generally within 8 inches of the surface for 6 to
11 months of the year. Bibb sandy loams occur along the stream banks and floodplain of Reach A3
in the project area.
Bonneau sand. This is a very deep, well- drained soil found on terraces of the Coastal Plain. Slopes
range from 0 -12 %. Surface runoff is negligible and permeability is moderate. Major uses are crops,
mainly corn, soybeans, small grain, pasture grasses, and tobacco. Bonneau sands occur along the
outer edge of the floodplain along Reach Al in the project area.
Norfolk loamy sand. This is a very deep, well - drained soil that occurs on uplands of the Coastal
Plain. They formed in fluviomarine deposits, and generally occur on slopes between 0 -10 %. Runoff is
negligible to medium and permeability is moderate to high. This soil type is mostly cleared and used
for cropland. Norfolk loamy sands occur along uplands within the target parcels of the project.
Table 3. Mapped Soil Series
U it
Map Unit Name
Percent
Drainage
Hydrologic
Landscape
% Area in
Symbol
Hydric
Class
Soil Group
Setting
Easement
Ra
Rains sandy Loam
80%
Poorly
B/D
Flats, Marines,
70%
Terraces
Bb
Bibb sandy loam,
80%
Poorly
D
Floodplains
15%
frequently flooded
BoA
Bonneau sand, 0 —
0%
Well
A
- --
5%
3% slopes
NoB
Norfolk loamy sand,
2 °
�°
Well
B
Floodplains
8%
/o 2 — 6 slopes
NoA
Norfolk loamy sand,
5%
Well
B
Flats, Marines,
2%
0 — 2% slopes
Terraces
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 10 April 2015

2.4 Site Photographs
Facing upstream on Reach Al. 10/09/2014
?acing downstream on Reach Al. 10/09/2014
Facing upstream on Reach A2. 10/09/2014
Facing downstream on Reach A2. 10/09/2014
acing upstream on Reach A3. 10/08/2014
Facing downstream on Reach A3. 10/08/2014
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 11 April 2015

Facing upstream on Reach B 1. 10/09/2014
Facing upstream on Reach B2. 10/09/2014
acing downstream on Reach B 1. 10/09/2014
?acing downstream on Reach B2. 10/09/2014
?acing upstream on Reach C. 10/09/2014
Facing downstream on Reach C. 10/09/2014
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 12 April 2015

General conditions of wetland seeps (W3, W4,
W6) along Reach Al and A2. 10/09/2014
General conditions Reach A3 and Wetland W7.
04/09/2014
General conditions top of Reach BI and wetland
seep (W1). 10/09/2014
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 13 April 2015

3 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
3.1 Site Protection Instrument(s) Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project
includes portions of the following parcels. A copy of the land protection instrument(s) is included in
the appendices.
Table 4. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
Site Deed Book Acreage
Landownder PIN County Protection and Page Protected
Instrument Number
Parcel A Paul H. & Debbie E. Howard 261701 -06 -5377 Johnston 4398 @291 31.15
Parcel B Paul H. & Debbie E. Howard 261701 -17 -3522 Johnston 4197 @252 0.48
TOTAL 31.63
When available, the recorded document(s) will be provided. If the recorded document(s) are not
available, the template documents will be provided.
EBX, acting as the Bank Sponsor, will establish a Conservation Easement, and will monitor the Site
for a minimum of seven years. This Mitigation Plan provides detailed information regarding bank
operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for review and approval
by the Interagency Review Team (IRT). Upon approval of the Site by the IRT, the site will be
transferred the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation ( NCWHF). The NCWHF shall be
responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation
Easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold
easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of
an initial monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the
Bank Sponsor. The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary,
maintenance of the Site during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Neu -Con Wetland and Stream Umbrella Mitigation
Bank made and entered into by EBX, USACE, and NC DWR.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 14 April 2015

4 BASELINE INFORMATION
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
4.1.1 Drainage Area
The easement totals 31.63 acres and the project streams include three unnamed tributaries to Buffalo
Creek, extending from the intersection of HWY 96 and Little Divine road to approximately 800 feet
east of Howard Road. The total drainage area at the downstream limits of the project is 570 acres
(0.89 mi) . The land use in the project watershed is approximately 32 percent cultivated cropland, 40
percent evergreen and deciduous forest, eight percent managed herbaceous cover and pasture, three
percent evergreen pine plantation, 16 percent developed, and one percent open water.
4.1.2 Surface Water Classification
The current State classification for the Buffalo Branch Mitigation Site restoration reaches is
undefined. Tributaries of the project run directly into Buffalo Creek. Buffalo Creek is defined as
Class C NSW (NCDWQ 2012a). Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life, secondary recreation, and
agricultural usage. The NSW is a designation for nutrient sensitive waters — intended for waters
needing additional nutrient management due to being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or
macroscopic vegetation. Buffalo Creek is listed on the 2012 303d list for impaired waters (NCDWQ
2012b). It is impaired for aquatic use, receiving a Fair Bioclassification rating for benthic
ecological/biological integrity.
Table 5. Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Inner Coastal Plain
River Basin
Neus e
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03020201180050
DW Q Sub -bas in
03 -04 -06
Project Drainage Area (acres)
570
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
2%
4.1.3 Endangered/Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under
provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Rare and
protected species listed for Johnston County, and any likely impacts to the species as a result of the
project construction, are discussed in the following sections.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (updated 22 September 2010) lists four
endangered species for Johnston County, North Carolina: red - cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis), Tar River spinymussel (Eliptio steinstansana), dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon), and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii) (Table 6). No protected species or potential
habitat for protected species was observed during preliminary site evaluations.
In addition to the USFWS database, the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database was
consulted to determine whether previously cataloged occurrences of protected species were mapped
within one mile of the project site. Results from NHP indicate that there are no known occurrences
within a one -mile radius of the project area. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to
federally protected species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 15 April 2015

WK Dickson submitted a request to USFWS for review and comments on the proposed Buffalo
Branch Stream Restoration Project on October 6, 2014 in regards to any potential impacts to
threatened and endangered species.
The proposed project offers some potential to improve or create suitable habitat for several Federal
Species of Concern. Habitat may be improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by
improving water quality, in- stream and near - stream forage, and providing stable conditions not
subject to regular maintenance. Improved stream habitat may benefit the American eel (Anguilla
rostrata). Terrestrial habitat will be improved through the restoration and enhancement of bottomland
hardwood communities. Improved terrestrial habitat may benefit pondspice (Listea aestivalis),
Cuthbert turtlehead (Chelone cuthbertii), and Rafinesque's big -eared bat — Coastal Plain subspecies
(Corynorhinus rafinesquii marcotis).
Table 6. Federally Protected Species in Johnston County
Common Name
Scientific name
Federal
Habitat
Record
Red - cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
Status
Present
Status
Vertebrate:
Red - cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
No
Current
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA
Yes
Current
Invertebrate:
Tar River spinymussel
Eliptio steinstansana
E
No
Current
Dwarf wedgemussel
Alasmidonta heterodon)
E
No
Current
Vascular Plant:
Michaux's Sumac
Rhus Michauxii
E
No
Current
4.1.4 Cultural Resources
Cultural resources include historic and archeological resources located in or near the project area. WK
Dickson completed a preliminary survey of cultural resources to determine potential project impacts.
A review of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office GIS Web Service database did not
reveal any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological resources in the proposed project
area. No architectural structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted during surveys
of the site for restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of the site has historically been disturbed
due to agricultural practices and channel modifications.
WK Dickson submitted a request to the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to search
records to determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance
that may be affected by the Buffalo Branch Stream Restoration Project on October 6, 2014.
4.2 Reach Summary Information
The project area is comprised of a single large easement area along three tributaries that flow into
Buffalo Creek. The easement is separated by a crossing at Howard Road. The western portion of the
project originates at the intersection of Hwy 96 and Little Divine Road and includes Reach Al, the
upstream portion of Reach A2, Reach B1, Reach B2, and Reach C. The eastern portion of the project
is located east of Howard Road. This area includes the lower section of Reach A2 and the entire
length of Reach A3.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 16 April 2015

Buffalo Branch stream channels include unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. Buffalo Creek
ultimately flows into the Neuse River (Figure 1). The Buffalo Branch Mitigation Site is not located in
a FEMA mapped floodzone (Figure 6). Invasive control and stabilization will be performed in select
segments of the project. NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms and were completed at representative
locations throughout the project area and are included in Appendix B. Results of the preliminary data
collection are presented in Figure 5, Table 7 and Table 8 below, and the Stream Morphology Table
in Appendix B.
Reach Al is a perennial channel flowing west to east and is located within the upstream portion of the
project. This reach is actively impacted by cattle and there is very sparse tree cover. The channel is
moderately incised and actively eroding. The majority of the riparian area is pasture. There are
existing hydric seeps along each bank.
Reach A2 is a moderately incised perennial channel flowing west to east and is located just
downstream of the confluence of Reach Al and Reach C. This perennial channel is dimensionally
stable, but is impacted by direct cattle access and a lack of riparian vegetation. The bedform
diversity is low and the buffer is devoid of appropriate hardwood vegetation.
Reach A3 is a perennial channel that begins downstream of Howard Rd. This perennial channel is
dimensionally stable, but is impacted by direct cattle access. Undergrowth is sparse throughout due to
cattle access. The majority of the riparian area is existing wetland.
Reach B 1 is a channelized intermittent ditch with moderately unstable banks that discharges to the
main channel of the project. This channel has been significantly altered by agricultural activities. The
riparian vegetation is predominantly pasture grasses with some shrubs along the bank. Livestock
freely access this channel.
Reach B2 is a fairly stable, intermittent channel that begins do W ,,Niucaut of Reach B 1. The riparian
vegetation is predominantly pasture with some shrubs and a few adult trees along the right bank.
Livestock freely access the channel.
Reach C is an intermittent ditch impaired by channelization. The channel flows from west to east
before draining into Reach Al. This channel is fairly stable and is impacted by cattle. The majority
of the riparian vegetation is pasture with little to no trees located in the buffer. Reach C includes an
existing farm crossing.
In general, all or portions of Al, A2, B1, B2, and C do not function to their full potential. Current
conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from livestock, historic
land uses, and water diversion. Having been channelized in the past and/or ditched to drain nearby
fields for agricultural activities, the streams do not access their floodplains as frequently as they
naturally would have prior to farming operations. In most cases, these streams are hydraulically
unstable, and are devoid of bedform diversity. Habitat along the majority of the restoration reaches is
poor in that there is little woody debris or overhanging vegetation for fish cover or protection for
other aquatic species. Vegetative and habitat diversity is poor along the reaches, as well, and offers
little benefit to the wildlife in the area. Site photographs and morphological parameters are located in
Appendix B.
Table 7. Summary of Existing Channel Characteristics
Reach Drainage ABKF 1 Width Mean Width:Depth Sinuosity Slope (ft /ft)
Area (ac) (ft) (ft) Depth (ft) Ratio
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 17 April 2015

Drainage ABKF 1 Width Mean Width:Depth
Reach Area (ac) (ft') (ft) Depth (ft) Ratio Sinuosity Slope (ft /ft)
Al
475
9.0
9.8
0.9
10.7
1.03
0.004
A2
516
15.0
19.3
0.8
24.8
1.04
0.004
A3
540
12.8
12.3
1.1
12.3
1.20
0.0025
BI
10
5.0
11.3
0.4
25.7
1.01
0.0088
B2
20
2.5
5.4
0.5
11.4
1.03
0.004
C
21
2.8
5.4
0.5
10.5
1.03
0.025
ABKF=
cross - sectional area (measured at approximate bankfull stage as estimated using existing conditions
data and
NC Regional Curve equations where field indicators
were not present)
Table 8. Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Al
A2
A3
Bl
B2
C
Length of Reach (linear feet)
1,033
1,043
1,830
534
588
360
Valley Classification
X
X
X
X
X
X
Drainage Area (acres)
475
516
540
10
20
21
NCDWQ Stream Identification
34.75
31.75
35.00
22.50
23.50
19.50
Score
NCDWQ Water Quality
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Classification
Morphological Description
G4c
G5c
E5
G5c
G5c
G5c
(stream type)
Evolutionary Trend
Stage II
Stage II
Stage VI
Stage II
Stage II
Stage II
Bb
Ra
Underlying Mapped Soils
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
BoA
NoB
Drainage Class
poorly
poorly
poorly;
poorly
poorly
poorly; well
poorly; well
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Slope
0.40%
0.40%
0.25%
0.88%
0.40%
2.50%
FEMA Classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
mixed
Native Vegetation Community
pasture
pasture
hardwood
pasture
pasture
pasture
forest
Percent Composition of Exotic
15
15
20
15
15
10
Invasive Vegetation
4.2.1 Channel Classification
The streams have been classified as intermittent and perennial streams using the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form version 4.11 (Appendix B) and are a mix of E5, G4c, or G5c stream types as
classified using the Rosgen stream classification system ( Rosgen, 1994). The design reaches have
been separated into six distinct sections that are described in Section 4.2.3. Channel characteristics
are summarized in Table 7, and Appendix B.
4.2.2 Discharge
Estimating flows (discharge) for the Buffalo Branch Site are difficult due to the channelization and
agricultural impacts of the existing streams. Several models, regression equations, and the Coastal
Plain regional curves were used to estimate existing bankfull discharges. Land use and slope were
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 18 April 2015

considered when the discharge calculations were developed. All hydraulic and hydrologic analyses
are discussed in Section 8.3.1. Data and analysis of the hydrologic and hydraulic models are included
as Appendix C.
4.2.3 Channel Morphology
4.2.3.1 Reach Al
Reach Al has a drainage area of 0.74 square miles
(475 acres), and flows in a southeasterly direction
through active pasture to the confluence with Reach
132. The planform of this perennial, G -type channel is
generally straight and is entrenched throughout. The
approximate bankfull cross - sectional area is 9.0
square feet with approximate dimensions of 9.8 feet
wide and 0.9 feet deep, while the cross - sectional area
of the channel at top of bank is 110.7 square feet. The
existing length of Reach Al is 1,033 linear feet, and
the dominant bed material is coarse sand. The gradient
of the reach is approximately 0.004 ft /ft. The reach is
severely oversized and exhibits moderately unstable
banks. The riparian buffer is primarily comprised of
pasture grasses with a narrow corridor of mature trees along the channel.
points on the NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11).
Downstream view of Al.
N RNM imiT 7:VA
The channel scored 34.75
Reach A2 is a perennial channel located in an active pasture with a drainage area of 0.81 square miles
(516 acres). The reach is approximately 1,043 linear feet, and flows to the southeast until it crosses
Howard Road. Reach A2, a G -type channel, is typically 19.3 feet wide and 0.8 feet deep near
bankfull, and 21.5 feet wide with a max depth of 1.9 feet at top of bank. The approximate bankfull
cross sectional area is 15.0 square feet. The existing slope of Reach A2 is 0.004 ft /ft, and the
dominant bed material is coarse sand. The channel scored 31.75 points on the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form (Version 4.11).
4.2.3.3 Reach A3
Reach A3 is located downstream of Howard Road
and flows in an easterly direction. This reach has a
drainage area of 0.84 square miles (540 acres).
Widths range from 9.4 feet along the upper segment
to 15.1 feet along the lower end. The existing cross -
sectional area is approximately 12.8 square feet. The
existing slope is 0.0025 ft/ft and is classified as an E5
stream type with an existing length of 1,830 linear
feet. The banks are stable, and mature hardwood
vegetation is present along the left and right bank.
The channel scored 35 points on the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form (Version 4.11).
4.2.3.4 Reach Bl
Downstream view of Reach A3
Reach 131 is a stable to moderately stable, intermittent channel located to the east of Reach Al. This
reach has a drainage area of 0.02 square miles (10 acres) and has a slope of 0.0088 ft /ft. This section
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 19 April 2015

is a G -type channel and has an approximate bankfull cross - sectional area of 11.3 square feet and an
area of 17.35 square feet at top of bank. The channel is typically 11.3 feet wide and 0.4 foot deep.
The riparian buffer is comprised of active pasture and some shrubby vegetation along and within the
channel. The channel scored 22.5 points on the NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11).
!WKNOIII 3►a
Reach B2 is a moderately stable, intermittent channel that flows in a southerly direction to its
confluence with Reach Al. Reach B2 has a drainage area of 0.03 square miles (20 acres) and has an
existing length 588 linear feet. The riparian buffer is comprised of active pasture and some shrubby
vegetation along and within the channel. The reach is a G5c stream type, has an average cross -
sectional area of 2.5 square feet, and a slope of 0.0040 ft /ft. The channel scored 23.5 points on the
NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11).
4.2.3.6 Reach C
Reach C is a straightened, intermittent ditch located in an active pasture in the upstream section of the
project. The reach is approximately 360 linear feet, and flows southeast to its confluence with Reach
Al. It has a drainage area of 0.03 square miles (21 acres). Reach C, a G -type channel, is typically 4.3
feet wide and 0.5 feet deep near bankfull, and 10.7 feet wide with a max depth of 2.2 feet at top of
bank. The approximate bankfull cross sectional area is 2.8 square feet. The existing slope of Reach C
is 0.025 ft/ft, and the dominant bed material is fine sand. The channel scored 19.5 points on the
NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (Version 4.11).
4.2.4 Channel Stability Assessment
A modified version of the channel stability assessment method (CSA) provided in "Assessing Stream
Channel Stability at Bridges in Physiographic Regions" by Johnson (2006) was used to assess
channel stability for the Buffalo Branch existing channels and reference reach. This method may be
rapidly applied on a variety of stream types in different physiographic regions having a range of bed
and bank materials.
The original CSA method was designed to evaluate thirteen stability indicators in the field. These
parameters are: watershed characteristics, flow habit, channel pattern, entrenchment /channel
confinement, bed material, bar development, presence of obstructions /debris jams, bank soil texture
and coherence, average bank angle, bank vegetation/protection, bank cutting, mass wasting/bank
failure, and upstream distance to bridge. As this method was initially developed to assess stability at
bridges, a few minor adjustments were made to remove indicators that contradict stability
characteristics of natural channels in favor of providing hydraulic efficiency at bridges. First, the
"channel pattern" indicator was altered such that naturally meandering channels scored low as
opposed to straightened/engineered channels that are favorable for stability near bridges. Secondly,
the last indicator, "upstream distance to bridge," was removed from the assessment as bridges are not
a focus of channel stability for this project. The twelve indicators were then scored in the field, and a
rating of excellent, good, fair, or poor was assigned to each project reach based on the total score.
(See Appendix B for the CSA field form.)
The CSA results (scores and ratings) for the Buffalo Branch Site project and reference reaches are
provided in Table 9. Project Reaches A2, B1, B2, and C all received "Fair" ratings, while Reach Al
received a "Poor" rating. Reach A3 which was also used for the reference reach received a "Good"
rating. Overall, the existing project streams appear to be physically stable as there is little active
erosion present; however, all channels proposed for either restoration or Enhancement Level I have
been straightened and entrenched, and some are actively maintained. These characteristics are
reflected in the poor CSA scores for channel pattern and bank vegetation/protection. Most reaches
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 20 April 2015

scored poorly for watershed characteristics since the surrounding land use is dominated by agriculture
activities or recent clear cutting up to top of bank.
Table 9. Channel Stability Assessment Results
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification
Bankfull is difficult and often times impossible to accurately identify on actively maintained channels
and agricultural ditches. The usual and preferred indicators rarely exist, and other factors may be
taken into consideration in order to approximate a bankfull stage. Other factors that may be used are
wrack lines, vegetation lines, scour lines, or top of a bankfull bench; however, complete confidence
should not be placed on these indicators. Along the proposed restoration and enhancement reaches,
the channel is generally entrenched and actively maintained, which means bankfull indicators were
very limited or non - existent. Therefore, bankfull stage was estimated by using Coastal Plain Regional
Curves and other hydrologic analyses, existing cross - sections, and in -house spreadsheets to estimate
bankfull area and bankfull discharge.
4.2.6 Vegetation
Current land use in the vicinity of the project is primarily agricultural and forestry. Land use
immediately surrounding the project includes pasture, row crops, and forestry. Within the easement,
two prominent vegetative communities are present: active pasture and disturbed riparian hardwoods.
A small unnamed tributary enters the project near the intersection of Hwy 96 and Little Divine Road,
flowing through an active pasture and running across Howard Road into a disturbed, wooded reach.
Exotic species are also present throughout, including Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora).
Within the proposed restoration/enhancement area to the west of Howard Road, the pasture is either
Bermuda grass with scattered loblolly pine trees (Pinus taeda) or fields planted with annual
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 21 April 2015
Al
A2
A3 (Ref.
Reach)
BI
B2
C
1
Watershed characteristics
9
9
8
9
9
9
2
Flow habit
7
7
4
7
7
6
3
Channel pattern
10
9
3
8
9
8
4
Entrenchment /channel
9
6
3
7
7
8
confinement
5
Bed material
6
6
5
7
7
6
6
Bar development
9
7
5
7
8
5
7
Obstructions /debris jams
5
3
3
4
4
6
8
Bank soil texture and
10
9
4
9
9
10
coherence
9
Average bank angle
10
8
4
7
8
7
10
Bank vegetation/protection
10
10
3
10
10
11
11
Bank cutting
8
7
4
6
8
6
12
Mass wasting/bank failure
6
5
2
4
6
4
13
Upstream distance to bridge
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Score
99
86
48
85
92
86
Rating*
Poor
Fair
Good
Fair
Fair
Fair
*Excellent (0 < Score <= 33), Good (33 < Score
<= 66),
Fair (66< Score <= 99), Poor (99 < Score < =132)
4.2.5 Bankfull Verification
Bankfull is difficult and often times impossible to accurately identify on actively maintained channels
and agricultural ditches. The usual and preferred indicators rarely exist, and other factors may be
taken into consideration in order to approximate a bankfull stage. Other factors that may be used are
wrack lines, vegetation lines, scour lines, or top of a bankfull bench; however, complete confidence
should not be placed on these indicators. Along the proposed restoration and enhancement reaches,
the channel is generally entrenched and actively maintained, which means bankfull indicators were
very limited or non - existent. Therefore, bankfull stage was estimated by using Coastal Plain Regional
Curves and other hydrologic analyses, existing cross - sections, and in -house spreadsheets to estimate
bankfull area and bankfull discharge.
4.2.6 Vegetation
Current land use in the vicinity of the project is primarily agricultural and forestry. Land use
immediately surrounding the project includes pasture, row crops, and forestry. Within the easement,
two prominent vegetative communities are present: active pasture and disturbed riparian hardwoods.
A small unnamed tributary enters the project near the intersection of Hwy 96 and Little Divine Road,
flowing through an active pasture and running across Howard Road into a disturbed, wooded reach.
Exotic species are also present throughout, including Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora).
Within the proposed restoration/enhancement area to the west of Howard Road, the pasture is either
Bermuda grass with scattered loblolly pine trees (Pinus taeda) or fields planted with annual
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 21 April 2015

rye /wheat, depending upon the season. Other grasses and weeds are limited. The areas along the
stream have common rush (Juncus effusus) and sedges (Carex sp.), along with a limited shrub /sapling
layer, including American holly (Ilex opaca), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and common persimmon
(Diosopyros virginiana). Adult trees are limited, but there are a few river birch (Betula nigra),
loblolly pine, and various oak species (Quercus sp.) along the stream corridor.
The restoration/enhancement area to the east of Howard Road, is mostly disturbed riparian hardwood
forest. Although forested along the stream, the area north of the woods is currently used as pasture
and cattle have access to the stream. The forested area contains a canopy of mostly red maple (Acer
rubrum), various oak species, sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and swamp tupelo (Nyssa
biflora). The understory mainly consists of giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), blueberry (Vaccinium
sp.), and few other shrubs. Green briar (Smilax rotundifolia) and Chinese privet are locally dense.
All naturally vegetated areas were classified by their community type, and their boundaries were
approximately located. Detailed observations of vegetation species, soils, and hydrology were
recorded in each community type. Table 10 describes each natural community.
Table 10. Natural Community Summary
Existing Land Use Percent of Natural Community
Watershed (Schafale and Weakley Community)
Agriculture — Row Crops 32
Agriculture — Pasture/Hayfields
Mixed Pines/Hardwoods 40
Open Water 1
Pine Plantation 3
Residential 16
4.2.7 Quantitative Habitat Assessment
NA
NA
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest - Coastal Plain
NA
NA
NA
A quantitative habitat assessment was performed in October 2014 on the reference reach for the
Buffalo Branch reference Site to measure the volume of woody debris and fish cover. These data
were used to establish a baseline for measuring functional uplift and to determine the placement and
volume of woody debris in the design reaches. A qualitative habitat assessment was performed in
October 2014 on the Buffalo Branch design reaches to obtain an estimate of existing habitat on the
design reaches.
The length of each sample reach was thirty to forty times the base -flow wetted width of the channel
with a minimum reach size of 100 feet. The sample reach was divided into ten transects spaced
evenly over the entire reach. Transect length was five feet upstream and five feet downstream of the
transect midpoint, and extended the full width of the channel. Parameters measured at each transect
were small woody debris (SWD), fish cover, substrate material, and riparian composition. At each
transect, the channel bed form was noted and an average width and depth recorded. The following is
an analysis of the habitat assessment data.
4.2.7.1 Small Woody Debris Methods and Results
Small woody debris was measured at the reference reach in order to design SWD habitat structures
similar to those found in the reference reach. SWD greater than 0.2 inches in diameter were
measured in each reference reach transect. Large woody debris was eliminated from analysis since
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 22 April 2015

these are analogous to structures such as log vanes and log toes currently applied to most restoration
designs.
Transects were identified as either shallow or pool bed form types resulting in four pools and six
shallows measured at the reference reach. Measurements of SWD were summed for each bed form
type and divided by the number of corresponding transects to get the average volume of SWD per
pool or shallow. The average volume was then divided by the average transect area to get the volume
of SWD per square foot. The average design reach bed form area was calculated by assuming a length
of ten feet (based on reference transects) and multiplying that by the average bottom cross section
width. The average volume was multiplied by the ratio of average reference reach transect area to the
average area in the design reach to obtain the volume of SWD to be installed at each fixed pool and at
select locations along the design shallows.
WK Dickson currently uses wattles, dead brush, and woody debris bundles in the design of
restoration channels. Based on the reference reach SWD analysis, these SAID structures will be
concentrated in pool habitats and throughout shallows in volumes and size classes similar to those
found in the reference reach. Wattles are woody branch structures tied together and embedded into
the bank so that the free ends stick out into the wetted channel. Dead brush structures are shrub or tree
tops that are anchored to the bottom of the channel. Woody debris bundles are bundles of sticks one
to four inches in diameter and one to four feet long that are anchored to the streambed. The average
volume of each SWD structure is presented in Table 11. A combination of structures listed in Table
11 will be used in the design to attempt to achieve the calculated average volume per bed form type
listed in Table 12.
Table 11. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD structures used in the design reach.
SWD Average Volume
Woody Debris Bundle 509
Dead Brush 589
Wattle 42
Root Wad 562
Leaf Pack 120
Table 12. Small Woody Debris calculations for the reference and design reach.
In addition to the habitat assessment conducted at the reference site, the design reaches of the project
site were visually assessed in order to measure representative habitat gains over time post -
construction. Based on these assessments, there is a disparity of SWD volume between the reference
reach and the design reaches (Chart 1). Small woody debris assessment results for design reaches
were very low compared to the reference reach results. Due to design reaches flowing through open
agricultural fields, minimal adjacent buffers are present to contribute woody debris. The woody debris
present is predominantly contributed from upstream with some input from the minimal buffer present.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 23 April 2015
Average volume
Average volume
Channel
Total
Average
to be applied to
to be applied to
bed
volume
volume in
Percent
design Reach Al
design Reach A2
form
(in 3)
reference
reach (in)
of WD
per 10 LF of
3)
per 10 LIT of
3)
channel (in
channel (in
Shallow
4438
740
66%
600
600
Pool
2303
576
34%
291
291
Total
6741
1315
100%
891
891
In addition to the habitat assessment conducted at the reference site, the design reaches of the project
site were visually assessed in order to measure representative habitat gains over time post -
construction. Based on these assessments, there is a disparity of SWD volume between the reference
reach and the design reaches (Chart 1). Small woody debris assessment results for design reaches
were very low compared to the reference reach results. Due to design reaches flowing through open
agricultural fields, minimal adjacent buffers are present to contribute woody debris. The woody debris
present is predominantly contributed from upstream with some input from the minimal buffer present.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 23 April 2015

Woody debris collected in streams provides habitat for macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians, and
increases stream productivity by retaining carbon in the channel. This quantitative habitat assessment
provides guidance for improving habitat conditions through specifically placed and sized SWD
structures, and provides a means for assessing functional gains over time. WK Dickson has included
these structures in the design plans (Appendix D).
800
= 700
z
@ 600
m
w
500
a
400
E
0
300
200
100
Qn
Average SWD per Reach
■
Buffalo Best Site Reach Al Reach A2 Reach B1 Reach B2 Reach C
Branch
E Reference ■ Mitigation*
Chart 1. Average volume (cubic inches) of SWD per assessed reach. This chart represents existing
conditions in all assessed reaches. *Mitigation reaches were assessed qualitatively.
4.2.7.2 Fish Cover Methods and Results
Fish cover measurements were taken at each transect along the reference reach and along the design
reaches at the Buffalo Branch Site. Fish cover area was visually calculated within the ten -foot transect
length along the reference reach and a visual assessment was conducted along the design reaches to
document existing conditions. Fish cover types include small woody debris and brush, aquatic
macrophytes, overhanging vegetation, undercut banks, and boulders. For each reach a percentage of
total fish cover and individual cover type areas were calculated (Chart 2). Location and general
habitat data was recorded for each fish cover measurement to assess spatial distribution.
The fish cover analysis revealed that on average the area of fish cover is nearly 25% higher in the
existing design reaches compared to the reference reach. This is because the streambeds along the
assessed portions of the design reaches were mostly covered by macrophytic vegetation and was
devoid of any significant woody debris or undercut banks. Fish cover from low growing brush will
increase in the restoration reaches after the riparian planting occurs. Woody debris structures will also
provide additional fish cover habitat and resting areas for fish swimming upstream.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 24 April 2015

Comparison of Average Fish Cover Between Reference Reaches and Buffalo
Branch Mitigation Reaches
100 -
90 -
80 -
70 -
0
s
60 -
50 -
�y 40 -
a`r 30 -
a
20 -
10 -
0
Buffalo Best Site Reach Al
Branch
Reach A2 Reach B1 Reach B2 Reach C
❑ Reference ■ Mitigation*
Chart 2. Average percent of fish cover per channel in the reference and mitigation reaches.
*Mitigation reaches were assessed qualitatively.
4.2.7.3 Substrate Composition
Substrates were divided into eight classes as follows: coarse /fine particulate organic matter,
silt /clay /muck, fine sand, coarse sand, gravel, cobble, boulder, and bedrock (Chart 3). Channel width
and water depth were measured at each transect in four equally spaced intervals from bank to bank.
Substrate coverage was visually determined between widths measured at each major change in
substrate type.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Comparison of Substrate Between Reference Reach and Buffalo
Branch Mitigation Reaches
r –r—r-1
C /FPOM Silt /Mud
Fine Coarse Gravel
Sand Sand
❑ Reach Al
❑ Reach A2
❑ Reference
Cobble Boulder Bedrock
Chart 3. Comparison of substrate composition between the reference reach and the restoration reaches.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 25 April 2015

The substrate composition analysis revealed that the reference reach has similar substrate to Reaches
Al and A2. Reach Al has a noticeably greater amount of fine sand than Reach A2 and the reference
likely due to active erosion. Organic matter (C /FPOM) was observed during the substrate comparison
but was immeasurable and less than 0.5 percent.. Macroinvertebrate abundance and diversity has been
tied to the ability of a channel to retain carbon. Several design structures and vegetation plantings can
be used to increase organic substrate composition. Constructed leaf packs will be installed in select
locations for immediate macroinvertebrate colonization. SWD bundles will serve to collect organic
matter flowing downstream increasing carbon retention. By adding sinuosity and creating a better
floodplain connection, adding SWD in select locations, and creating pool habitats, substrate
composition will more closely resemble reference reach conditions.
4.3Wetland Summary Information
4.3.1 Existing Wetlands
The US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) depicts wetlands within
the project site (Figure 4). The floodplain along Reach A3 is mapped as PFOIA (Palustrine Forested
Broad - Leaved Deciduous Temporarily Flooded). Additionally, a pond is shown in the floodplain of
Reach Al, and mapped as PUBHh( Palustrine Unconsolidated Bottom Permanently Flooded
Diked/Impounded).
A wetland delineation was performed in September 2014. Wetland boundaries were delineated using
current methodology outlined in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
(DOA 1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010). Soils
were characterized and classified using the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,
Version 7.0 (USDA -NRCS 2010). Wetland boundaries were marked with sequentially numbered
wetland survey tape (pink/black striped). Flag locations were surveyed under the direction of a
Professional Licensed Surveyor (PLS) with GPS and conventional survey (Figure 4; Table 13).
Based on consultation with the IRT, the mitigation design will enhance the hydrology and vegetation
of 5.08 acres of existing wetlands in the project area. Wetland preservation will include 4.47 acres of
riparian wetland on Reach A3. The protection and enhancement of these seeps will provide for
improved hydrologic function of the adjacent stream reaches. Benefits include the storage of excess
water during flood events, preventing erosion of stream banks, reducing in- stream sedimentation, and
nutrient reductions. No wetland mitigation credits will be generated from the enhancement of these
seeps.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 26 April 2015

Table 13. Wetland Summary Information
Native vegetation
Pasture
community
Percent composition of
exotic invasive <5%
vegetation
Pasture Pasture Pasture Pasture Pasture Forested Pasture Forested
<5% <5% <5% <5% <5% 20% <5% 20
4.3.1.1 Hillside seep along Reach 131 (WI)
This disturbed wetland is a hillside seep in an active pasture at the top of Reach B 1 and along the
north and west side of the channel. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with
some common sedges (Carex sp.) present. Tree cover is very sparse with a few loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda) individuals along the channel. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and
hydrology is from groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.2 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W2)
This disturbed, slightly channelized wetland is a hillside seep along the north side of Reach Al.
Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present. Tree
cover is very sparse. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from
groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.1 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W3)
This disturbed, isolated wetland is a hillside seep along the south side of Reach Al. Vegetation is
primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present. This wetland is
seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from groundwater seepage along the slope. The
current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.2 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W4)
This disturbed, slightly channelized wetland is a hillside seep just upstream of the confluence of
Reach Al and Reach C. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some
common sedges present. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from
groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.3 Riparian Wetland along Reach B2 (W5)
This disturbed, depressional wetland is located along the interstream divide between Reaches Al and
B2. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present.
The area has sparse tree cover along the channel and a limited shrub /sapling layer, including loblolly
pine, American holly (Ilex opaca), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and common persimmon (Disopyros
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 27 April 2015
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Excavated
Excavated
Parameters
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
W7
Pond
Seep
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.77
0.33
0.1
0.8
0.13
2.63
4.12
0.32
0.35
Wetland Type
Seep
Seep
Seep
Seep
Depression
Seep
Riparian
Pond
Excavated Seep
Riverine
Mapped Sod Series
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
i
Drainage Class
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Flooding
Groundwater
Groundwater
Source of Hydrology
Groundwater
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Discharge
Livestock
Livestock
Livestock
Hydrologic Impairment
Livestock
compaction
compaction
compaction
Livestock
Livestock
Livestock
Livestock
Livestock
compaction
Incised channel
Incised channel
Incised channel
compaction
compaction
compaction
compaction
compaction
Native vegetation
Pasture
community
Percent composition of
exotic invasive <5%
vegetation
Pasture Pasture Pasture Pasture Pasture Forested Pasture Forested
<5% <5% <5% <5% <5% 20% <5% 20
4.3.1.1 Hillside seep along Reach 131 (WI)
This disturbed wetland is a hillside seep in an active pasture at the top of Reach B 1 and along the
north and west side of the channel. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with
some common sedges (Carex sp.) present. Tree cover is very sparse with a few loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda) individuals along the channel. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and
hydrology is from groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.2 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W2)
This disturbed, slightly channelized wetland is a hillside seep along the north side of Reach Al.
Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present. Tree
cover is very sparse. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from
groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.1 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W3)
This disturbed, isolated wetland is a hillside seep along the south side of Reach Al. Vegetation is
primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present. This wetland is
seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from groundwater seepage along the slope. The
current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.2 Hillside seep along Reach Al (W4)
This disturbed, slightly channelized wetland is a hillside seep just upstream of the confluence of
Reach Al and Reach C. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some
common sedges present. This wetland is seasonally saturated to the surface and hydrology is from
groundwater seepage along the slope. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.3 Riparian Wetland along Reach B2 (W5)
This disturbed, depressional wetland is located along the interstream divide between Reaches Al and
B2. Vegetation is primarily a mix of pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present.
The area has sparse tree cover along the channel and a limited shrub /sapling layer, including loblolly
pine, American holly (Ilex opaca), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and common persimmon (Disopyros
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 27 April 2015

virginiana).This wetland is seasonally saturated and hydrology is from groundwater seepage along
the slope and overbank flows from Reach B2. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.1 Hillside seep along Reach A2 (W6)
This disturbed wetland is located along the floodplain of Reach A2 along the entire right bank and
along a small portion of the left bank. The nearly level topography exhibits evidence of flooding in
many places, and this wetland is seasonally saturated from high groundwater. Tree cover is with a
few loblolly pine individuals and narrow buffer of river birch (Betula nigra) saplings along the
channel. The current land use is pasture.
4.3.1.2 Riparian Wetland along Reach A3 (W7)
This bottomland hardwood forest wetland is located along the floodplain of Reach A3. The nearly
level topography exhibits evidence of flooding in many places, and this wetland is seasonally
saturated from high groundwater and bank overflow. The current land use is mature forest with a mix
of trees, saplings, and shrubs. Although forested along the stream, the area north of the woods is
currently used as pasture and cattle have access to the stream. The forested area contains a canopy
of mostly red maple (Acer rubrum), various oak species (Quercus sp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), and swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora). The understory mainly consists of giant cane
(Arundinaria gigantea), blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), and few other shrubs. Green briar (Smilax sp.)
and Chinese privet are locally dense. Due to the dense canopy and shrub stratum, only a low density
of herbaceous vegetation is present.
4.3.1.3 Excavated Pond along Reach Al
This pond is located along the right bank of Reach Al and is mapped as a PFOIA (Palustrine
Unconsolidated Bottom Permanently Flooded Diked/Impounded). Vegetation is primarily a mix of
pasture grass and weeds with some common sedges present. The current land use surrounding the
pond is pasture.
4.3.1.4 Excavated Seep along Reach A2 /A3
This seep is located along the floodplain of Reach A3. The nearly level topography exhibits evidence
of flooding in many places, and this wetland is seasonally saturated from high groundwater and bank
overflow. The current land use is a mix of forest and pasture.
A jurisdictional determination of the wetlands has not been made by the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE), but the USACE has visited the restoration site. Wetland forms are included in
Appendix B. Onsite wetlands include wetlands along Reach A1, B 1, B2, A2, and A3 (Figure 5).
4ARegulatory Considerations and Potential Constraints
4.4.1 Property Ownership, Boundary, and Utilities
There are no major constraints to construction of the Buffalo Branch Site. This site is readily
accessible from Howard Road and NC Hwy 96. There is a third older culvert set below the current
bed elevation that carries baseflow. The designer will coordinate with NCDOT to ensure the
proposed design is consistent with NCDOT usage. An existing pond on the right bank of Reach Al is
excavated in the floodplain and spoil is placed on the channel bank. The proposed easement will
encompass this pond and it will be backfilled as part of the proposed mitigation. There are no other
infrastructure concerns in the proposed easement and current/future floodplain. There are no existing
easements or utility corridors within the proposed bank boundaries. Reach A has one easement break
at the Howard Road right -of -way and one cattle crossing just downstream of Howard Road; both
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 28 April 2015

breaks are downstream of any proposed alterations to stream bed elevation. No additional crossings
or easement breaks are proposed at this time. The project area is not within a FEMA 100 -year flood
zone.
4.4.2 Site Access
There are no access constraints to the Buffalo Branch Site. To access the Site from the town of Selma,
travel north approximately 4.9 miles on NC HWY 96, and turn right onto Little Divine Road. Turn
left on the first dirt road (Howard Road) in approximately 0.3 miles. Following Howard Road, Reach
A2 will be crossed about 400 feet up. The site protection instrument can be found in Appendix A.
4.4.3 FEMA/ Hydrologic Trespass
Hydrologic trespass is a not a concern for this project. The Buffalo Branch Site is not located within
any FEMA floodway area (Figure 6). While designing the Buffalo Branch project, appropriate
measures were taken to eliminate hydrologic trespass of the adjacent agricultural fields and animal
operations. The adjacent land use will not be affected by the proposed design, and the property
owners have been notified of any potential impacts from hydrologic trespass within existing ditches.
No detrimental impacts are expected beyond the easement limits.
Table 14. Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
(Waters of the United States -
Yes
No
AppendixB
Section 404
(Waters of the United States -
Yes
No
AppendixB
Section 401
Endangered Species Act
Yes
No
Section 4.1.3; Appendix B
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Section 4.1.4; AppendixB
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA) /Coastal Area
No
N/A
N/A
Management Act (CAMA)
�FEMA Floodplain Compliance
N/A
N/A
Section 4.4.3; Appendix B
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
5 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Mitigation credits presented in these tables are projections based upon site design. Upon completion
of site construction, the project components and credits data will be revised to be consistent with the
as -built condition.
Table 15. Mitigation Credits
Stream
Totals 3,944
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan
The Buffalo Branch Stream Restoration Project
Mitigation Credits
Riparian Non - riparian Nitrogen
Wetland Wetland Buffer Nutrient Offset
N/A N/A N/A N/A
29
Phosphorous
Nutrient Offset
N/A
April 2015

Project Components
Project
Stationing/
Existing
Approach
Restoration or
Restoration
Mitigation
Component
Location
Footage or
(PI, PM
Restoration
Footage or
Ratio
or Reach ID
performance standards are being met.
(70 % * *)
Acreage
5%
Equivalent
Acreage
S TREAM
7 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
75%
performance standards are being met.
(85 % * *)
g Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates
5%
I Reach Al
0 +75
to
13 +85
1,033
PII Restoration
1,310
1,310
1 : 1.0
I Reach A2
13 +85
to
21 +17
732
Enhancement 1
732
732
1 :1.5
Reach A2
22 +08
to
26 +00
311
Priority I
392
392
1 : 1.0
Reach A3
26 +00
to
44 +30
1,830
Enhancement 11- Low
1,830
1,830
1 :5.0
Reach B1
0 +00
to
5 +34
534
Enhancement II
534
534
1:2.5
Reach 132
5 +34
to
11 +22
588
Enhancement I
588
588
1 :1.5
Reach C
0 +17
to
3 +97
360
Enhancement II
380
380
1 : 2.5
6 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise
provided written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for
construction of the mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release
schedules below. In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
released depending on the specifics of the case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard. The
release of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as follows:
Table 16. Credit Release Schedule
Release Credit Release Activity Interim Total Released
Milestone Release
1 Site Establishment (includes all required criteria 15% 15%
stated above)
2 Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey 15% 30%
3 First year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
40%
performance standards are being met.
4 Second year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
50%
performance standards are being met.
(60 % * *)
5 Third year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
60%
performance standards are being met.
(70 % * *)
6 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates
5%
65%
performance standards are being met.
(80 % * *)
7 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates
10%
75%
performance standards are being met.
(85 % * *)
g Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates
5%
80%
performance standards are being met.
(90 % * *)
9 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates
90%
performance standards are being met, and project
10%
(100 % * *)
has received close -out approval.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 30 April 2015

6.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT
with written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
b) Recordation of the Conservation Easement, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the
USACE covering the property
c) Financial assurances.
6.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan
and submittal of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. All subsequent credit releases
must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a determination that required
performance standards have been achieved. As projects approach milestones associated with credit
release, the Sponsor will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation
substantiating achievement of criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be
included with the annual monitoring report.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 31 April 2015

7 FUNCTIONAL RATIONALE
The Stream Functions Pyramid Framework (Harman et. al. 2012) uses stream functions to describe
project objectives, existing condition assessments and monitoring, performance metrics, and design
criteria. The Framework separates stream functions into five categories, ordered into a hierarchy,
which communicate the interrelations among functions and illustrate the dependence of higher level
functions (biology, physiochemical and geomorpholgy) on lower level functions (hydrology and
hydraulics). Functions that affect the greatest number of other functions are illustrated at the base of
the pyramid, while functions that have the least effect on other functions are illustrated at the top of
the pyramid. The Pyramid is illustrated below.
t
Geology Climate
While traditional mitigation approaches have generally relied on surrogate measures of success (i.e.
linear feet of restoration) for determining SMU credit yields, a function -based approach provides a
more objective and flexible approach to quantify the expected ecological benefits of a mitigation
design. Additionally, a functional based approach broadens the reach -scale goals of a restoration
project by contextualizing the functional uplift to the watershed scale. The proposed Buffalo Branch
Mitigation project will provide numerous ecological and water quality benefits within the Neuse
River Basin by applying an ecosystem restoration approach.
In consultation with the IRT, we have designed a mitigation approach that will restore and enhance
natural waterways and also preserve and enhance existing wetland seeps within the project area. No
wetland mitigation credits will be generated from the enhancement of these seeps, but a credit
multiplier will be applied to individual reaches based on additional buffer widths greater than 50feet
(Table 1; Figures 9 & 10).
While adjacent riparian habitats are often not the focus of stream restoration, the enhancement and
protection of these seeps will provide significant ecological benefits to the project area. Benefits
include the storage of excess water during flood events, preventing erosion of stream banks, reducing
in- stream sedimentation, and nutrient reductions. Wetland seeps provide habitat for a wide variety of
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 32 April 2015

wetland herbaceous species and because seeps are less frequently flooded than adjacent streambeds
they function as a seed source for downstream riparian zones. Anticipated functional benefits and
improvements within the project area, as based on the Function -Based Framework are outlined in
Table 17.
Table 17. Functional Benefits and Improvements
Functional
Objective Description Level
(1 -5)
Benefit will be achieved through cattle exclusion and direct removal of fecal
Nutrient removal inputs, filtering of runoff through buffer areas, the conversion of active farm
fields to forested buffers, and improved denitrification and nutrient uptake 5
through buffer zones.
Benefit will be achieved through the stabilization of eroding stream banks
Sediment removal through cattle exclusion (passive) and bioremediation, bed loss will be
arrested with grade control structures, and reduction of sediment loss from 3, 5
re- forested pasture.
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of buffer areas that will
Runoff filtration receive and filter runoff, thereby reducing nutrients and sediment 4,5
concentrations reaching aquatic resources.
8 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
8.111eference Stream Studies
8.1.1 Target Reference Conditions
The restoration portions of the project site are characterized by agricultural and livestock practices.
Several ditches exist in the watershed and contribute to the project site. Physical parameters of the site
were used, as well as other reference materials, to determine the target stream type. An iterative
process was used to develop the final information for the site design.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 33 April 2015
Benefit will be achieved through the enhancement of floodplain
Water storage
connectivity which will store more water during precipitation events than
1,2
under current drainage conditions.
Improved
Benefit will be achieved through the increased storage of precipitation in
groundwater
floodplain wetlands. Greater storage of water will lead to improved
2
recharge
infiltration and groundwater recharge.
Restoration of
Benefit will be achieved by restoring riparian buffer and wetland buffers to
habitats
hardwood ecosystems.
4, 5
Improved substrate
Substrate will become coarser as a result of the stabilization of stream banks
and instream cover
and an overall decrease in the amount fine materials deposited in the stream.
3, 5
Addition of large
Benefit will be achieved through the addition of wood structures as part of
woody debris
the restoration design. Such structures may include log vanes, root wads,
3, 4, 5
log weirs, and log toes.
Reduced water
temperature due to
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of canopy tree species to
4,5
shading
the stream buffer areas.
8 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
8.111eference Stream Studies
8.1.1 Target Reference Conditions
The restoration portions of the project site are characterized by agricultural and livestock practices.
Several ditches exist in the watershed and contribute to the project site. Physical parameters of the site
were used, as well as other reference materials, to determine the target stream type. An iterative
process was used to develop the final information for the site design.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 33 April 2015

To develop the target reference conditions, physical site parameters were reviewed. This included the
drainage area, land use, soils mapping units from the Johnston County Soil Survey for the watershed
and Site, typical woody debris and habitat available for the area, as well as general topography. The
"Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina" was also used to narrow the potential
community types that would have existed at the site (Schafale and Weakley, 2003).
Targeted reference conditions included the following:
• Located within the Physiographic Region — Inner Coastal Plain,
• Similar drainage area,
• Similar land use onsite and in the watershed,
• Similar watershed soil types,
• Similar site soil types,
• Ideal, undisturbed habitat — several types of woody debris present,
• Similar topography,
• Similar slope,
• Pattern common among coastal plain streams, and
• Minimal presence of invasive species.
8.1.1.1 Reference Site Search Methodology
All the parameters used in Section 4.1 were used to find appropriate reference stream sites. Obtaining
property owner information and owner authorization for access was another factor in locating suitable
reference sites for the project. For this project, there was no predetermined amount of reference sites
needed as long as the site was suitable and met the parameters. Several potential reference sites were
assessed, and their characteristics were noted. It is difficult to find reference sites on the coastal plain
because many have been disturbed by farming or urban development. Most streams tend to be
modified ditches and may have some of the characteristics that are sought in a reference, but too few
to make it an ideal reference for the project site. One reference stream site that proves to be ideal in
both geomorphology and habitat is located at the downstream section of Reach A3 in the wooded area
east of Howard Road.
8.1.1.2 Reference Watershed Characterization
The reference stream flows west to east and is the most downstream portion of Reach A3 (Figure 9).
The reach that was surveyed and analyzed is approximately 375 feet long. The drainage area for the
unnamed tributary is 0.84 square miles (540 acres). The land use in the watershed is characterized by
mostly mixed pines and hardwoods (40 percent), cultivated row crops (29 percent), residential (18
percent), managed herbaceous cover /pasture land (eight percent), pine plantations (four percent), and
open water (one percent). Site photographs of the reference stream are located in Appendix B.
The current State classification for the Buffalo Branch Mitigation Site restoration reaches is
undefined. Tributaries of the project run directly into Buffalo Creek. Buffalo Creek is defined as
Class C NSW (NCDWQ 2012a). Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life, secondary recreation, and
agricultural usage. The NSW is a designation for nutrient sensitive waters — intended for waters
needing additional nutrient management due to being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or
macroscopic vegetation. Buffalo Creek is listed on the 2012 303d list for impaired waters (NCDWQ
2012b). It is impaired for aquatic use, receiving a Fair Bioclassification rating for benthic
ecologicalibiological integrity.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 34 April 2015

8.1.1.3 Reference Discharge
Several hydrologic models /methods were used to develop a bankfull discharge for the reference site.
Existing drainage area, land use, slope, roughness, and cross - sectional area were all factors
considered when performing the calculations. Using a combination of Coastal Plain Regional Curves,
in -house spreadsheet tools, and a project specific regional flood frequency analysis, the existing
discharge was found to be around 17 cubic feet per second (ft3 /s). See Section 8.3.1.1 for a more
detailed description of the hydrologic analyses performed for this project.
8.1.1.4 Reference Channel Morphology
In comparison to the restoration reaches, the reference reach is approximately the same size to
slightly larger than Reaches Al and A2 when comparing pattern, dimension and profile, which is the
reason for using a scaling factor for the design. The scaling factor is based on the difference in
bankfull area of the reference channel. The new reach would then have the necessary dimensions of
that of either a smaller or larger stream corresponding to differences in drainage area. The stream was
typically eight to ten feet wide and one to two feet deep. The cross sectional area was typically around
11 square feet with a width to depth ratio around 8.
8.1.1.5 Reference Channel Stability Assessment
The reference reach was stable and showed no evidence of incision or erosion in the portion that was
surveyed and analyzed. The stream appeared to maintain its slope and had sufficient amounts of
vegetation to secure its banks. Riparian buffer widths exceeded fifty feet on each side. The CSA
results (scores and ratings) for the reference reach are provided above in Table (Section 4.2.4). The
reference reach received a "Good" rating as the channel demonstrates a stable meandering pattern and
a well vegetated riparian buffer.
8.1.1.6 Reference Bankfull Verification
Typical indicators of bankfull include vegetation at the bankfull elevation, scour lines, wrack lines,
vegetation lines, benches /inner berm, and point bars. Throughout the entire length of the reference
reach, bankfull is located at the top of bank elevation. The accuracy of this bankfull stage is verified
by the Coastal Plain Regional Curves and hydrologic analyses using existing cross sections to
calculate area and discharge. Evidence that can further support the location of bankfull is the lack of
any bench or berm features within the channel, and wrack lines present within the floodplain.
8.1.1.7 Reference Riparian Vegetation
The reference reach riparian community is characteristic of a coastal plain small stream swamp
community. This community is approximately 15 to 20 years old, as evidenced by the representative
diameter at breast height (DBH) measurements. This community was determined to have had past
disturbance altering the species composition. Most of the canopy species recorded are high dispersal
species and have been observed to occur near the restoration site. The following table lists the
coverage estimates and species encountered. The right bank is denoted as RB and the left bank is
denoted as LB.
It is anticipated that a local seed source for these high dispersal species is present and will disperse
across much of the mitigation site. These species are often found in early successional communities
and quickly fill disturbance gaps. Because many of these high dispersal species often become
aggressive in these sites, they are not included in the Restoration Planting List (Section 8.2.2).
Hardwood species typical of the target community were observed in adjacent and nearby
communities, and were judged to be more appropriate for this site.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 35 April 2015

Table 18. Tree Communities at the Reference Reach for Buffalo Branch Site.
8.1.1.8 Stream Habitat Assessment — Woody Debris
The habitat assessment for the reference stream channel is included in the habitat assessment
discussion for Buffalo Branch Site (Section 4.2.7).
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 36 April 2015
Percent
Percent
Representative
Transect
Location
Coverage
Evergreen
Deciduous
DBH (in.)
Species
1
LB
80
0
100
15
Liriodendron tulipifera,
Acer rubrum
RB
90
10
90
18
Acer rubrum, Pinus taeda
2
LB
85
0
100
20
Liriodendron tulipifera, Nyssa biflora,
Quercus alba
RB
85
10
90
18
Acer rubrum, Pinus taeda
3
LB
90
0
100
17
Quercus nigra, Liriodendron tulipifera,
Nyssa biflora
RB
85
10
90
18
Acer rubrum, Pinus taeda
4
LB
85
0
100
17
Liriodendron tulipifera, Nyssa biflora,
Quercus nigra
RB
85
15
85
15
Pinus taeda, Ulmus americana,
Quercus alba
5
LB
85
0
100
17
Liriodendron tulipifera, Nyssa biflora
RB
85
0
100
15
Liquidambar styracii lua
6
LB
85
0
100
17
Quercus nigra, Liriodendron tulipifera,
Nyssa biflora
RB
85
0
100
6
Nyssa biflora, Acer rubrum,
Catalpa sp.
7
LB
80
0
100
10
Quercus michauxii, Ulmus americana
RB
75
0
100
6
Magnolia virginiana
8
LB
75
0
100
18
Magnolia virginiana, Quercus michauxii,
Quercus alba
RB
80
0
100
10
Nyssa biflora, Liriodendron tulipifera,
Carya sp., Acer rubrum
9
LB
70
0
100
10
Liriodendron tulipifera, Acer rubrum,
Magnolia virginiana
RB
80
0
100
10
Nyssa biflora, Acer rubrum, Catalpa sp.
10
LB
75
0
100
12
Liriodendron tulipifera, Carya sp.
RB
75
0
100
8
Liquidambar styracii lua, Acer rubrum,
Liriodendron tulipifera
8.1.1.8 Stream Habitat Assessment — Woody Debris
The habitat assessment for the reference stream channel is included in the habitat assessment
discussion for Buffalo Branch Site (Section 4.2.7).
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 36 April 2015

8.2 Design Parameters
8.2.1 Stream Restoration Approach
Stream restoration efforts along the tributaries at the Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation site will be
accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design
approach applies a combination of analytical and reference reach based design methods that meet
objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. Proposed treatment
activities may range from minor bank grading and planting to re- establishing stable planform and
hydraulic geometry. For reaches requiring full restoration, natural design concepts have been applied
and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The objective of this approach is
to design a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements and ties into the
existing landscape.
The Buffalo Branch Site will include Priority Levels I and II stream restoration and stream
Enhancement Levels I and 11. Priority Levels I and II stream restoration will incorporate the design
of a single - thread meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken from the reference site
described in Section 8.1 above, published empirical relationships, NC Coastal Plain Regional Curves,
and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. Approximately 1,702 linear feet of stream channel will be
reconstructed. Enhancement Level I will be applied to 1,320 linear feet of channel that requires
stabilization and bank improvements, and buffer restoration. Enhancement Level II will be applied to
an additional 2,744 linear feet of channel that requires buffer enhancement and/or minimal bank and
habitat improvements. A conceptual plan view is provided in Figure 9.
Current stream conditions along the proposed restoration reaches demonstrate significant habitat
degradation as a result of impacts from livestock and channelization performed to promote
agricultural activities. Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor condition throughout most of the
project area above Howard Road. Much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs and active
pasture is present up to the edge of the existing channel.
The Buffalo Branch Site design approach began with a thorough study of existing conditions,
including the onsite streams, seeps, valleys, and watershed. Design parameters, including active
channel, habitat and floodplain features were developed from analyses performed at the reference site.
Analytical design techniques were used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as
a whole.
Engineering analyses were performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach based design. A combination of methods (including Hydraflow Hydrographs, regional
curves and flood frequency analysis) were used to calculate flows received by the channel for
bankfull and other significant storm events. Through this hydrologic analysis, the design discharge
(typically referenced as bankfull or dominant discharge) was determined, and the subsequent design
was based on this calculated discharge. Design parameters developed through the analyses of
reference reach data and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling were confirmed using the Stable Channel
Design function components within HEC -RAS and through spreadsheet tools.
Engineering analyses were performed concurrently to geomorphic and habitat studies. While the
stream design was verified by simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of desirable
habitat features were derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both riparian
habitat features and in- stream structures such as log grade controls, brush toes, log toes, log drops
were used throughout the project to act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and
redirecting the stream's energy. Bank stability will also be enhanced through the installation of
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 37 April 2015

cuttings bundles and live stakes that include native species (e.g. black willow (Salix nigra) and silky
dogwood (Cornus amomum)).
In- stream habitat is highly dependent on available cover and organic material. A quantitative habitat
assessment method was used to measure type, location, and quantity of habitat in the reference
streams. During design, the habitat assessment results were scaled appropriately to the design
parameters such that the quantity and placement of the habitat features along the restored channel
mimics reference conditions. This process provides a natural channel design that addresses aquatic
function improvements in addition to stability.
Sections of abandoned stream channel will be backfilled to the elevation of the floodplain in areas
adjacent to the new channel with material excavated onsite and by installing channel plugs where
necessary. The floodplain will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will
provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Stream banks will be stabilized using a
combination of grading, erosion control matting, bare -root plantings, native material revetment
techniques (i.e. bioengineering), structure placement, and sod transplants where possible. The stream
and adjacent riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50 -foot permanent conservation
easement, which will be fenced as needed to exclude livestock.
The Buffalo Branch Site has been broken into the following design reaches:
• Reach Al (STA 0 +75 to STA 13 +85) — Most upstream reach of the project totaling 1,310
linear feet of Priority II restoration. Pasture and disturbed wetlands are located adjacent to the
reach.
• Reach A2 (STA 13 +85 to STA 26 +00) — Reach immediately downstream of Reach Al
totaling 732 linear feet of Enhancement Level I and 392 linear feet of Priority 1 Restoration.
Pasture and disturbed wetlands are located adjacent to the reach through the Enhancement
section. Pasture and disturbed riparian hardwood forest surround the Restoration reach.
• Reach A3 (STA 26 +00 to STA 44 +30) — Most downstream reach of the project totaling
1,830 linear feet of Enhancement Level II -low. The design for this reach will mostly focus
on improving the riparian buffer and excluding livestock. Bottomland hardwood forest and
riparian wetlands surround this reach.
• Reach Bl (STA 0 +00 to STA 5 +34) — A reach adjacent to Reach Al totaling 534 linear feet
of Enhancement Level II. This reach is surrounded by active pasture.
• Reach B2 (STA 5 +34 to STA 11 +22) — Reach immediately downstream of Reach 131
totaling approximately 588 linear feet of Stream Enhancement Level I. This reach is
surrounded by active pasture.
• Reach C (STA 1 +50 to STA 6 +00) — Tributary west of Reach Al totaling approximately
380 linear feet of Enhancement Level II. This reach is surrounded by active pasture.
Reach Al
Priority 2 restoration is proposed for Reach Al to address existing impairments, particularly the
channelized and oversized channel and lack of bedform diversity. Priority 1 restoration is not possible
along this reach due to elevation constraints at the culverts under HWY 96. If the proposed channel
bed were to be raised, the increase in water surface elevations would result in hydrologic trespass on
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 38 April 2015

properties upstream of the HWY 96 and Little Divine Road intersection. The design approach will
include meandering the proposed channel within the natural valley, constructing a floodplain bench,
and backfilling the existing stream. A minimum 100 foot buffer will be established and planted with
native riparian vegetation. Because the buffer is devoid of significant woody vegetation, woody
debris will be installed along the bed to improve in- stream habitat. Livestock will be excluded with
fencing installed along the easement boundary. All areas within the proposed buffer will be planted
with native riparian vegetation.
Reach A2
A combination of Enhancement Level I and Priority 1 restoration is proposed for Reach A2.
Enhancement Level I begins just downstream of the confluence of Reaches Al and C and ends just
upstream of Howard Road. The existing channel has been significantly impacted by cattle, and the
buffer consists primarily of pasture. The smoothing of irregular banks, installation of grade control
structures, and installation of woody debris structures will be performed along the reach to improve
aquatic habitat. Priority 1 restoration is proposed for the portion of Reach A2 downstream of Howard
Road to address historic straightening and channel enlargement. The existing ditch will be backfilled,
and the channel will be relocated such that it meanders within the existing valley. A ford crossing will
be installed just downstream of the Howard Road ROW to allow the landowner continued access
across the property. Livestock will be excluded with fencing installed along the easement boundary.
All areas within the proposed buffer will be planted with native riparian vegetation
Reach A3
Enhancement Level II (low) is proposed on Reach A3. The channel is stable throughout the proposed
easement and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. The riparian buffer is relatively intact and
consists primarily of mature hardwoods. However, there are impaired areas where the buffer is less
than 50 feet wide and/or cattle have access. Minimal grading will be required in a few areas where
cattle have damaged the channel banks. All non - vegetated areas within the proposed buffer will be
planted with native riparian vegetation.
Reach B1
Enhancement Level II is proposed on Reach B 1 due to the channel's current stability and presence of
mature trees located along the top of banks. The design approach on this reach will focus on
improving the riparian buffer and minimal grading to address minor erosional areas resulting from
cattle impacts. The existing crossing located at the upper end of the reach will be removed. Additional
bank grading and stabilization will be included in the culvert removal. All areas within the proposed
buffer will be planted with native riparian vegetation.
Reach B2
Enhancement Level I is proposed for Reach B2. The design approach on this reach will focus on bank
stabilization, bedform diversity, and riparian buffer restoration. The existing channel has been
impacted by cattle, is over - widened, and the buffer consists primarily of pasture. Stabilization
activities will include installing grade control structures, installing log toes and/or vegetated sills to
narrow the low -flow channel, and installing woody debris structures to improve hydraulic efficiency
and aquatic habitat. All disturbed areas within the proposed buffer will be planted with native riparian
vegetation.
Reach C
Enhancement Level II is proposed on Reach C due to the channel's current stability and small
drainage area. The design approach on this reach will focus on improving the riparian buffer and
minimal grading to address minor erosional areas resulting from cattle impacts. The existing crossing
located at the upper end of the reach will be removed. Additional bank grading and stabilization will
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 39 April 2015

be included in the culvert removal. All areas within the proposed buffer will be planted with native
riparian vegetation.
8.2.1.1 Design Discharge
Based upon the hydrologic analyses described below, design discharges were selected that fall
between model results for the NC regional curve and the 1.1 -year flood frequency analysis for each
reach. The selected flows for the restoration reaches are 14ft3 /s for Reach Al and 15ft3 /s for Reach
A2. These discharges will provide frequent inundation of the adjacent floodplain.
The design discharges were selected based on the following rationale:
• The calculated bankfull discharge for the analog /reference reach closely matches both the
results of the 1.1 -year flood frequency analysis and the Hydraflow Hydrographs model for
the 1 -year storm,
The results of the Hydraflow Hydrographs model for the 1 -year storm matched up well with
the results of the 1.1 flood frequency analysis,
The results of the 1.1 -year flood frequency analysis matched well with the NC regional curve
(Doll et al., 2003), and
Selecting design discharges around the 1.1 -year storm events allows frequent inundation of
the floodplain, while also preventing adjacent active agriculture land from flooding at a high
frequency.
8.2.1.2 Design Methods
There are three primary methods that have demonstrated success in stream restoration: analog,
empirical, and analytical. All three methods have advantages and limitations, and it is often best to
utilize more than one method to address site - specific conditions or to verify the applicability of design
elements. This is particularly true in developed watersheds where existing conditions do not always
reflect current inputs and events, and sediment and hydrologic inputs may remain unstable for some
time. Combinations of analytical and analog methods were used to develop the stream designs for the
Buffalo Branch site.
Analytical Approach
Analytical design is based on principles and processes considered universal to all streams, and can
entail many traditional engineering techniques. The analytical approach utilizes continuity, roughness
equations, hydrologic and hydraulic models, and sediment transport functions to derive equilibrium
conditions. Since the project is located within a rural watershed, restoration designs are based on
hydrologic and hydraulic analyses, including rainfall - runoff models to determine design discharges
coupled with reference reach techniques.
Analog Approach
The analog method of natural channel design involves the use of a "template" or reference stream
located near the design reach, and is particularly useful when watershed and boundary conditions are
similar between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore et al., 2001). In an analog approach, the
planform pattern, cross - sectional shape, longitudinal profile, and frequency and locations of woody
debris along the analog reaches are mimicked when developing the design parameters for the subject
stream. A scaling factor was calculated from the survey data in order to correctly size the planform
design parameters for the project site. The scaling factors for each design reach were derived from the
design cross - sectional area and topwidth of each reach as follows:
The appropriate bankfull cross - sectional area (CSA) of each design reach was calculated
using an in -house spreadsheet based on Manning's Equation. The input parameters included
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 40 April 2015

the design discharge as determined by the hydrologic analysis described above, and proposed
slope based on site conditions and the sinuosity measured for the analog reach.
2. The cross - sectional shape was adjusted within the spreadsheet to replicate the width -depth
ratios and side slopes surveyed along the analog reach, while also maintaining the CSA
necessary to convey the design discharge.
3. The scaling factor is determined from the ratio of the design topwidth to the analog topwidth
(Table 19). For this project, several sections and planform geometry were obtained at the
analog site, resulting in an average width of 9.4 feet.
4. Pool cross - sectional areas were calculated using both typical reference reach techniques and
the analog approach. Design CSA areas were determined using the measured analog ratios of
shallow /ripple CSA to pool CSA as applied to the design CSAs. The pool cross - sectional
shape was adjusted within the in -house spreadsheet as described above in step 2.
Table 19. Scaling Factors for Sizing Planform Design Parameters
Drainage Proposed Bankfull
Reach
Design
Analog Reach Scaling
Area (ac) CSA (ft)
Topwidth (ft)
Topwidth (ft) Factor
Al 475 9.9
9.4
9.1 -9.6 1.0
A2 516 9.9
9.4
9.1 -9.6 1.0
8.2.1.3 Typical Design Sections
Typical cross sections for shallows and pools are shown on the design plan sheets in Appendix D.
The cross - section dimensions were developed for the three design reaches by using a WK Dickson in-
house spreadsheet described in Section 8.2.1.2 of this report. The cross - sections were altered slightly
to facilitate constructability; however, the cross - sectional area, width to depth ratio, and side slopes
were preserved. Typical pool sections include pools located on straight reaches and pools on meander
bends.
8.2.1.4 Meander Pattern
The design plans showing the proposed channel alignment are provided in Appendix D. The meander
pattern was derived directly from the analog reach and sized using the scaling factors described in
Table 19. The analog meander pattern was altered in some locations to provide variability in pattern,
to avoid onsite constraints, to follow the valley pattern, and to make the channel more constructible.
The morphologic parameters summarized in the Appendix C were applied wherever these deviations
occurred.
8.2.1.5 Longitudinal Profiles
The design profiles are presented in Appendix C. These profiles extend throughout the entire project
for the proposed channel alignment. The profiles were designed using the analog reach bed features
that were sized with the scaling factors. The bed slopes and bankfull energy gradients were
determined for each design reach based on the existing valley slope and the sinuosity of the design
reach. Log structures will be utilized in the design to control grade, divert flows, and provide
additional habitat diversity and stability.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 41 April 2015

8.2.1.6 In- Stream Structures
Structures will be incorporated into the channel
design to provide additional stability and
improve aquatic habitat. Native materials and -
vegetation will be used for revetments and grade
control structures where applicable.
Additionally, woody debris will be placed
throughout the channel at locations and at a x
frequency that is similar to those mapped in the
analog reaches. The analog reach has woody
debris throughout the length of the channel,
providing grade control for shallows and forcing Sod mats blanket the top of bank o this stream in
scour pools. Woody habitat features installed Bertie County.
will include leaf packs, dead brush, woody debris bundles, root wads, and wattles. Sod mats harvested
onsite will be installed along stream banks during construction if and when feasible. Sod mats will
only be harvested and used if comprised of appropriate vegetation. The use of sod mats that include
aggressive turf grasses will be avoided. Sod mats (see photo above) are natural sections of vegetation
taken from the banks when they were cut during construction, and are about nine inches thick. Before
installation, proposed banks are graded lower than specified to accommodate the thickness of the mat.
The mats are placed on top of the bank to act as a natural stabilizer of native species, and they grow
much faster than the combination of coir fiber matting and seeding (see detail Appendix D). Other
bank stability measures include the installation of live stakes, brush toes, log sills, and log toes.
Typical details for proposed in- stream structures and revetments are in Appendix D.
8.2.2 Natural Plant Community Restoration
8.2.2.1 Plant Community Restoration
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the restoration project. The
selection of plant species is based on what was observed at the reference reach, species present in the
forest surrounding the restoration site, and what is typically native to the area. Several sources of
information were used to determine the most appropriate species for the restoration project. The
reference stream is located within a disturbed Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp. Dominant species
included sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer ruburm), tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora), and various oak species (Quercus sp.) in the canopy.
Shrubs included sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana) and American holly (Ilex opaca). The absence of
bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) likely indicates past logging with poor regeneration at the site.
The reference site was chosen due to the stability of the channel, the physical structure of the forest
community, and to evaluate stream habitat. The species present are indicative of early successional
species that have high dispersal rates. The mitigation site also supports many species typical of this
community type due to its past disturbance history. Typically, a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
would occur along the stream banks and adjacent floodplain of the proposed restoration site.
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp will be the target community type and will be used for all areas
within the project, as well as for buffer around the site. The plant species list has been developed and
can be found in Table 20. Species with high dispersal rates are not included because of local
occurrence, adjacent seed sources, and the high potential for natural regeneration. The high dispersal
species include red maple, tulip poplar, and sweetgum.
The restoration of plant communities along the Buffalo Branch Site will provide stabilization and
diversity. For rapid stabilization of the stream banks (primarily outside meanders), silky dogwood,
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 42 April 2015

silky willow, and black willow were chosen for live stakes along the restored channel because of their
rapid growth patterns and high success rates. Willows will also be quicker to contribute organic
matter to the channel. Willows grow at a faster rate than the species planted around them, and they
stabilize the stream banks. When the other species are bigger, the black willows and silky willows
will slowly stop growing or die out because the other species would outgrow them and create shade
that the willows do not tolerate. The live stake species will be planted along the outside of the
meander bends three feet from the top of bank, creating a three -foot section along the top of bank.
The live stakes will be spaced one per linear foot with alternate spacing vertically. See Appendix D
for a detailed planting plan.
After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified and any compaction will be deep
tilled/ripped before the topsoil is placed back over the site. Any topsoil that is removed during
construction will be stockpiled and placed over the site during final soil preparation. This process
should provide favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will
provide natural stabilization for the site.
Table 20. Proposed Plant List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species - Riparian Areas
Common Name
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator*
Growth Rate
River Birch
Betula nigra
FACW
rapid
Oak, Willow
Quercus phellos
FACW
rapid
Oak, Swamp Chestnut
Quercus michauxii
FACW-
moderate
Oak, Water
Quercus nigra
FAC
rapid
American sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
FACW-
rapid
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
OBL
moderate
Oak, Overcup
Quercus lyrata
OBL
moderate
Bald Cypress
Taxodium distichum
OBL
rapid
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree Species
Common Name
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator*
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
FACW
Silky Willow
Salix sericea
OBL
Black Willow
Salix nigra
OBL
*National Wetland Indicator Status from Draft Rating 2012 - Atlantic Gulf Coastal Plain.
8.2.2.2 On -Site Invasive Species Management
Control for invasive species will be required within all grading limits associated with stream
restoration, stream Enhancement Level I, and Stream Enhancement level 11. Invasive species will
require different and multiple treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and the location of
the species being treated. All treatment will be conducted so as to minimize its effectiveness and
reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native vegetation. Treatment methods will include
mechanical control (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw and chemical control (foliar spray,
cut stump, and hack and squirt techniques). Plants containing mature, viable seeds will be removed
from the site and properly disposed of. All herbicide applicators will be supervised by a certified
ground pesticide applicator with a North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(NCDA &CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to herbicide labels and
NC and Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated, type of treatment
employed, type of herbicide used, application technique, and herbicide concentration and quantities
used. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 43 April 2015

8.2.3 Best Management Practices
Due to the rural nature of this project, individual stormwater best management practices (BMPs) will
not be required. However, diffuse flow structures will be applied at locations where ditches or other
forms of concentrated flow enter the conservation easement. All diffuse flow structures will be
installed within the conservation easement so that landowners will not have access to the structures.
Failure or maintenance of the structures is not anticipated as these structures will be installed in low -
gradient areas, and the areas proposed to diffuse flow will be well vegetated and matted.
Stormwater management issues resulting from future development of adjacent properties will be
governed by the applicable state and local ordinances and regulations. It is recommended that any
future stormwater entering the site maintain pre - development peak flow. Any future stormwater
diverted into the project should be done in a manner as to prevent erosion, adverse conditions, or
degradation of the project in any way.
8.2.4 Soil Restoration
After construction activities, the subsoil will be scarified and any compaction will be deep tilled
before the topsoil is placed back over the site. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be
stockpiled and placed over the site during final soil preparation. This process should provide
favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will provide natural
stabilization for the site.
8.3 Data Analysis
8.3.1 Stream Data Analysis
8.3.1.1 Stream Hydrologic Analysis
Hydrologic evaluations were performed for the design reaches using multiple methods to determine
and validate the design bankfull discharge and channel geometry required to provide regular
floodplain inundation. The use of various methods allows for comparison of results and eliminates
reliance on a single model. Peak flows (Table 21) and corresponding channel cross - sectional areas
were determined for comparison to design parameters using the following methods:
• Regional Flood Frequency Analysis,
• AutoCAD's Hydraflow Hydrographs,
• NC and VA/MD Regional Curves for the Coastal Plain, and
• USGS regional regression equations for rural conditions in the Coastal Plain.
Regional Flood Frequencv Analvsis
A flood frequency analysis was completed for the study region using historic gauge data on all nearby
USGS gauges with drainage areas less than 6,400 acres (10 miz) which passed the Dalrymple
homogeneity test (Dalrymple, 1960). This is a subset of gauges used for USGS regression equations.
Regional flood frequency equations were developed for the 1.1 -, 1.5 -, and 2 -year peak discharges
based on the gauge data. Discharges were then computed for the design reach. These discharges were
compared to those predicted by the discharge regional curve and USGS regional regression 2 -year
discharge equations.
AutoCAD's Hvdraflow Hvdrmzraphs
Hydraflow Hydrographs was used to simulate the rainfall - runoff process and establish peak flows for
the watersheds. This model was chosen over the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers model HEC -1
because it allows the user to adjust the peak shape factor for the Coastal Plain conditions. Rainfall
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 44 April 2015

data reflecting a 284 peak shape factor and a standard Type II distribution were used, along with
NRCS hydrology (time of concentrations and runoff curve numbers), to simulate the rainfall - runoff
process.
Regjonal Curve Regression Equations
The North Carolina Coastal Plain regional curves by Doll et al. (2003) and Sweet and Geratz (2003)
and the Virginia/Maryland (Krstolic et al., 2007) Coastal Plain regional curves for discharge were
used to predict the bankfull discharge for the site. The NC regional curves predicted flows that are
similar to those predicted by the 1.1 -year flood frequency, while the VA/MD curves are comparable
to flows predicted by the 1.5 -year flood frequency equation. The regional curve equations for NC
discharges by Doll et al. (2003) (1) and Sweet and Geratz ( 2003) (2) and VA/MD (3) discharges are:
(1) QbkT16.56 *(DA)0.72 (Doll et al., 2003)
(2) Qbkj=-8.49 *(DA)0.76 (Sweet and Geratz, 2003)
�
(3) Qb 28.3076 *(DA)0s9134 (Krstolic et al., 2007)
Where Qbkf= bankfull discharge (ft3 /s) and DA= drainage area (mi).
USGS Rg2ional Regression Equations
USGS regression equations estimate the magnitude and frequency of flood -peak discharges (Gotvald,
et al., 2009). The regression equations were developed from gauge data in different physiographic
regions of the Southeastern United States. For this analysis, there was only concern for the 2 -year
return interval. The equation for the rural Coastal Plain (Hydrologic Region 4) is:
(4) Q2= 60.3 *(DA)o.649
Table 21. Peak Flow Comparison
Reach
Drainage
Area (Ac)
)
Hydraflow
ydrographs
Q1
FFQ
Qi.i
FFQ
Q�s
NC
Regional
Curve Q (1)
NC Regional
Curve Q (Z)
VA/MD
Regional
Curve Q (3)
Regional
Regression
Eqns. Q2
Design/
Calculated
Q
A3
(Analog)
540
20
19
23
15
8
26
54
15 -20
Al
475
17
17
41
13
7
24
50
14
A2
516
18
18
43
14
8
25
52
15
BI & B2
20
5
1
5
1
1
4
6
4
C
21
2
1
5
1
1
4
6
4
The fact that the regional curves predict flows similar to the 1.1 -year flood frequency analysis
indicates that the bankfull flows occur in the region with a frequency of approximately once a year.
The developers of the NC Coastal Plain regional curves report an average recurrence interval of 1.12
years for the gauged streams included in their study.
8.3.1.2 Sediment Transport Analysis
An erosion and sedimentation analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design creates a
stable sand bed channel that neither aggrades nor degrades over time. Typically, sediment transport is
assessed to determine a stream's ability to move a specific grain size at specified flows. Various
sediment transport equations may be easily applied when estimating entrainment for gravel bed
streams; however, these equations are not as effectively applied to sand bed channels where the entire
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 45 April 2015

bed becomes mobile during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, more sophisticated
modeling techniques were used to analyze the stream design for this project. The following methods
and functions were utilized during the sediment transport analysis:
Stable Channel Design Function — Copeland Method (HEC -RAS),
• Shear Stress, and
• Velocity.
Stable Channel DesivLn
Design cross - section dimensions as determined from the analog approach were evaluated using the
stable channel design functions within HEC -RAS. These functions are based upon the methods
presented in the SAM Hydraulic Design Package for Channels developed by the USACE Waterways
Experiment Station. The Copeland Method was developed specifically for sand bed channels (median
grain size restriction of 0.0625 mm to 2 mm) and was selected for application at Best Site. The
method sizes stable dimensions as a function of slope, discharge, roughness, side slope, bed material
gradation, and the inflowing sediment discharge. Results are presented as a range of widths and
slopes, and their unique solution for depth, making it easy to adjust channel dimensions to achieve
stable channel configurations. The stable design output parameters are listedin Table 22. The results
are acceptable and match closely with the design reach parameters.
Table 22. Stable Channel Design Output
s Bottom Energy Composite Velocity Shear Stress
Reach Q (ft/S3) width (ft) Depth (ft) Slope (ft/ft) n value (ft /s) (Ibs /ft2)
A] 14 3 1.6 0.0026 0.05 1.5 0.25
A2 15 3 1.6 0.0025 0.05 1.5 0.25
Shear Stress Approach
Shear stress is a commonly used tool for assessing channel stability. Allowable channel shear stresses
are a function of bed slope, channel shape, flows, bed material (shape, size, and gradation),
cohesiveness of bank materials, and vegetative cover. The shear stress approach compares calculated
shear stresses to those found in the literature. Shear stress is the force exerted on a boundary during
the resistance of motion as calculated using the following formula:
(1) r =yRS
ti = shear stress (lb/ft)
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
S = average channel slope (ft /ft)
Table 23. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Shear Stresses
Proposed Shear Stress
Allowable Shear Stress'
Reach at Bankfull Stage
Critical Shear Stress
(lbs /ft2)
Sand/Silt /Clay
Vegetation
(lbs /ft)
(lbs /ft2)
(lbs /ft2)
Al 0.16
>0.003
0.03 to 0.26
0.2 to 0.95
A2 0.16
>0.003
0.03 to 0.26
0.2 to 0.95
1(Fischenich, 2001)
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 46 April 2015

Review of the above table shows that the proposed shear stresses for the Buffalo Branch Site design
reaches fall between the critical shear stress (shear stress required to initiate motion) and the
allowable limits. Therefore, the proposed channel should remain stable.
Velocitv Approach
Published data are readily available that provide entrainment velocities for different bed and bank
materials. A comparison of calculated velocities to these permissible velocities is a simple method to
aid in the verification of channel stability. Table 24 compares the proposed velocities calculated
using Manning's equation with the permissible velocities presented in the Stream Restoration Design
Handbook (MRCS, 2007).
Table 24. Comparison of Allowable and Proposed Velocities
Reach Manning's "n" Design Velocity (ft /s) Allowable Velocity, (ft /s)
value Fine Sand Coarse Sand
Al 0.05 1.4 2.0 4.0
A2 0.05 1.4 2.0 4.0
I(NRCS, 2007)
8.3.2 Mitigation Summary
Natural channel design techniques have been used to develop the restoration designs described in this
document. The combination of the analog and analytical design methods was determined to be
appropriate for this project because the watershed is rural, the causes of disturbance are known and
have been abated, and there are minimal infrastructure constraints. The original design parameters
were developed from the measured analog/reference reach data and applied to the subject stream. The
parameters were then analyzed and adjusted through an iterative process using analytical tools and
numerical simulations of fluvial processes. The designs presented in this report provide for the
restoration of natural Coastal Plain sand -bed channel features and stream bed diversity to improve
benthic habitat. The proposed design will allow flows that exceed the design bankfull stage to spread
out over the floodplain, restoring a portion of the hydrology for the existing wetlands.
A large portion of the existing stream will be filled using material excavated from the restoration
channel. However, many segments will be left partially filled to provide habitat diversity and flood
storage. Native woody material will be installed throughout the restored reach to reduce bank stress,
provide grade control, and increase habitat diversity.
Forested riparian buffers of at least fifty feet on both sides of the channel will be established along the
project reach. An appropriate riparian plant community, a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp, will be
established to include a diverse mix of species. Replanting of native species will occur where the
existing buffer is impacted during construction.
The Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site is being built in conjunction with the Buffalo Branch
Buffer/Nutrient Offset Site. Reductions in nutrients and other pollutants will be achieved with the
buffer restoration work, providing substantial benefits to the watershed. The preservation and
enhancement of existing wetlands in the easement will provide improved hydrologic function to the
adjacent stream reaches.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 47 April 2015

9 MAINTENANCE PLAN
The site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will be conducted a minimum
of once per year throughout the post construction monitoring period until performance standards are
met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that require routine
maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following site
construction and may include the following:
Table 25. Maintenance Plan
Component/Feature Maintenance through project close -out
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in-
stream structures to prevent piping, securing of loose coir matting, and
supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the channel
may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head - cutting.
Vegetation Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted
plant community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. EKOtic
invasive plant species shall be controlled by mechanical and /or chemical
methods. Any vegetation control requiring herbicide application will be
performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules
and regulations.
Site Boundary Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction
between the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be
identified by fence, marker, bollard, post, tree - blazing, or other means as
allowed by site conditions and /or conservation easement. Boundary markers
disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and /or replaced on an as
needed basis.
Ford Crossing Ford crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Road Crossing Road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 48 April 2015

10 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The success criteria for the Buffalo Branch Site will follow accepted and approved success criteria
presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent agency guidance. Specific
success criteria components are presented below.
10.1 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
10.1.1 Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven -year monitoring period. The two
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until
two bankfull events have been documented in separate years.
10.1.2 Cross Sections
There should be little change in as -built cross - sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example
down- cutting or erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example
settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross -
sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
10.1.3 Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images
should not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in
channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the
banks over time. A series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian
vegetation.
10.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will
follow IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover
a minimum of two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the fall
of each year. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least
320 planted three -year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five -year old trees at the end of
Year 5, and the final vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees per acre with an average height of 10
feet at the end of Year 7.
10.3 Scheduling /Reporting
A mitigation plan and as -built drawings documenting stream restoration activities will be developed
within 60 days of the planting completion on the mitigation site. The report will include all
information required by IRT mitigation plan guidelines, including elevations, photographs and
sampling plot locations, gauge locations, and a description of initial species composition by
community type. The report will also include a list of the species planted and the associated densities.
Baseline vegetation monitoring will include species, height, date of planting, and grid location of each
stem. The baseline report will follow USACE guidelines.
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology will be assessed to determine the
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 49 April 2015

success of the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for five years or until the final
success criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to the IRT.
The monitoring reports will include all information, and be in the format required by USACE.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 50 April 2015

11 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the IRT monitoring template. The monitoring report
shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and
trends, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding project close -out. The success
criteria for the Buffalo Branch stream mitigation will follow current accepted and approved success
criteria presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines, and subsequent agency guidance.
Specific success criteria components are presented in Table 26. Monitoring reports will be prepared
annually and submitted to the IRT.
Table 26. Monitoring Requirements
Required Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
As per April 2003
Additional surveys will be performed if
USACE Wilmington
Pattern
Baseline
monitoring indicates instabilityor
District Stream
significant channel migration
Mitigation Guidelines
As per April 2003
Baseline,
USACE Wilmington
Years
Dimension
Surveyed cross sections and bank pins
District Stream
1,2,3,5, and
Mitigation Guidelines
7
As per April 2003
USACE Wilmington
Additional surveys will be performed if
Profile
Baseline
District Stream
monitoring indicates instability
Mitigation Guidelines
Crest Gauges and /or Pressure
As per April 2003
Transducers will be installed on site; the
Surface Water
USACE Wilmington
devices will be inspected on a
Hydrology
District Stream
Annual
quarterly /semi - annual basis to document
Mitigation Guidelines
the occurrence of bankfull events on the
project
Vegetation will be monitored per IRT
Vegetation
Annual
guidelines
Exotic and
Locations of exotic and nuisance
Nuisance
Annual
vegetation will be mapped
Vegetation
Locations offence damage, vegetation
Project
Semi-
damage, boundary encroachments, etc.
Boundary
annual
will be mapped
Stream Visual
Annual
Semi - annual visual assessments
11.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey will include a complete profile of Thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of
bank to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual
monitoring reports unless requested by USACE. Stream channel stationing will be marked with
stakes placed near the top of bank every 100 feet.
11.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year
by qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 51 April 2015

species, and easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete
streamwalk and structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to
record each monitoring event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of
visual monitoring will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas
and digital images. Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or
degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or
an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or
continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time should indicate
successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
11.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross - sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in
pools and half in shallows. All cross - section measurements will include bank height ratio and
entrenchment ratio. Cross - sections will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as-
built cross - sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated to determine if they represent
movement toward a less stable condition (for example down - cutting or erosion), or are minor changes
that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the
banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2, and the entrenchment
ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches. Channel stability should be demonstrated
through a minimum of two bankfull events documented in the seven -year monitoring period.
11.4 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size, and cover a minimum of two
percent of the planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the plots: species,
height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur each year during the
monitoring period. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at
least 320 planted three -year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 and 260 five -year old trees per acre
at the end of Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 trees per acre
with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period.
Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter
the desired community structure of the site. If necessary, EBX will develop a species - specific control
plan.
11.5 Remedial Actions
The Mitigation Plan will include a detailed adaptive management plan that will address how potential
problems are resolved. In the event that the site, or a specific component of the site, fails to achieve
the defined success criteria, EBX will develop necessary adaptive management plans and/or
implement appropriate remedial actions for the site in coordination with the IRT. Remedial action
required will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and will include
identification of the causes of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring
criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions. If tree mortality affects 40 percent
or greater of the canopy in a stream restoration area, then a remedial /supplemental planting plan will
be developed and implemented for the affected area(s).
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 52 April 2015

12 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
EBX acting as the Bank Sponsor, will establish a Conservation Easement, and will monitor the Site
for a minimum of seven years. This Mitigation Plan provides detailed information regarding bank
operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for review and approval
by the IRT. Upon approval of the Site by the IRT, the site will be transferred to the NCWHF. The
NCWHF shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in
the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld. Easements held by the
NCWHF are stewarded in general accordance with the guidelines published by the National Land
Trust Alliance; easement monitoring is conducted on an annual basis. An overview of the NCWHF
Easement Stewardship program is included in Appendix A. Endowment funds required to uphold
easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the NCWHF.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of
an initial monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the
Bank Sponsor. The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary,
maintenance of the Site during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Neu -Con Wetland and Stream Umbrella Mitigation
Bank made and entered into by EBX, USACE, and NC DWR.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 53 April 2015

13 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of site construction, EBX will implement the post - construction monitoring
protocols previously defined in this document. Project maintenance will be performed as described
previously in this document. If, during the course of annual monitoring, it is determined that the site's
ability to achieve site performance standards are jeopardized, EBX will notify the USACE of the need
to develop a Plan of Corrective Action. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized
EBX will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and /or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
5. Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the
extent and nature of the work performed.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 54 April 2015

14 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
The Sponsor shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond to the IRT
sufficient to assure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any
remedial work required. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to his
designee or to a standby trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the
event of default by the Bank Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form
that ensures that the USACE receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or
revocation. Buffalo Branch will utilize a construction and monitoring bond surety of at least
$550,000.00. The bond will be provided by RLI Surety and will designate the NCWHF (long -term
steward) as the obligee.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 55 April 2015

15 OTHER INFORMATION
15.1 References
Johnston County, North Carolina. Available online at htt_n: / /www.fws.2ov /ralei2h/. [Accessed 25
October 2011.]
Amoroso, J.L., ed. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Chow, Ven Te. 1959. OUen- Channel Hvdraulics. McGraw -Hill, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, FWS /OBS- 79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y -87 -1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Fischenich, C. 2001. "Stability thresholds for stream restoration materials." ERDC Technical Note
No. EMRRP- SR -29, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Miss.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843 -K -12 -006.
Johnson PA. 2006. Assessing stream channel stability at bridges in physiographic regions. U.S.
Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Report Number FHWA- HRT -05-
072.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. and S.P. Hall, eds. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH
654), USDA
NCDENR 2012a. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water
Quality http: / /portal.ncdenr.or web /wg/home. (February 2012).
NCDENR 2012b. "2012 North Carolina 303(d) Lists - Category 5." Water Quality Section.
htta:Ht)ortal.ncdenr.or&web /wa /home. (August 2012).
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262 -274
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 56 April 2015

Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and F.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), 2002. Regulatory Guidance Letter. RGL No. 02 -2,
December 24, 2002.
US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE), 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS),
1994. Soil Survey of Johnston County, North Carolina.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S.
Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC /EL TR- 10 -20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS),
Web Soil Survey; httn : / /websoilsurvev.nres.usda.2ov (September 2014).
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble
(eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, (USEPA, 1999) 1999. EPA Manual. Quantifying
Physical Habitat in Wadeable Streams.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "Threatened and Endangered Species in North Carolina."
North Carolina Ecological Services. http: / /www.fws.gov /raleigh/ (November 2012).
USDA -NRCS. 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Technical Release 55.
Buffalo Branch Mitigation Plan 57 April 2015

Appendix A
Figures and Site Protection Instrument (s)
List of Figures
Figure 1- Vicinity Map
Figure 2- USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3- Soils Map
Figure 4- National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 5- Current Conditions Map
Figure 6- FEMA Map
Figure 7- LIDAR Map
Figure 8a- 1950 Historical Conditions Map
Figure 8b- 1980 Historical Conditions Map
Figure 9- Conceptual Plan Map
Figure 10- Non - Standard Buffer Width Calculations
Site Protection Instruments
Conservation Easement Deeds
NCWHF Stewardship Program Overview
Preliminary Plats
Note: This appendix will be updated as the easement deeds and plats become available.

b
0
o-�
/. a
�44fi M
0
J\
N421
' CJ�0
POLL
rn \JOHNSON ;Rp . ,'
O
VNN,Rp OLD,DAM -RD o
- BRANCH
J HAPEL CHURCH RD' m
w ' HP
Buffalo Branch Stream
Mitigation Site '
f s
T 7. a 39
LII
LE DIVINE RD'
0.,�REVELL R
o
' OLD C
WA
REECH RD � —��
HAWKINS RD
Y! + US 301'HWY N
GIi
96
�\ I
Seima o
, k1rV\W MWEV'"01 ;&' WS11111111 M E
VIA
ROD
jig
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Buffalo : Stream • . •
0 '1�iy� ►:�i�ri� �r alb'
Legend
` © Airports
Proposed Easement
Streams
`
BB_Esmnt_102714
Q 5mile_aviation_zone
Q HUC 03020201180050
ERETT�N
= Interstate
Highway
OSp�T
NC Highway
Local Road
' CJ�0
POLL
rn \JOHNSON ;Rp . ,'
O
VNN,Rp OLD,DAM -RD o
- BRANCH
J HAPEL CHURCH RD' m
w ' HP
Buffalo Branch Stream
Mitigation Site '
f s
T 7. a 39
LII
LE DIVINE RD'
0.,�REVELL R
o
' OLD C
WA
REECH RD � —��
HAWKINS RD
Y! + US 301'HWY N
GIi
96
�\ I
Seima o
, k1rV\W MWEV'"01 ;&' WS11111111 M E
VIA
ROD
jig
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Buffalo : Stream • . •
0 '1�iy� ►:�i�ri� �r alb'

4
74-
{
%S1 1
OLD MOORE RD
S.
F ,
r 'Ap
♦.
w r
♦ ti NORTH TRL
J
9� DAVISWARM DR
♦ SULLIVAN RD
,OR
Drainage Area- 570 acres 4t
f Gfa
r.,er:
0 • -
LILLIAN RD
i i +iea p
jFier Temidt
Ch REVELL RD
LYNNIN
VQ'
Source: Selma Quadrangle Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i -cubed
Figure 2.
USGS Topographic Map _ _ Roads
,
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site L _ Drainage Area
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Proposed Easement
Feet
Existing Streams
1 inch = 2,000 feet

A
NORTH TRL
�•? • ! ":\
4 ,
4
Jf
E w
r , , e •,aRt � �z, p�V�HF
Soil Symbol Name Soil Symbol Name
Bb Bibb sandy loam, frequently flooded MaB Marlboro sandy loam, 2 - 8% slopes
BoA Bonneau sand, 0 - 3% slopes NoA Norfolk loamy sand, 0 - 2% slopes
CoB Cowartsloamy sand, 2 - 6% slopes NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 2 - 6% slopes
GeB Gilead sandy loam, 2 - 8% slopes PaE Pacolet loam, 15 - 25% slopes
GeD Gilead sandy loam, 8 - 15°% slopes Ra Rains sandy loam
GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 - 2% slopes Tn Toisnot loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam Wt Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
MaA Marlboro sandy loam, 0 - 2% slopes
Figure 3.
Soils Map Roads
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site Existing Streams
0 250 500 1,000 Proposed Easement
Feet
Johnston County Soils
1 inch = 500 feet

Z
}
2
PS81A�
e � E
NORTH TRL
j, � •ey4:rV•
o • r y
T
m PUBHx
r
Source: National
Figure 4.
National Wetlands Inventory Map
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Inve
e•y
M
IS Data, °201
Roads
Existing Streams
NWI Wetlands
Proposed Easement

C
C
i f
2 �
2 W1
co
rn
2
W2
TIM,.] W3
W4
y � �c-
t
i s 7Y i iiq rl Sy ;.Y`
F .x „`• a a�. �T
W7
y.
+ Excavated Seem
W7
a r
Ilk, Will,
F ; Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
N Present Marg)nal Absent
• R• N
U Absent No Fill
2
� > Present
sr 3CS ` 2
c Common
??S:a r., ;:. �o. _ 1, ►;.
Figure 5.
�.- Roads
Current Conditions Map
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site Existing streams
0 200 400 800 ® Existing Wetlands
Feet ED Proposed Easement
1 inch = 400 feet

Figure 6.
FEMA Map
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Roads
— Existing Streams
Proposed Easement
FEMA 100 -yr Floodplain
(none on property)

Figure 7.
LIDAR Map
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Proposed Easement
Existing Streams
Roads

NORTH TRL
Q�
G�
J�
G�
0P�
n
rn
Z
SAULS LN
e: USGS 1950 Aerial Phottoogr
EBX
��"'
W
0
Z
�O
iw,
Figure 8a.
1950 Historical Conditions
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site Roads
0 350 700 1,400 Proposed Easement
Feet
1 inch = 700 feet

N
NORTH TRL
J�
y0
0
_ w
- z
�O =
O �
Q
�0
O
51-6 NFRO.
P
v
P
Z -
rn
SAULS L"
Source: USGS 1980'A`erial'Photography
Figure 8b.
Ie 1980 Historical Conditions
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 350 700 1,400
Feet
1 inch = 700 feet
Roads
Proposed Easement

•� - - •?fir
E
dch y� 1.
Reach , ,lir.xti
` 1 s fA? �
_
W5,., r. lytr i - �, ri r+ t i'r��: F� r.
' 4� ! , a! 1. i►. a' r . W7..
Excavated Pond :T
Y' ja 4�Excavated Sect �e
4._ P J
/ Reach +w�
Vie.
.<
it
e �T +1S
r r, FO�
it
.1011111111I.— Ak-
Figure 9.
Conceptual Plan Map �WK
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site �DICI<SON
OLOO 400 800 community infrastructure consultants
Feet
1 inch = 400 feet
Roads
Reach
Mitigation Type
Existing
Proposed
Mitigation
SMUs
Length (LE)
Length (LE)
Ratio
Priority 1 Restoration
Al
P2 Restoration
1,033
1,310
1:1.0
1580
Priority 2 Restoration
A2
Enhancement I
732
732
1:1.5
575
A2
PI Restoration
311
392
1:1.0
436
Stream Enhancement Level I
A3
Enhancement II (low)
1,830
1,830
1:5.0
366
Stream Enhancement Level II
BI
Enhancement II
534
534
1:2.5
248
132
Enhancement I
588
588
1:1.5
460
Stream Enhancement Level II
- Low c
Enhancement II
360
380
1:2.5
179
Enhanced Wetlands
5,388
5,766
3844
Existing Wetlands
Target Parcels
Proposed Easement
t 4L
,
•� - - •?fir
E
dch y� 1.
Reach , ,lir.xti
` 1 s fA? �
_
W5,., r. lytr i - �, ri r+ t i'r��: F� r.
' 4� ! , a! 1. i►. a' r . W7..
Excavated Pond :T
Y' ja 4�Excavated Sect �e
4._ P J
/ Reach +w�
Vie.
.<
it
e �T +1S
r r, FO�
it
.1011111111I.— Ak-
Figure 9.
Conceptual Plan Map �WK
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site �DICI<SON
OLOO 400 800 community infrastructure consultants
Feet
1 inch = 400 feet

® Reach Breaks
Top of Bank
QProposed Easement
Buffer Credit Adjustment
+150' ( +20%)
0 125 - 150' ( +16 %)
0 100 - 125'(+12%)
v
0 75 100'(+7%)
m
Q
-
50 - 75'(0%)
�r
c�
C
�ea�b
6Z
Proposed
Mitigation
Buffer Width
Reach
Mitigation Type
Length (LF)
Ratio
Multiplier
SMUs
d ti
Ala -LB
P2 Restoration
152
1:1.0
0%
152
Alb -LB
P2 Restoration
1,158
1:1.0
20%
1,390
Ala - RB
P2 Restoration
87
1:1.0
0%
152
Alb -RB
P2 Restoration
1,223
1:1.0
20%
1,468
Al -Left Bank
1542
Al- Right Bank
1620
Al TOTAL
1580
A2a - LB
Enhancement I
136
1:1.5
20%
109
Alb -LB
EnhancementI
166
1:1.5
12%
124
A2c - LB
Enhancement I
361
1:1.5
16%
279
A2d -LB
Enhancement
69
1:1.5
12%
52
Ate - LB
P1 Restoration
253
1:1.0
12%
283
A2f -LB
P1 Restoration
139
1:1.0
7%
149
A2a - RB
Enhancement I
732
1:1.5
20%
586
A2b -RB
P1 Restoration
160
1:1.0
16%
186
A2c -RB
P1 Restoration
135
1:1.0
12%
151
A2d -RB
P1 Restoration
97
1:1.0
7%
104
y0(vq
A2 -Left Bank
996
A2- Right Bank
1026
A2 TOTAL
1011
A3
Enhancement II (low)
1,830
1:5.0
0%
366
A3 -Left Bank
366
A3- Right Bank
366
A3 TOTAL
366
BI-LB
Enhancement II
534
1:2.5
12%
239
BI-RB
Enhancement II
534
1:2.5
20%
256
B1 -Left Bank
239
��y
Bl- Right Bank
256
•
B1 TOTAL
248
B2a -LB
Enhancement I
360
1:1.5
16%
278
B2b-LB
Enhancement I
228
1:1.5
12%
170
B2 -RB
Enhancement I
588
1:1.5
20%
470
B2 -Left Bank
449
B2- Right Bank
470
B2 TOTAL
460
C - LB
Enhancement II
380
1:2.5
20%
182
Ca -RB
Enhancement 11
75
1:2.5
0%
30
Cb- RB
Enhancement 11
305
1:2.5
20%
146
C -Left Bank
182
existing Buff,,
C- Right Bank
176
C TOTAL
179
PROJECT TOTAL
3,844
*Total SMUs calculated by averaging
the total left bank reach and right bank reach SMUs
9�
n�
M
LC.
V1
3
fQ
l'I7
�i.
Z
Figure
10.
Non - Standard Buffer Width Calculations
PAN
Buffalo Branch Site
wkwl<
ebx
WDICI<SON
0
100 200
400
Feet
community infrastructure
consultants
�� COMPANY
1 inch = 200 feet

MODEL CONSERVATION EASEMENT
January 18, 2001
Rev'd October 16, 2002
Rev'd August, 2003
Model Conservation Easement for use in preserving mitigation property. Language in
italics is instructional, and should be deleted when site - specific Conservation Easement
is prepared.
PERMANENT CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT ( "Conservation Easement ") made this
day of , 200_ by and between
( "Grantor ") and (Grantee).
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,
their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine
or neuter as required by context.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying and
being in County, North Carolina, more particularly
described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein ( "Property ");
WHEREAS, Grantee is [either a public body of this state, an agency of the United
States, or a nonprofit corporation or trust whose purpose is the conservation of property],
and is qualified to be the Grantee of a conservation easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat.
§ 121 -35;
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the conservation, scenic, natural, or
aesthetic value of the property in its natural state, which includes the following natural
communities: [describe by wetland and /or stream type, as well as any associated buffers
or upland communities]. The purpose of this Conservation Easement is to maintain
wetland and/or riparian resources and other natural values of the Property, and prevent
the use or development of the Property for any purpose or in any manner that would
conflict with the maintenance of the Property in its natural condition.
[ For use when the mitigation is offered for impacts of a single individual or
general permit use] WHEREAS, the preservation of the Property is a condition of
Department of the Army permit Action ID issued by the Wilmington
District Corps of Engineers, required to mitigate for unavoidable stream and/or wetland
impacts authorized by that permit. Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of
enforcement shall be held by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District

(Corps, to include any successor agencies), and that these rights are in addition to, and do
not limit, the rights of enforcement under said permit.
[Alternate paragraph for use when the conservation easement supports a
mitigation bank] WHEREAS, the preservation of the Property is required by a Mitigation
Banking Instrument for the [Name of Bank], Department of the Army Action ID [Action
ID number for the mitigation bank]. The Mitigation Bank is intended to be used to
compensate for unavoidable stream and/or wetland impacts authorized by permits issued
by the Department of the Army. Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of
enforcement shall be held by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
(Corps, to include any successor agencies), and that these rights are in addition to, and do
not limit, the rights of the parties to the Mitigation Banking Instrument.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and
representations contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby
unconditionally and irrevocably grants and conveys unto Grantee, its heirs, successors
and assigns, forever and in perpetuity a Conservation Easement of the nature and
character and to the extent hereinafter set forth, over the Property described on Exhibit A,
together with the right to preserve and protect the conservation values thereof, as follows:
ARTICLE I.
DURATION OF EASEMENT
This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. This conservation Easement is an
easement in gross, runs with the land and is enforceable by Grantee against Grantor,
Grantor's personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, lessees, agents and
licensees.
ARTICLE II.
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
Any activity on, or use of, the Property inconsistent with the purpose of this
Conservation Easement is prohibited. The Property shall be preserved in its natural
condition and restricted from any development that would impair or interfere with the
conservation values of the Property.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities and uses
are expressly prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated hereunder:
A. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change disturbance, alteration or
impairment of the natural features of the Property or any introduction of non - native
plants and/or animal species is prohibited.
B. Construction. There shall be no constructing or placing of any building,
mobile home, asphalt or concrete pavement, billboard or other advertising display,

antenna, utility pole, tower, conduit, line, pier, landing, dock or any other temporary or
permanent structure or facility on or above the Property.
C. Industrial, Commercial and Residential Use. Industrial, residential and /or
commercial activities, including any right of passage for such purposes are prohibited.
D. Agricultural, Grazing and Horticultural Use. Agricultural, grazing, animal
husbandry, and horticultural use of the Property are prohibited.
E. Vegetation. There shall be no removal, burning, destruction, harming, cutting
or mowing of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation on the Property.
F. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails or walkways
on the property; nor enlargement or modification to existing roads, trails or walkways.
G. Signaae. No signs shall be permitted on or over the Property, except the
posting of no trespassing signs, signs identifying the conservation values of the Property,
signs giving directions or proscribing rules and regulations for the use of the Property
and/or signs identifying the Grantor as owner of the property.
H. Dumping or Storage. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery or hazardous substances, or toxic or
hazardous waste, or any placement of underground or aboveground storage tanks or other
materials on the Property is prohibited.
I. Excavation, Dredging or Mineral Use. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat,
minerals or other materials, and no change in the topography of the land in any manner
on the Property, except to restore natural topography or drainage patterns.
J. Water Quality and Drainage Pattern. There shall be no diking, draining,
dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or related activities, or
altering or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration
of the restored, enhanced, or created drainage patterns. In addition, diverting or causing
or permitting the diversion of surface or underground water into, within or out of the
easement area by any means, removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into waters,
springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides is prohibited.
K. Development Rights. No development rights that have been encumbered or
extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be transferred pursuant to a
transferable development rights scheme or cluster development arrangement or
otherwise.
L. Vehicles. The operation of mechanized vehicles, including, but not limited to,
motorcycles, dirt bikes, all- terrain vehicles, cars and trucks is prohibited. [The Corps
will generally allow the use of vehicles on existing roads provided those roads are

identified by reference to a recorded map showing their location, configuration, and
size.]
M. Other Prohibitions. Any other use of, or activity on, the Property which is or
may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant, the preservation of the Property
substantially in its natural condition, or the protection of its environmental systems, is
prohibited.
ARTICLE III
GRANTOR'S RESEVERED RIGHTS
The Grantor expressly reserves for himself, his personal representatives, heirs,
successors or assigns, the right to continue the use of the property for all purposes not
inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, including, but not limited to, the right to
quiet enjoyment of the Property, the rights of ingress and egress, the right to hunt, fish,
and hike on the Property, the right to sell, transfer, gift or otherwise convey the Property,
in whole or in part, provided such sale, transfer or gift conveyance is subject to the terms
of, and shall specifically reference, this Conservation Easement.
[For use when mitigation work (approved or required restoration, creation, or
enhancement)is to be done on the property]Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions,
Grantor reserves for Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to construct wetland
and stream mitigation on the Property, in accordance with the [describe mitigation plan
by title, date and permit action id if a single mitigation site; if a mitigation bank, include
the language "detailed mitigation plan approved in accordance with the Mitigation
Banking Instrument for the Mitigation Bank.]
ARTICLE IV.
GRANTEE'S RIGHTS
The Grantee or its authorized representatives, successors and assigns, and the
Corps, shall have the right to enter the Property at all reasonable times for the purpose of
inspecting said property to determine if the Grantor, or his personal representatives, heirs,
successors, or assigns, is complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes
of this Conservation Easement. The Grantee shall also have the right to enter and go
upon the Property for purposes of making scientific or educational observations and
studies, and taking samples. The easement rights granted herein do not include public
access rights.
ARTICLE V
ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. To accomplish the purposes of this Easement, Grantee is allowed to prevent
any activity on or use of the Property that is inconsistent with the purposes of this
Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features of the Property that may
be damaged by such activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation

Easement by Grantor that comes to the attention of the Grantee, the Grantee shall notify
the Grantor in writing of such breach. The Grantor shall have 30 days after receipt of
such notice to correct the conditions constituting such breach. If the breach remains
uncured after 30 days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by
appropriate legal proceedings including damages, injunctive and other relief.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice,
to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief if the breach
of the term of this Conservation Easement is or would irreversibly or otherwise
materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement. The
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that under such circumstances damage to the Grantee
would be irreparable and remedies at law will be inadequate. The rights and remedies of
the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all other rights
and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement. The
costs of a breach, correction or restoration, including the Grantee's expenses, court costs,
and attorneys' fees, shall be paid by Grantor, provided Grantor is determined to be
responsible for the breach. The Corps shall have the same right to enforce the terms and
conditions of this easement as the Grantee.
B. No failure on the part of the Grantee to enforce any covenant or provision
hereof shall discharge or invalidate such covenant or any other covenant, condition, or
provision hereof or affect the right to Grantee to enforce the same in the event of a
subsequent breach or default.
C. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be construed to entitle
Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the Property
resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control, including, without limitation, fire,
flood, storm, war, acts of God or third parties, except Grantor's lessees or invitees; or
from any prudent action taken in good faith by Grantor under emergency conditions to
prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to life, damage to property or harm to the
Property resulting from such causes.
ARTICLE VI
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Warrantv. Grantor warrants, covenants and represents that it owns the
Property in fee simple, and that Grantor either owns all interests in the Property which
may be impaired by the granting of this Conservation Easement or that there are no
outstanding mortgages, tax liens, encumbrances, or other interests in the Property which
have not been expressly subordinated to this Conservation Easement. Grantor further
warrants that Grantee shall have the use of and enjoy all the benefits derived from and
arising out of this Conservation Easement, and that Grantor will warrant and defend title
to the Property against the claims of all persons.

B. Subsequent Transfers. The Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms of this
Conservation Easement in any deed or other legal instrument that transfers any interest in
all or a portion of the Property. The Grantor agrees to provide written notice of such
transfer at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of the transfer. The Grantor and Grantee
agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive any merger of the fee
and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof and shall not be amended,
modified or terminated without the prior written consent and approval of the Corps.
C. Assignment. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this
Conservation Easement are in gross and assignable provided, however that the Grantee
hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation
Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a qualified holder under N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 121 -34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee
further covenants and agrees that the terms of the transfer or assignment will be such that
the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in perpetuity the conservation
purposes described in this document.
D. Entire Agreement and Severabilitv. This instrument sets forth the entire
agreement of the parties with respect to the Conservation Easement and supersedes all
prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or agreements relating to the Conservation
Easement. If any provision is found to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the remainder shall continue in full force and effect.
E. Obligations of Ownership. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes,
assessments, fees, or charges levied upon the Property. Grantor shall keep the Property
free of any liens or other encumbrances for obligations incurred by Grantor. Grantee shall
not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the ownership,
operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the obligation to comply with
federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to the exercise of the
Reserved Rights.
F. Extinauishment. In the event that changed conditions render impossible the
continued use of the Property for the conservation purposes, this Conservation Easement
may only be extinguished, in whole or in part, by judicial proceeding.
G. Eminent Domain. Whenever all or part of the Property is taken in the exercise
of eminent domain so as to substantially abrogate the Restrictions imposed by this
Conservation Easement, Grantor and Grantee shall join in appropriate actions at the time
of such taking to recover the full value of the taking, and all incidental and direct
damages due to the taking.
H. Proceeds. This Conservation Easement constitutes a real property interest
immediately vested in Grantee. In the event that all or a portion of this Property is sold,
exchanged, or involuntarily converted following an extinguishment or the exercise of
eminent domain, Grantee shall be entitled to the fair market value of this Conservation

Easement. The parties stipulate that the fair market value of this Conservation Easement
shall be determined by multiplying the fair market value of the Property unencumbered
by this Conservation Easement (minus any increase in value after the date of this grant
attributable to improvements) by the ratio of the value of this easement at the time of this
grant to the value of the Property (without deduction for the value of this Conservation
Easement) at the time of this grant. The values at the time of this grant shall be the values
used, or which would have been used, to calculate a deduction for federal income tax
purposes, pursuant to Section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code (whether eligible or
ineligible for such a deduction). Grantee shall use its share of the proceeds in a manner
consistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement.
I. Notification. Any notice, request for approval, or other communication
required under this Conservation Easement shall be sent by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, to the following addresses (or such address as may be hereafter specified
by notice pursuant to this paragraph):
To Grantor:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Grantee:
[Name, address and fax number]
To the Corgs:
[Name, address and fax number]
J. Failure of Grantee. If at any time Grantee is unable or fails to enforce this
Conservation Easement, or if Grantee ceases to be a qualified grantee, and if within a
reasonable period of time after the occurrence of one of these events Grantee fails to
make an assignment pursuant to this Conservation Easement, then the Grantee's interest
shall become vested in another qualified grantee in accordance with an appropriate
proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction.
K. Amendment. This Conservation Easement may be amended, but only in a
writing signed by all parties hereto, and provided such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any
applicable laws, and is consistent with the conservation purposes of this grant.
L. [For use if there is a document describing the current condition of the
property. The language provided is applicable if there is a mitigation plan that
accurately describes the current condition and uses of the property. If there is not such a
plan, another document we agree is accurate and can be identified and is in our files can
be referenced.]Present Condition of the Property. The wetlands, scenic, resource,
environmental, and other natural characteristics of the Property, and its current use and
state of improvement, are described in Section , Appendix B of the Mitigation Plan,

dated , prepared by Grantor and acknowledged by the Grantor and
Grantee to be complete and accurate as of the date hereof. Both Grantor and Grantee
have copies of this report. It will be used by the parties to assure that any future changes
in the use of the Property will be consistent with the terms of this Conservation
Easement. However, this report is not intended to preclude the use of other evidence to
establish the present condition of the Property if there is a controversy over its use.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually unto Grantee for
the aforesaid purposes.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
[Signatures of the Grantor and Grantee in appropriate form]

Kelly Harrill
Chairman
Greensboro, NC
Tenna Koury
Vice Chairman
Burlington, NC
John C. Hagan
Secretary
Greensboro, NC
W. Harrison Stewart
Treasurer
Greensboro, NC
Eddie C. Bridges
Executive Director
Greensboro, NC
Dan Barker
Greensboro, NC
Thomas A. Berry
Greensboro, NC
Samuel E. Bridges
Greensboro, NC
Tracy Brooks
Greensboro, NC
Tonnie E. Davis
Roxboro, NC
Johnny Dinkins
Greensboro, NC
William DuBose
Greensboro, NC
Gregory Erwin
Raleigh, NC
John D. Goins
Hendersonville, NC
Stewart Gordon
Winston- Salem, NC
Scott Heffernan
Greensboro, NC
Maurice S. Hull
High Point, NC
John Preyer
Chapel Hill, NC
Dr. Wes Perry
Kinston, NC
Mark Ruffin
Greensboro, NC
John Saslow
Greensboro, NC
Michelle Sharpe
Greensboro, NC
Mark Toland
Asheville, NC
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is intended to provide a brief overview of the NCWHF Easement
Stewardship program. We currently hold over thirty individual conservation easements
across North Carolina, including over 2,000 acres of land. These perpetual easements
were mostly established through environmental mitigation projects which restored or
preserved important wildlife habitat along with ecological functions of streams and
wetlands. We continue to accept and hold easements that fit with our Mission Statement:
The purpose of the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation is to assist in the
acquisition, management and protection of wildlife habitat within the state of North
Carolina and promote conservation education for the benefit of future generations.
Easements held by the NCWHF are stewarded in general accordance with the guidelines
published by the National Land Trust Alliance. For each easement it accepts, the
NCWHF requires an endowment fee which is held in trust. The funds are used for
ongoing monitoring of the specific site as well as any legal costs which may arise.
Monitoring is conducted on an annual basis. This involves a preliminary review of
ownership via tax records and a GIS -based review of the site each year. After the file is
updated an on -site inspection is conducted to confirm that the terms of the easement are
being honored. Visits are coordinated with the landowner when possible. The visit is
recorded in a written report and with photographs that are then archived. Signs
identifying the boundary of the easement are refreshed as needed during these visits.
Each landowner associated with the site is contacted at least annually and updated on the
status of the easement, even when in full compliance. The aim is to prevent violations by
maintaining a working partnership with the landowners. Any violations of easement
terms are promptly communicated to the landowner. Minor violations are typically
resolved with clear communication and reminders of the easement terms. However, if a
violation occurs that is not resolved through cooperative means in a timely manner, the
NCWHF is prepared to draw on the endowment funds to initiate legal recourse.
For any questions about the Easement Stewardship Program at the NCWHF, please
contact Matthew Harrell, (252) 299 -1655 or Harrell.conservation(a,=aiI.com
Sincerely,
L'ezl
Matthew Harrell
On Behalf of the NCWHF
P.O. Box 29187. Greensboro, NC 27429 -9187
(336) 375 -4994 . www.ncwhf.org

Site :
Address:
Monitor Name:
Others Present: 1)
2)
3)
Conservation Easement Monitoring Report
Date:
Arrival Time:
Departure Time:
Weather Conditions:
Circle appropriately
Y or N 1. Landowner contacted prior to visit?
Y or N 2. Landowner /representative present during visit?
Y or N 3. Recorded easement reviewed prior to inspection?
Y or N 4. Recorded plat reviewed prior to inspection?
Features Present in Easement?
Y or N Powerlines
Y or N Fences
Y or N Stream Crossings
Y or N Deer Stands/ Duck Blinds
5. Indicate monitoring method: Walking ATV Air
6. Indicate observed disturbances to the site:
Y or N a. Beaver activity Explain:
Y or N b. Invasive Vegetation Privet Kudzu Bamboo Multifloral Rose
Y or N c. Other land management issues (Erosion, water quality, fire, etc)
Y or N d. Grading/ Excavation/ or Construction activities
Y or N e. Depositing or dumping (trash, dirt, yard debris, etc)
Y or N f. Vegetative damage, including mowing, trimming, or tree removal
Y or N g. Livestock (present or signs of recent presence)
Y or N h. Vehicle use within easement other than on designated paths
atv dirtbike truck machinery
Y or N Points of access located GPS:
Overview of Observations:
Wildlife:
Y or N i. Photo's taken?
Y or N j. Followup required/ Site under Review? List primary issue:
Other
Notes on Reverse

1 e' RE. OFFX:ER L,
COUNTY C THE MAP OR PLAT TO
IM,K:H 7HIS CERMCATXIN 1S AP" XFD MEETS ALL STATUTORY
REOLMREMENIS FOR REI:OROA6
At ;vj
5+a4c a; t4ar4h Cara l+(-a) 7 -..K^S nn Coti,nJ�y
FRED FOR REC1s7RArK71M 3)(Cembee' A2
2014 AILOL'' !s A M
FLAT CARNET �' 'ID . PAGE
;Ale PLAT is EXEMOT FROM SUBONMN1 RE71'WA10V WT M rW
X*067ON COGMT7•' PI.~00 JLWfSDIGTAON.
ATE T7at
LEGEND
R/Ir - R7GN7 OF WAY
C/L CENTERUNE
0- NEW 7RON STAKE
Cn . 00SImc WON P9-E7
EAX - EXISTING AXLE
RW - RTOW -CF -WAY DrSK
0 - ND POWT SET
PP - PoorR POLE
OW) - GUY WIRE
P) - CONTROL CORNO?
DNB - DELAPIDA TED W1700 OVILD.Mr
HCGSM - NC Gm SURVEY MOIKAi1MT
� �} -C- - ELECIRIPAL LAIF
'LJ►L�.A`� f4A -J � Tw' - r --- - 7ELEPHOAL, LINE
RE R OF DEEDS 2 L -.T7 �V -✓'2 - NOr Ta SGILE
JiMYNSlON COUNTY ! E � - - - - • A0XMWC PROPERTY LAC
1 Y \\ �! =- WIRE FENCE
EASEMENT LINE
EASEMENT 8 BOfAA[NifY LNi'
r: \� -O -• ChAN -LAW; FEIhM.f
.! {7
1 I `
now awvj S HOWAID
DO 43Pa6. PC 291
1 ; \
V
1 �
r
rya
5'r ff7 A 5
1 \
1
\
�f 11 i
? f p
POW
2.3
v.
sr
CONWRVAriON
�� 16
EAMMENr
4} �• ' �� 'ss�- 1T AREA i
�� 10-
_7 4� I ��� Y•J�e 15
tt" i`� r` 14 r
1 ( J
5'2 {1�0
i 6
� � 2 ed
AREA 1 R De 4598, PG 291 �• 4WA .00. � z' 4
A J - 09 4197, PC 252 TQ 1+
ACRE4X 00A Jti
(BY COMPUTIM
}�
AREA 7 - 24.198 AC.! EXCL. R11M
AREA 2 - 6453 AC3 CL R/W gq
AREA 3 - 0.481 AC# WrL R/11' L`
TOTAL - 37.672 AC.* AACL. R/M _gI
[s PAUL
Al'L'SLM L'WfEG7M 1972' Des
N- 674,826.1418' DB
E- 2206;509.0128'
(HAD 63/2011)
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SURVEY OF
THE BUFFALO BRANCH SITE
FOR
EBX -NEUSE I, LLC.
SELMA TOWNSHIP OCTOBER 20„ 2014
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NC 1' = 150'
151]' 75' 0 150' 300'
GRAPHUC SCALE
1
1'
f 5'7
1 �
NORT78HG
EASTBYG I
I
675,582 7387'
�
2270,457.8498' I
3
d75,&780PB2'
2,.210,42/.6457' I
3
675,637.8206 J 2,210,379.2596' 1
1 4
675,666.8976 J 2.2FO.JJ7.5632' 1
1 5
67$694.45275 J 2,210,29Z8673'1
6
675,7233136 2,210,256.J894'
1 7
675,751-5648 2,210,215.2496'
8
675.780 -15J2 7,210.17J.06JI'I
1 9
675,W7 1410 2 710 133 0944' 1
1 10
675 835 0689 2,7 70 091 7814'
1 11
675 863 7129 2.2 10.048.973r 1
112
6758926786 1 2,270,0053462'1
1 73
675, 970.4637 J 2209 962.6989" 1
1 !4
675,948.3860 J 2,209,918,3405'1
15
675,974.876f J ?209874,5!48' 1
16
676,001,09-'9 2,209829,0456'
17
676, 025 97450' 2,209.764,J354- 1
}8
676:0498933
j 2TfR9. 739.8603'
1 19
6760723954''
2.918.96-91J7,
20
N 60'00 55" W
5249 1
1 2211
676 7.76683 /1,209,6062Z!
1 22
676, 735.5781 2,209,568.757 r' 1
123
676,2LA.5056 ' fj¢96'
�24
1 26
676`J4r 50&5 •'
676.55 '0076
&9.54
2209817.6692'
1 26
676;St16.6986J 2.209761.5527'
37
676,977.6903 2,209923.3974'
128 1
676,975.4486 J 2,2x0,071.1354'
129 1
$76,760.1708 J 2,2!0,313:4966"
130 k
$76,509.F986 2,2 5' 0 566 9 688•
1 J1 1
4575,9879466 1 2,210,5968299' 1
,12 I 15745,827-5319' 12.2fa, 967456J2' 1
J3 1 675 800 1389' 2,2 P 1, 052 4RW'
34 18.Y� 628 8998' 2..210 988 9756
135 1 675.464.5 108 7,2 717852141):
136 1675-584.74,91' J 2.270-641.6951'
13X675,536.3469' 2.210-616.9964'
136 1675,625.M7 / 2.210 487.71 JJ'
139 1 675, 478 J 181 J 2,210, 993.6576'
40 [ 675,733 7109 1 $211. 120.1554'
41 1874666J527' 7.211,297-6788'1
42 187/�j 6980929' 2217,4238184'
43 1 �E75,8251762' 22 }1, 6000071'
44 1675.9223985' 2,217.840.9795'
145 1 676;034 20401 2,210,845.1461'
1 46 676,372.39851 2,217,9x5.2650'
147 6715,415.4540 I x,211,98.73406'
1 6715,4602x85' 2,212,065 -5311
49 1678,4647598' 2.2 }2,J229239'
1 50 1878.5332207' 2,212,4T6.J -W'
51 1 878,347 8351) 2�2 12.339.52732
1 57 1 676,290 58251 2,112,35'9.129.7 1
1531676,2786485 2,2,12,065'.2573'
154 1 676,116. !465'1 2,212.953.4.795' I
55 675,846 787471 2,211,963.8961' 1
UW£ TA(RLE
1 4045
a iARASC
LENGTH I
I L -P
N 54'5812' 711
43. IV
L -2
N 54521 W
51.82 f
L -3
N 55'08 % W
50.83 1
-
I L -4
N 55'03' W
4&42
L -5
N 55.19, 59,- W
50.43 I
L-6
N 553r!?E� W
49.9,
L -7
N -W+,5 7 W
30.94 f!
i-8
N 35`59 D7' w
46-74 f
i -9
N 155 56?8 W
49.87
4 -5'0
N 56'1244 W
509'420,. w
L -11
N 56°25 jgiT(� W
52.37
1 4-12
N 56'541 \ W
`
50.90
I L -13
N 5748 �i W
52.41
I L -;4
N 5650'58' W
57.21
L -5'5
N 60'00 55" W
5249 1
L -76
N 615'54'1 J' w
51.17
L -17
N 60.43'48' W
-p�51'
50-50 i
48.48
4 -5'a
N 6, W
4 -5'9
N 63' 35' w
5259 E
1 L -20
N 6738•.56` w
48.44 I
1 L -2f
N 64 40' 8` w
41..87
L -22
N 2634 ' W
70.95 I
4-2J
N 1,'4250' E
(44.00 I.
L -24
N 11'03'72'
214.22 T
L -25
7 -'
'- 175.57
L -26
N 718'57'49'
488.14 1
L -27
N 88'32734" E
147.79
L -28
S 4823'13` E
324.17
I L -29
S 46'2653' E
349,74
L -30
S 0313'Q2�' E
53209
I � -JJ2
S 663877
09.32
L -33
sS4T,:: W
271.59 1
L-34
S 250779 W
53.46 1
I L -35
N 55.42/12• w
156,95'
I L -36 I
S 34.51153` w
5239
I L -37 I
N 82'44X�
;09.32' 1
I�
VKZFMrrY MAP
(Nor TO sC4LE)
CURVE TABLE
DE`» 1 � iI r Mr ,D yTA w 18140
1.92.00 0
I L -36 i N 26,2056 £ T 1
I L -J9 S 6,r F316 E 789.91 I PAL[ K HONKRO, A.
4-40 I FM 7551 6' £ 729 -88 I ' 4 `^�, DEME' EDINAROS }AIWA
' L-41 3�T' E 217.40 1 _ OB 4P97, PG 252
4 -41 41' E 259.85 1
I L -43 I
N 02-08;&% E
T; r.ee I
L -58
L -57
I L -44 I
N F 1'43 011, E
345.39'
0
I L -45 I
N 5T4O 49 E
80.53
2.211.520.0236'
1 L -58 I
I L -46
N 66'202` £
1 0 0,57
9y
I L -47 I
2
I L-48
70 7
S5 2' .1
x
�
P
ljR
j y
1 4 -49 1
R 87' 4� 07 W
238.17 1
-
( S GROUND CO OMT 6'5
1 L -50 f
509'420,. w
164.8d 1
I i -Sr G
I L -52
5 P
S S6Px4 .4 W
287,96 7
PALM N. M0NAR0 R.37
DnW EDWARDS NONAM
/
p
I L -53
S 59"2056' w
174.,F6
08 QW. PC 291
I L -54
S 5648'73' w
241.64
L -55
s 6448 W
271.75 _
{5'1
CONSERVATION
EASEMENT m
AREA 3
(CC) �n
M�
�1 fi75.775 1767
57 1 675,5862874'
2.211,872.2295
2.211,722.2295'
L -58
L -57
s 81'2,4 29 T w
N 85'35 W
83.02
184.80
f
�
1 58 1 6x5.553 9860'
2.211.520.0236'
1 L -58 I
W 79.36:54' W
79
69.55
1
59 675,4638350 2,211,328.4239'
60 675.451,155F5� Z211.246.3702-1
67 675,465.7746 1 2,211,062.065.^' 1
I L -59
1 L -60 I
1. L -61 1
N 24" E
N 53'05 "48' E
15 2P 53'02' W
237.44
115.81
206.22
x
�
P
ljR
j y
pp
( S GROUND CO OMT 6'5
L -82
N ¢Q°5t'40 E _
2092,41'
00 434A, PO 2791
r
J V. /
N If-
JR , ti �- FEF J DI-37
DEED
L
t At .. I.
NC GEWETre SOWEY 10MMlAENT
REFERENCE TASLE
FROM; 'AVERY 1972' 70: 1CRE£CK 7972'
N- 674.597.7617' N- 674,826.1418'
E- 2,205,479.50%' I E-2.2PY.508.0126'
GM BEAROW GRAD DISTANCE
N s0- '43'53' E _V95..09' (GRrO)
oo
1 r
7// /' D7 4c rK>wA O a rCONSERVA7iQM Am
09 4396, PC 291 r EASEAfEHT . © CMRPSTORMTR K PADER7CK• PROF'€SSIONk LAW 5(#WMR
f NCI, 4189, CWTi`Y 7WT FW5 SURVEY E4 OF ANCINER
AR A 4 CATE00wY- 70 W, AN EXCEPrXAI RT THE DUWToON 01
r
1, V-5.' L -45'89 ol
5'n r/
STATE OF ACMP7H CAROLN4A �CFA457ONP COVHT'Y
y
4 CNRisTaPHER K PAD£RICIC Cih77Fy rmr rHS
PLAY WAS DRAWN UNDER MY SUPERITJCMI FROM AN ALR
SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERV751ON:• (66M DESCRPWN
,,,. -r•- �",T'� ��` OY.�, . '�Y RECORDED IN A61P d AEEO aOOK5' NOTED); WT THE
y�r••Y.. "' - V im, yf �)l� BOLWa4RIES NOT SURVEYED ARE CLEARLY ANBICATED AS 4N41NH
FROM ONFORMT70N REFERENCED HEREON, 7W rW RATA
$SAL OF PRECISKTN AS CALCULATED 15 1: 10, TWT TM6 PLAY
t -� r Y _ A1R° WAS PREPARED !N ACCORDANCE WITH G.S. 47 -JO AS
■r L -57 n L -56 5"F ,4 . 1-1i `. A ;IEN'DED,,OR7�C11�MAL�AY�AIURFr rFA OQA6..
PAUL H. MONYA% JR,
0&&W aWAAW HOWARD
De 43M, PC 291
c� HOWARD RD.
',. NCSR 1937
00" PUBUC R/W (SOIL)
°HER L_, 3
NOTM
1. CtiM'8NN£D FACTOR 5'S 0.9998MPi8.
2. ALL DISTANCES ARE 1KAPIZANrAL GROUND
MEASUREMENTS W FEET A OECLMALS rMNkW,,
LOW-ESS OTHERma NOTED.
3 ACCESS TO EASEMENT swu BE TNROuCH
NEA7450RIH0 DMC7S.
�, ,, MATRIX E''A�..JS� Tu(r.ff PLLC
NO N. QUEEN ST,. SUITE A KINSTON. NC 20601
1EL" 262- 3n -26E10 FAX 252- '312 -4747
FIRM LIC. 1 P -0221 - EMAIL: 9ulveyar6matrixeaet.net
DRAWN BY: CKP PROJECT NO.: 20140058
SURVEYED BY: ALL DATE: 10/20/14
SCALE: V - 150' DRAW6NG NAME: EASEMENT

Appendix B
Baseline Information
Buffalo Branch Baseline Information Table
Buffalo Branch Routine Wetland Data Forms
Buffalo Branch NCDWQ Stream Determination Data Forms
Buffalo Branch Existing Conditions Cross Section Charts
Buffalo Branch NCDWQ Habitat Assessment Forms
Buffalo Branch Channel Stability Assessment Form
Buffalo Branch NCDWR Buffer Determination
Buffalo Branch Correspondence

Project Information
All
Project Name
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Site
County
Johnston
Project Area (acres)
31.6
Project Coordinates (latitude
35° 36'26.312" N
and longitude)
78° 17' 17.923" W
Project Watershed Summa y Information
X
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Neuse River Basin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03020201180050
DWQ Sub -basin
3/4/2006
Project Drainage Area (acres)
570
Project Drainage Area
2
Percentage of Impervious Area
Native vegetation community
CGIALand Use Classification woody wetlands,
emergent herbaceous wetlands, cultivated crops
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
All
A2
A3
B1
B2
Length of reach (linear feet)
1,033
1,043
1,830
534
588
Valley Classification
X
X
X
X
X
Drainage area (acres)
475
516
540
10
20
NCDWQ stream identification
m ixed
Native vegetation community
pasture
34.75
31.75
35.00
22.50
23.50
score
forest
Percent composition of exotic
NCDWQ Water Quality
invasive vegetation
Classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Morphological Description
f
Wetland
(stream type)
G4c
G5c
ES
G5c
G5c
Evolutionary trend
Stage II
Stage II
Stage VI
Stage II
Stage II
0.33 0.1
0.8
0.13
Bb
4.12 0.32 0.35
Underlying mapped soils
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Ra
Seep Seep
Seep
Depression
NoB
Pond Excavated Seep
poorly,
Riverine
Mapped Soil Series Rains
C I
360
X
21
19.50
N/A
G5c
Stage II
Ra
BoA
Drainage class
poorly
poorly
poorly; well poorly
poorly poorly; well
Soil Hydric status
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric Hydric
Slope
0.40%
0.40%
0.25%
0.88%
0.40% 2.50%
FEMA classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
m ixed
Native vegetation community
pasture
pasture
hardwood
pasture
pasture pasture
forest
Percent composition of exotic
invasive vegetation
15
15
20
15
15 10
Wetland Summary Information
f
Wetland
Wetland Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland
Wetland Excavated Excavated
Parameters WI
W2 W3
W4
W5
W6
W7 Pond Seep
Size of Wetland (acres) 0.77
0.33 0.1
0.8
0.13
2.63
4.12 0.32 0.35
Riparian
Wetland Type Seep
Seep Seep
Seep
Depression
Seep
Pond Excavated Seep
Riverine
Mapped Soil Series Rains
Rains Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains
Rains Rains
i
Drainage Class Poorly
Poorly Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly
Poorly Poorly Poorly
Soil Hydric Status Hydric
Hydric Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric
Hydric Hydric Hydric
Flooding
Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater
Source of Hydrology Discharge Discharge Discharge
Groundwater
Discharge
Groundwater
Discharge
Groundwater
Groundwater
Discharge
Groundwater Groundwater
Dischazge Discharge
Discharge
Livestock Livestock
Livestock
Livestock
Hydrologic Impairment compaction compaction
compaction
Livestock
Livestock
Livestock Livestock Livestock
compaction el
Incised channel Incised channel Incised charm
compaction
compaction compaction compaction. compaction
Native vegetation Pasture
Pasture Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Forested Pasture Forested
community
Percent composition of
exotic invasive <5%
<5% <5%
<5%
<5%
<5%
20% <5% 20%
vegetation
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Waters of the United States -
Yes
No
Appendix
Section 404
Waters of the United States -
Yes
No
Appendix
Section 401
Endangered Species Act
Yes
No
Section 4.1.3; Appendix B
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Section 4.1.4; Appendix B
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA) /Coastal Area
No
N/A
N/A
Management Act (CAMA)
FEMAFloodplain Compliance
N/A
N/A
Section 4.4.3; Appendix B
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BA -3 Upland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope ( %): 2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.607900 Long: - 78.293543 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains Sandy Loam NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _/ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓ Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Site is active pasture.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: BA-3 Upland
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B)
6.
W = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 45 20% of total cover:
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes F No W/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
0 = Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Total % Cover of: MUItiDIV bv:
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size:
OBL species x 1 =
1
FACW species x 2 =
2
FAC species x 3 =
3
FACU species x 4 =
4
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Pinus taeda
5 Yes FAC
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.0'
2 Rosa multiflora
5 Yes FACU
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
3.
4.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
5,
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
6.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
10 = Total Cover
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of total cover: 5
20% of total cover: 2
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 foot radius )
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Cynodon dactylon
70 Yes FACU
Sapling —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2 Eupatorium capillifolium
20 Yes FACU
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
4,
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
8.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
10.
11.
W = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 45 20% of total cover:
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes F No W/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
0 -3 10 YR 4/2
3 -12 10 YR 7/1 95
12 -24 10 YR 5/1 95
Sampling Point: BA -3 Upland
depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc` Texture Remarks
SL
10 YR 5/8 5 C PL SCL
10 YR 6/1 5 C M SCL
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
11
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BA -3 Wetland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope ( %): 2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.607900 Long: - 78.293543 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains Sandy Loam NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _/ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
Site is active pasture.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V/ No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: BA -3 wetland
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B)
6.
iuu = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 50 20% of total cover: 20
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation n
20% of total cover: Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
0
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Total % Cover of: MUItiDIV bv:
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size:
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
1
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species 2 x 3= 6
2
FACU species 92 x 4 = 368
3
4
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 104 (A) 384 (B)
5
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.7
0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Pinus taeda
2
Yes
FAC
0 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.0'
2 Rosa multiflora
2
Yes
FACU
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
3.
4.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
5,
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
6.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
4
= Total Cover
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of total cover: 2
20% of total cover:
0.8
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 foot radius )
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Cynodon dactylon
70
Yes
FACU
Sapling —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2 Eupatorium capillifolium
20
Yes
FACU
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3 Juncus effusus
5
No
OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
q Carex stipata
5
No
OBL
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
8•
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
10.
11.
iuu = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 50 20% of total cover: 20
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation n
20% of total cover: Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: BA -3 Wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc` Texture Remarks
0 -6 10 YR 5/1 95 10 YR 5/8 5 C PL CL
6 -24 10 YR 6/1 60 10 YR 5/1 40 C M SC
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
✓ Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BE 5- Upland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope ( %): 2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.605143 Long: - 78.292401 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains Sandy Loam NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _/ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓ Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Site is active pasture.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3) ✓
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches): 6 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: BE 5- Upland
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B)
6.
cu = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes F No W/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
0 = Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Total % Cover of: MUItiDIV bv:
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size:
OBL species x 1 =
1
FACW species x 2 =
2
FAC species x 3 =
3
FACU species x 4 =
4
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Pinus taeda
5 Yes FAC
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.0'
2.
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
4•
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
5,
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
6.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5 = Total Cover
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 foot radius )
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Cynodon dactylon
70 Yes FACU
Sapling —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2 Eupatorium capillifolium
5 No FACU
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3 Juncus effusus
5 No OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4,
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
8.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
10.
11.
cu = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes F No W/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

SOIL
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Sampling Point: BE 5- Upland
Profile Description: (Describe
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Redox Features
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc`
Texture Remarks
0 -5
10 YR 5/3
100
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
SL
5 -15
10 YR 5/3
95
10 YR 4/2 10 C M
SL
15 -20
10 YR 2/1
80
10 YR 4/2 20 C M
SL
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 15013)
✓ Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
11
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BE 5- Wetland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope ( %): 2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.605143 Long: - 78.292401 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains Sandy Loam NWI classification: none
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _/ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
Site is active pasture.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3) ✓
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V/ No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: BE 5- Wetland
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B)
6.
bb = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation n
20% of total cover: Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
0
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Total % Cover of: MUItiDIV bv:
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size:
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
1
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species 5 x 3 = 15
2
FACU species 75 x 4 = 300
3
4
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 90 (A) 325 (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.6
0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Pinus taeda
5
Yes FAC
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.0'
2.
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
4•
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
5,
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
6.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5
= Total Cover
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 foot radius )
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Cynodon dactylon
70
Yes FACU
Sapling —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2 Eupatorium capillifolium
5
No FACU
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3 Juncus effusus
5
No OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
q Carex stipata
5
No OBL
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
8.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
10.
11.
bb = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation n
20% of total cover: Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: BE 5- Wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc` Texture Remarks
0 -4 10 YR 4/2 100 LS
4 -24 10 YR 2/1 95 10 YR 4/2 5 C M SCL
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
✓ Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BJ -3 Upland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Riverine Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): nearly level Slope ( %): <1 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.605376 Long: - 78.287166 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb Sandy Loam NWI classification: Freshwater Forested /Shrub Wetland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes _/ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ Y/ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓ Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: BJ -3 Upland
50% of total cover: 35
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
2 Quercus nigra
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover: 10
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1 Pteridium aquilinum
2 Arundinaria gigantea
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 10
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2 Vitis rotundifolia
3.
4.
5.
70
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
_ 20% of total cover: 12
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
FACW species x 2 =
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
60
Yes FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4
(A)
2 Quercus nigra
10
No FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 20% of total cover:
Total Number of Dominant
3.
15 Yes FACU
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.01
Species Across All Strata: 6
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66
(A/B)
6.
50% of total cover: 35
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
2 Quercus nigra
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover: 10
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1 Pteridium aquilinum
2 Arundinaria gigantea
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 10
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2 Vitis rotundifolia
3.
4.
5.
70
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
_ 20% of total cover: 12
Total % Cover of: MultiDIv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 20% of total cover:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
15 Yes FACU
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.01
5 Yes FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
20 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 4
10 Yes FACU
5 Yes FACW
15 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 4
50 Yes FAC
5 No FAC
05 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 27.5 20% of total cover: 11
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Sampling Point: BJ -3 Upland
Profile Description: (Describe
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Redox Features
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc`
Texture Remarks
0 -4
10 YR 4/2
100
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
SL
4 -12
10 YR 5/3
80
7.5 YR 5/8 20 C M
SCL
12 -20
2.5 Y 6/4
80
10 YR 2/2 20 C M
SCL
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
11
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Buffalo Branch Site City /County: Johnston Sampling Date: 09/23/2014
Applicant /Owner: EBX State: NC Sampling Point: BJ -3 Wetland
Investigator(s): Brian Hockett, Brad Breslow Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Riverine Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): nearly level Slope ( %): <1 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P /MLRA 136 Lat: 35.605376 Long: - 78.287166 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb Sandy Loam NWI classification: Freshwater Forested /Shrub wetland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that aDDly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
✓ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
✓ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
✓ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes V( — No
Depth (inches): 10
Saturation Present? Yes v( No
Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V/ No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Site is forested.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
B,1 -3 wetland
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Quercus nigra
40
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7
(A)
2 Nyssa biflora
20
Yes
OBL
Total Number of Dominant
Liriodendron tuli ifera
3. p
5
NO
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 8
(B)
4 Betula nigra
2
No
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.5
(A/B)
6.
50% of total cover: 33.5
SaDlina Stratum (Plot size
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
1 Nyssa biflora
2 Liriodendron tulipifera
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover: 15
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
1 Arundinaria gigantea
2 Osmunda cinnamomea
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 30
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 foot radius )
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2 Vitis rotundifolia
3.
4.
5.
67 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet:
_ 20% of total cover: 13.4 Total % Cover of: MultiDIv bv:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 20% of total cover: ❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
15 Yes OBL ❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is 153.01
15 Yes FACU ❑ problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
30 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 6
45 Yes FACW
15 Yes FACW
IOU = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 12
20 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
L5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12.5 20% of total cover: 5
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Site is forested.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
Present? Yes • No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Sampling Point: BJ -3 Wetland
Profile Description: (Describe
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Redox Features
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc`
Texture Remarks
0 -3
10 YR 2/2
100
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
CL
3 -15
10 YR 5/1
70
7.5 YR 5/8 30 C M
SCL
15 -25
10 YR 6/1
80
7.5 YR 5/8 20 C M
SCL
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So1ls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
✓ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1536)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
— Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
W1
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2.0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: QI 1 e R I Project/Site:
i I
Evaluator: R I County: ao Vh Vn s�o ,,
Total Points: Stream Determination (circ
Stream is at least intermittent
if 219 orperennial if >30' Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
Latitude: 35, (a0'- Ste( ® M
Longitude: _+t. 9,13 - U70vVf
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= l �+ 1
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
(3")
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
I 0
Cl)
2
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. rife -pool, step -pool,
I 0
i �
2 I
3
ripple -pool seauence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
I 0
1
(1 }
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
1
2�
6. Depositional bars or benches
(1
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
I 1
0
3
8. Headcuts
0
�D
2 I
3
9. Grade control
I M
0.5
I 1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
(`� I
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
4'yes =-3)
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow,
0
1
2 I
3�
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5
I 16
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
I 0
X-C)
1 +
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
I 0.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
I
No = 0
r6s = 3�
C. Biology (Subtotal = .
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
4
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
I Cl'
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
I CO-
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
C-6-5D
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
I 0
I (-0.5%
1
1.5
24. Amphibians -
�- (
0.5
1„
1.5
25. Algae
0
_ Q,5 -_
cl, )
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
ACW = 0.70 OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. Seep. 35 of manual
Notes:
I
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ,' 0 t q Project(Site: g r f � � Latitude: 35, (c0'4 3DI ® N Evaluator: County: jovkvks�o 01 Longitude: - ,4;; aQ% -612ovd
Total Pointe: Stream Determination (Cilglisawa. Other
Stream is at least intermittent 3 , '
if >19or perennial if?30' Ephemeral Intermitten Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = -A4-_)
Absent
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
I 0
ripple -pool sequence
M
1 4. Particle size of stream substrate
1 0
1 5. Active /relict floodplain
0
16. Depositional bars or benches
i (-,0--)
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1 0
1 8. Headcuts
1 0
9. Grade control
1 0
10. Natural valley
1 11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydroloav (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
r�Q._.;)
1 14. Leaf litter
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal = -I,-+-)
1 1
1 18. Fibrous roots in streambed
( 3
1 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
M
1 22. Fish
1 I
1 23. Crayfish
0
24. Amphibians
0
25. Algae
0
26. Wetland plants_ in streambed
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
I Notes:
I
Sketch:
Weak
1
D
LJ
CID�1
1
0.5
0.5
1
1
1
Q�0.5 j
0.5
Moderate 1
2 1
2
2
Strong
3
3
3 1
2 1 3
2 1 C3)
2 3
C-2) 1 3
2 1 3
1 I 1.5
1_ 1.5
es =3)
2
2,
5
1
t �--
iffe5 3_
2
1 1
2
1 1
C1
2 1
1
2 1
0.5
1 1
1 I
1 I
0.5 ({
FACW 0.7;)OBL =1.5 Other =0
C,3
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site: BNate'�E�
I Latitude: 35, aO1 3� ! I -� ® N
R3
Evaluator: County: J0KV\s�o A I Longitude: aQ% -UZo+N
Total Points: Stream Determination (circl Other
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent erenni e.g. Quad Name:
if 2 19 or perennial if a 30" �.....
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =J q )
Absent
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
ripple -pool sequence
j 1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
8. Headcuts
/111)
9. Grade control
Notes:
10. Natural valley
I
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
a artificial ditches are nut rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 4's )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
(0�
14. Leaf litter
j1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
! 3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed�3
-�
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
j 1
22. Fish
e 0
23. Crayfish
0
24. Amphibians
0
25. Algae
ro
26. Wetland plants in streambed
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
Weak
1
1
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
1
1
1
('0.5
Moderate
2
1 3
2 1 U'D
2 _;3
2 3
2 3
3
Stag
m. 3.
3
3
2
2
0.5
1
1
2 1
2 1
2
1 2
0.5 1
0.5 1
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
lies = 3
Other = 0
C3
3
0
1.5
1.5
0 �.
0 1
3 1
3 1
1.5
1.5
15
1.5
I
I
I
I

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
BkHaEo'�rArG -La
Pro'ect/Site: Latitude: 35, &0*;- 3151 ®rc0
�I �- '
Evaluator: County: 5oytY\ S�o Longitude: - -4;; p.Q%312avd
Total Points: Stream Detegr�,,t0atio le one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent ' Ephemeral �IKfermittent rennial e.g. Quad Name:
ift 19 or perennial if? 30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1.5 t
10 Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -cool, step -pool,
Boole -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active /relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
.artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =)
12. Presence of Baseflow
Absent
0
0
0
0
0
el_o___
0
Weak
1
�J
1
1
1
I 1
I 0.5
rNo =0 ,)
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter 1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0
17 Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0 I
21. Aquatic Mollusks
ro
22. Fish
0 I
23. Crayfish
0
24. Amphibians
0
25. Algae
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
1
0.5
0.5
Moderate Strong I
a?) 1 3 1
2 3
2 3
2 I
3
(7-)
3
2
3
2 I
3
2 I
3
1 I
1.5
1 1
1.5
Yes = 3
2 I 3
2 I 3
0.5 I 0
i I 1.5
1.5
(I-es =3 .!
1 1
0
2 0-
0
KID 2
3
1 2
3
0.5 1
1.5
X0.5 1
1.5
5 1
1.5
0.5
FACW = 0.75; 96T-= UD Other = 0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: q i I Project/Site: 8ki+ato r�� Latitude: 35, (00'* SDI ® M
Evaluator: I County: 5onv\54D Longitude: aQ% 317ov✓
Total Points: Stream Determi off I cis one) Other
I
Stream isat least /nteim0 E hemeral iermitte erennial e. Quad Name:
if 19 or if 30* *
? .Cf- P 9'
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
1 1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
1 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
1 5. Active /relict floodplain
1 6. Depositional bars or benches
17. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
110. Natural valley
111. Second or greater order channel
a adificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow
Absent Weak
0 1
0 1
0
1 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria I
14. Leaf litter I 1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1 0
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1 0
1 17. Soil -based evidence of high r table? I No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
1
0
6y)
0
1
1 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
3 1
0
121. Aquatic Mollusks
0
122. Fish
A,? I
0.5
I 0
24. Amphibians
1'ii =0
0
1 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria I
14. Leaf litter I 1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1 0
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1 0
1 17. Soil -based evidence of high r table? I No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
1 2
3
1 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
3 1
0
121. Aquatic Mollusks
1 t
122. Fish
(16-d
1 23. Crayfish
I 0
24. Amphibians
0 I
25. Algae
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. Seep. 35 of manual.
I Notes:
Sketch:
t�
1
0.5
0.5
Moderate
r2
r2
2
2
2
2
1
1
Yes = 3
Strong
3
3 1
3 1
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
1.5
2 3
2 3
0.5 0
1' 1.5
f.% 1.5
eS __= 3 u.�
.
I 1
0
2 I 0--l'
0
1 2
3 1
1 2
3 1
0.5 1 1
1.5 I
(11.5 l I 1 I
1.5
are? 1
1.5
0.5 1
FACW = 0.75; 96L = 1.5 other = 0
I
I

NC DWp_ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site: $�i+ette r3y�y�¢rt
Evaluator: County: Jo \i ,SID
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if 19 or perennial if? 30' ("I /�yy
. s
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active /relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
.artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= _)
12. Presence of Baseflow
Stream Determ (circle one)
Ephemeral r ermittent erennial
Absent
0
0
90
0
0
tee
0
0
Latitude: 35, U01- SM o At
Longitude: aQ%-61Zoo/
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
Weak Moderate
1 f�
2
FM
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria (-OD
14. Leaf litter 1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0
C. Biology (Subtotal= 4, C )
2
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
(0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
I 2
22. Fish
�a --)
23. Crayfish
0
24. Amphibians
0
25. Algae
26. Wetland plants in streambed
'
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
I Notes:
Sketch:
1 1 2
1
0.5
0.5
Yes = 3
2
2
0.5
r'Yes =3�
%-7
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
I 2
0.5
1
0.5
CP
1
0.5
0.5
Yes = 3
2
2
0.5
r'Yes =3�
%-7
2
/11� 1
2
r-1=5 I
1
2
1
2
0.5
1
e-4 >
1 _
s�
1
0.5
1 I.
FACW = 0.75; "L = 1.5) Other = 0
Strong
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
1.5
3
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

Upstream
207
206
205��
c
0
0 204
w
203
Buffalo Branch Reach B1 Cross Section 1 - Run
202
0 5 10 15
t Reach B1
Downstream
20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
40 45 50

Upstream
204
203
Buffalo Branch Reach B1 Cross Section 2 - Run
Downstream
ctf 202 - -
c
0
.@
w
201
200
199
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
--*.--Reach B1 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

c
0
a�
w
Upstream
Buffalo Branch Reach B2 Cross Section 3 - Run
202
201
200
199
198 -
197 Y
196
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Distance (ft)
--*.--Reach B2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Downstream
40 45 50

Upstream
202
201
200
c
199
> 198 •
a�
w
197
WIDE
195
0
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reach B2 Cross Section 4 - Pool
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
--*.--Reach B2 Approx. Bankfull —
35
Floodprone Area
40 45 50

Upstream
199
198
197
° 196
a�
w 195 -
194
193
0 5 10
Buffalo Branch Reach A2 Cross Section 5 - Riffle
15
t Reach A2
20 25
Distance (ft)
Approx. Bankfull
Downstream
30 35 40 45 50
— Floodprone Area

198
197.5
197
196.5
196
c
° 195.5
w
195
WIMIR
194
193.5
193
Upstream
Buffalo Branch Reach A2 Cross Section 6 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
--*--Reach A2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

203
202
201
c
° 200
w 199
198
Upstream
Buffalo Branch Reach C Cross Section 7 - Run
Downstream
197
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
tReach C Approx. Bankfull —
35
Floodprone Area
40 45 50

202
201
200
° 199
.@
w 198
197
Upstream
Buffalo Branch Reach Al Cross Section 8 - Pool
Downstream
196
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
--*.--Reach Al Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

202
201
200
v
c
° 199
a�
w 198
197
196
0
Upstream
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reach Al Cross Section 9 - Riffle
5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance (ft)
--*.--Reach Al Approx. Bankfull —
35 40 45 50
Floodprone Area

M
c
0
a�
w
206
205
204
203
202
201
200
199
198
197
196
Upstream
Buffalo Branch Reach Al Cross Section 10 - Pool
Downstream
0 5
10 15
t Reach Al
20 25
Distance (ft)
Approx. Bankfull
30 35 40 45
Floodprone Area

M
c
0
a�
w
Upstream
206
205
204
203
202
201 = ~�
200
199
Buffalo Branch Reach Al Cross Section 11 - Riffle
198
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40'
Downstream
Distance (ft)
tReach Al Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
45 50

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
11 / 13 Rcvision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
trOTAL SCORE
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream Vi —Al Location/road: R w 1 q 6 (Road Name )County '30 ` Mael
Date 1 /1\ A CC# Basin N to g, Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide IASpecial Study (Describe) JF1 1 ei1fi G�'G
Latitude 60301 Longitude ' 41 :4$312 Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: S %Forest %Residential %Active Pasture __' ",% Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use ❑ Forest ,.Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream (. J- Channel (at top of bank) U .4 Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
Width variable ❑Braided channel Marge river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m) j ► 0J
Flow conditions: ❑High (Normal Mow
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ...............................
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear U(Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES gNO Details
9 Channelized ditch
Deeply incised- steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend 1pChannel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development OSewage smell
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: 4N ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment /grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Weather Conditions: Photos: ON P Pigital 1335mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet - Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel- minimal dredging ................................................. ............................... 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and/or bends beginning to reappear.. 10
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch .......................... 5
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........ 0
larks Subtotal
—L-
11. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and I type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common, or Abundant.
Sticks K Snags/logs -Undercut banks or root mats �- Macrophytes a Leafpacks
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring
A. Substrate types mixed
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
n3
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
15
10
5
3 types present .........................
18
13
8
4
2 types present .........................
17
12
7
3
1 type present ...........................
16
11
C
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and no
fish cover ..............
..............................0
pp __
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal W
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
n3
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
6
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
60
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt/clay/ muck ...................................................................... ...............................
I
Remarks Subtotal 20
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present
Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of loom length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ...............................
to
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ...............................
8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the loom length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ...............................
6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ...............................
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ...............................
4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ............................................................................. ...............................
f 1�
I'
Subtotal
Remarks
?5 Page Total -�
Benthic SOP rim Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
Score
A. Erosion
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders .... ............................... 6
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding .............. ............................... )
4. Massive erosion .............. ............................... .........................0 Erosion Score 3
B. Bank Vegetation
4
1. Mostly mature trees ( >12" DBH) present ............................10
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare....... 7
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ............ 4
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank .......... ............................... 3
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................0 Vegetation Score T
Remarks
Subtotal_(
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ....... ............................... 8
...............
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading .................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
1'4
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near - stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Benthic SOP
Dec. 2013
.A
Appendix 6
Page Total
TOTAL SCORE i
Page 51
Score
Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
3
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
2
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
1
1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
3
3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
0
0
Remarks
Subtotal
Benthic SOP
Dec. 2013
.A
Appendix 6
Page Total
TOTAL SCORE i
Page 51

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
Tvnical Stream Cross-section
Extreme High Water
J'? Normal High Water
Ins' Flow
Stream Width This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
11 /13 Revision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
TOTAL SCORE
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
'1-
Stream v T " A Z- Location/road: PoWv-A Ak (Road Name )County 36NVkS 6V1.
Date q/1 t 11� CC#
Basin [V?A) - Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide Mpecial Study (Describe) i -iC Q -qei,� K
Latitude SS - Wg3oq Longitude —q$, ` 131Z Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/I Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: S %Forest %Residential qS %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use ❑ Forest g Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream 3, q Channel (at top of bank) 4 9 Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m) jM 0.1
Flow conditions: ❑High Normal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ............................... ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear CAlightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES )kMO Details
JqChannelized ditch
❑Deeply incised - steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
[Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization:1AI ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Weather Conditions: ✓^ M4 Photos: ON W ,�Migital 1335mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel- minimal dredging ................................................. ............................... 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and /or bends beginning to reappear.. 10
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch .......................... e
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........ 0
Remarks Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
G Sticks Snags /logs _ Undercut banks or root mats Z_Macrophytes Leafpacks
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
Score
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
15
10
5
3 types present .........................
18
13
8
4
2 types present .........................
17
12
7
3
1 type present ...........................
16
V
6
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and no fish cover .............. ..............................0
D No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
M)
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
cf:>
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt/clay/ muck ...................................................................... ...............................
1
Remarks Subtotal-?=O
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ...............................
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ............................... �4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ........................................................................... ............................... (W
Subtotal
Remarks
Page Total ` v
Benthic SOP Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
A. Erosion
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders .... ...............................
6
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding .............. ..............................a)
3
4. Massive erosion ....................................... ...............................
0 Erosion Score
B. Bank Vegetation
1. Mostly mature trees ( >12" DBH) present ............................10
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare ......
GV
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ............
4
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank ........... ..............................3
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................0 Vegetation Score
Remarks
Subtotal /D
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading .................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near- stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ............................... 5 5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ............................... 4 4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ............................... 3 3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ............................... 2 2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ............................... 4 4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ............................... 3 3
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ............................... 2 2
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ............................... 1 1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ............................... 3 3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ............................... 2 2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ............................... 1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ............................... C�
Remarks Subtotal O
Page Total /
TOTAL SCORE
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
'-I -- — — - Loser
Bank
Stream Width ----�
This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
11/13 Revision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
TOTAL SCORE
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 104 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream 0 -- A 3 Location/road: 4DW0,,J QA (Road Name
Date q h 114 CC#
Basin %\J &U4'P
)County , ti rs�o h
Subbasin
Observer(s)� Type of Study: ❑Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide Special Study (Describe) M
Latitude 3S • &L-J_$qLLongitude '-I%, 2SQ,131 Z Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/l Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: �5 %Forest %Residential - %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use PtForest JWAgriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream 11 (P Channel (at top of bank) 12. 0 Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m) h 0S_
Flow conditions: ❑High ❑Normal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ............................... ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES ❑ NO Details
❑Channelized ditch
❑Deeply incised - steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: ❑N ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Weather Conditions: Photos: ON ❑Y ❑Digital ❑35mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
A. Natural channel- minimal dredging ................................................. ...............................
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and/or bends beginning to reappear..
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch ..........................
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........
Remarks
Score
15
10
5
0
Subtotal 15-
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
C,Sticks L Snags/logs Undercut banks or root mats l- Macrophytes C—Leafpacks
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
Score
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
41—D
10
5
3 types present .........................
18
13
8
4
2 types present .........................
17
12
7
3
1 type present ...........................
16
11
6
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and no fish cover .............. ..............................0
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
d'.i—
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
0
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt/clay/ muck ...................................................................... ...............................
I
Remarks Subtotal ZO
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ...............................
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ............................... 4
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ............................... 4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ............................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
Page Total
Benthic SOP Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
Lft. Bank
A. Erosion
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders ... ............................... 5
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding ........................................... affim r —
4. Massive erosion ....................................... ............................... Erosion Score
B. Bank Vegetation
1. Mostly mature trees (> 12" DBH) present ............................10
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare ....... 7
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ............4
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank ........... ..............................3 to
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................0
Vegetation Score
Remarks
Subtotal /(0
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading .................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
24
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near - stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Page Total <72 Z
TOTAL SCORE 91z
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6
Lft. Bank
Rt. Bank
Score
Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
c. zone width 6-12 meters ........................................ ...............................
2
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
1
1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
3
3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
0
0
Remarks
Subtotal
Page Total <72 Z
TOTAL SCORE 91z
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
Tvnical Stream Cross - section
Extreme High Water
Normal High Water
Normal Flow
Lower
Bank
-c— Upper Bank i
Stream Width This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
11 /13 Revision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
TOTAL SCORE
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream J Sl Location /road: 4-WY 16 (Road Name
Date L?/(l h4 CC#
Basin /1%t Q Se
)County ',TI A 9' V h
Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide Mpecial Study (Describe) Ir 'I
Latitude 3 S. 6aal 309 Longitude T$, 281.92 Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/I Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: %Forest %Residential q r %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use OfForest WAgriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream 1.3 Channel (at top of bank) 1.9 Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m) 0#5'
Flow conditions: ❑High Olormal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ............................... ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear 9 Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES ❑ NO Details
❑Channelized ditch
❑Deeply incised - steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: CAN ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm /levee
Weather Conditions: 5JA rI Photos: ON qY CRUigital ❑35mm
Remarks: t
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel - minimal dredging ................................................. ............................... 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and /or bends beginning to reappear.. X17
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch .......................... 5
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........ 0
Remarks Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
Sticks Snags /logs Undercut banks or root mats
Macrophytes
Leafpacks
15
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR
COVER
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present ................. 20
15
10
5
3 types present ......................... 18
13
8
4
2 types present ......................... 17
12
7
3
1 type present ........................... 16
11
6
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and
no fish cover .............. ..............................0
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal_
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
dT)
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
(Z
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt / clay / muck ...................................................................... ...............................
1
Remarks Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ............................... 4
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ............................... 4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ............................................................................. ...............................
Tubtotal �
Remarks
Page Total 2D
Benthic SOP Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
Score
A. Erosion
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders .... ..............................49
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding ............... ..............................3
4. Massive erosion ....................................... ...............................
0 Erosion Score
B. Bank Vegetation
4
1. Mostly mature trees ( >12" DBH) present ............................10
3
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare ....... 7
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ...........9)
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank ........... ..............................3
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................0 Vegetation Score
Remarks
Subtotal
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 0
E. No canopy and no shading ................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near- stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6
Score
Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
3
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
2
1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
3
3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
0
0
Remarks
Subtotal
Page Total
TOTAL SCORE
l l
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
Tvnical Stream Cross - section
( , , Extreme Ext High Water
Normal High Water
Normal Flow
Lower
Bank
t— Upper Bank —�
Stream Width This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
1 1/13 Revision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
TOTAL SCORE I
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream UT — B 2- Location/road: [4vj `f q( (Road Name )County 3DhhS4Dn
Date q /II /14 CC# Basin V W 54 Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide 0$pecial Study (Describe) M 4,�,a ,44*v%,,
Latitude Longitude
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO
Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
mg/I Conductivity (corr.) gS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: s %Forest %Residential S� %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use EFForest G'Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream 1, 5 Channel (at top of bank) _,p , :1. Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m)
Flow conditions: ❑Highlormal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ...............................
❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................
❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ...............................
❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ...............................
❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ...............................
❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear '0Qightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES ❑ NO Details
❑Channelized ditch
❑Deeply incised - steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: ON ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Weather Conditions: Photos: ON ❑Y ❑Digital 035mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel - minimal dredging ................................................. ............................... 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and /or bends beginning to reappear..
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch ..........................
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........ 0
Remarks Subtotal_
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common, or Abundant.
Sticks Snags/logs Undercut banks or root mats _
_Macrophytes
Leafpacks
15
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR
COVER
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present ................. 20
15
10
5
3 types present ......................... 18
13
8
4
2 types present ......................... 17
12
7
3
1 type present ........................... 16
11
6
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and
no fish cover ..............
..............................0
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
JCP
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt/clay/ muck ...................................................................... ...............................
1
Remarks Subtotal ZO
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ............................... 4
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ............................... 4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ............................................................................. ...............................
Subtotal
Remarks
Page Total
Benthic SOP Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
A. Erosion
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders .... ............................... 6
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding ............... ..............................3
4. Massive erosion ....................................... ............................... 0
B. Bank Vegetation
1. Mostly mature trees ( >12" DBH) present ............................10
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare ....... 7
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ............ 4
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank ........... ..............................3
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................0
Remarks
Erosion Score (0
Vegetation Score If
Subtotal
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ...............................
E. No canopy and no shading .................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks G 2:\
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near - stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6
Score
Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
3
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
2
2
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
3
3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
0
0
Remarks
Subtotal
Page Total `
TOTAL SCORE
l "1
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
Tvuical Stream Cross - section
Extreme High Water
1. - —
Normal High Water
Normal Flow
Lower
Bank
-9- Upper Bank -a"
Stream Width -. This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
11/13 Revision 9
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
rrOTAL SCORE
Biological Assessment Branch, DWR
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right -of -way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream - -A C. Location/road: k cWl 9L(Road Name )County 7301kKS 40n
Date `t h CC# Basin AAOSL Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish ❑Benthos ❑ Basinwide _09pecial Study (Describe) All
Latitude Longitude
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO
Ecoregion: ❑ CA ❑ SWP ❑ Sandhills ❑ CB
mg/I Conductivity (corr.) µS /cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: %Forest %Residential q s %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use (,Forest IR Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream 1, O Channel (at top of bank) b 1 n Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (in)_ 410 Q,9
Flow conditions: ❑High JNormal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ....... ............................... ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25 -75% of available channel, many logs /snags exposed .............. ............................... ❑
D. Root mats out of water ................................................................................... ............................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ...................... ............................... ❑
Turbidity: ❑Clear ❑ Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project ?? ❑ YES ❑ NO Details
❑Channelized ditch
❑Deeply incised - steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
[Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: ❑N ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade- control structure ❑Berm/levee
Weather Conditions: Photos: ❑N ❑Y ❑Digital 035mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK
Benthic SOP Page 49
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel- minimal dredging ................................................. ............................... 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic ( >20 year old), and/or bends beginning to reappear.. 10
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch .......................... J5__
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone........ 0
Remarks Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
Sticks Snags/logs Undercut banks or root mats
Macrophytes _
_Leafpacks
15
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR
COVER
>50%
30 -50%
10 -30%
<10%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present ................. 20
15
10
5
3 types present ......................... 18
13
8
4
2 types present ......................... 17
12
7
3
1 type present ........................... 16
11
6
2
No substrate for benthos colonization and
no fish cover .............. ..............................0
0 No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal 0
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed
Score
1. gravel dominant .................................................................................... ...............................
15
2. sand dominant ...................................................................................... ...............................
4:D
3. detritus dominant ................................................................................. ...............................
7
4. silt/clay /muck dominant ...................................................................... ...............................
4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel ................................................................................... ...............................
12
2. nearly all sand ..................................................................................... ...............................
17:)
3. nearly all detritus ................................................................................. ...............................
4
4. nearly all silt/clay/ muck ...................................................................... ...............................
1
Remarks Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent ( >30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) ............................. ............................... 8
2. Pools Infrequent ( <30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ................................................................................ ............................... 6
b. pools about the same size ........................................................................ ............................... 4
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water /run habitat present ............................................................................. ............................... 4
2. Deep water /run habitat absent ............................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal
Remarks
Page Total I?
Benthic SOP Page 50
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
A. Erosion
1. No, or very little, erosion present ............ .............................10
2. Erosion mostly at outside of meanders .... ............................... 6
3. Less than 50% of banks eroding ............... ..............................3
4. Massive erosion ....................................... ............................... 0
B. Bank Vegetation
1. Mostly mature trees (> 12" DBH) present ............................10
2. Mostly small trees ( <12" DBH) present, large trees rare ....... 7
3. No trees on bank, can have some shrubs and grasses ............ 4
4. Mostly grasses or mosses on bank ........... ..............................3
5. Little or no bank vegetation, bare soil everywhere ................ 0
Remarks
Erosion Score Ill
Vegetation Score '4
Subtotal 14
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............. ............................... 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...................... ............................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ...... ............................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ........................ ............................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading .................................................................................. ............................... 0
Subtotal O
Remarks
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near- stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters ...................................................... ...............................
5
5
2. zone width 12 -18 meters .................................................... ...............................
4
4
3. zone width 6 -12 meters ...................................................... ...............................
3
3
4. zone width < 6 meters ....................................................... ...............................
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
4
4
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ........................................ ...............................
3
3
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
2
2
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
1
1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters .......................................... ...............................
3
3
b. zone width 12 -18 meters ....................................... ...............................
2
2
c. zone width 6 -12 meters ........................................ ...............................
1
1
d. zone width < 6 meters .......................................... ...............................
kv>
Remarks
Subtotal
Page Total f I
TOTAL SCORE Z b
Z (p
Benthic SOP Page 51
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

Appendix 6. Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet — Coastal Plain Streams
Tvvical Stream Cross-section
Extreme High Water
..
g
Normal High Water
gab Normal Flow
Stream Width -._ This side is 45° bank angle.
Benthic SOP Page 52
Dec. 2013 Appendix 6

CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT FORM
Stability Indicator
Excellent (1 -3 )
Good (4 - 6)
Fair (7 - 9)
Poor 110 - 12) Score
1. Watershed and flood plain
Stable, forested, undisturbed
Occasional minor disturbances in the
Frequent disturbances in the
Continual disturbances in the
activity and characteristics
watershed
watershed, including cattle activity
watershed, including cattle activity,
watershed. Significant rattle activity,
(grazing and /or access to stream),
landslides, channel sand or gravel
landslides, channel sand or gravel
construction, logging, or other minor
mining, logging, farming, or
mining, logging, farming, or
deforestation. Limited agricultural
construction of buildings, roads, or
construction of buildings, roads, or
activities
other infrastructure. Urbanization over
other infrastructure. Highly urbanized
significant portion of watershed
or rapidly urbanizing watershed
2. Flow habit
Perennial stream with no flashy
Perennial stream or ephemeral first-
Perennial or intermittent stream with
Extremely flashy; flash floods prevalent
behavior
order stream with slightly increased
flashy behavior
mode of discharge; ephemeral stream
rate of flooding
other than first -order stream
3. Channel pattern
Straight to meandering with low
Meandering, moderate radius of
Meandering with some braiding;
Braided; primarily bed load; engineered
radius of curvature; primarily
curvature; mix of suspended and bed tortuous meandering; primarily bed
channel that is maintained
suspended load
loads; well- maintained engineered
load; poorly maintained engineered
channel
channel
3. Channel pattern (revised)
No evidence of channelization.
Appears to have previously been
Appears to have previously been
Appears to have previously been
Meandering, stable channel or
channelized. Stream is relatively
channelized. Stream is actively
channelized. Stream is actively
straight (step -pool system, narrow
stable. Channel has some meanders
adjusting (meandering); localized
adjusting (laterally and /or vertically)
valley), stable channel.
due to previous channel adjustment.
areas of instability and /or erosion
with few bends. Straight, unstable
around bends. Straightened, stable
reach.
channel.
4. Entrenchment/ channel
Active flood plain exists at top of
Active flood plain abandoned, but is
Moderate confinement in valley or
Knickpoints visible downstream;
confinement
banks; no sign of undercutting
currently rebuilding; minimal channel
channel walls; some exposure of
exposed water lines or other
infrastructure; no levees
confinement; infrastructure not
infrastructure; terraces exist; flood
infrastructure; channel- width -to- top -of-
exposed; levees are low and set well
plain abandoned; levees are moderate
banks ration small; deeply confined; no
back from the river
in size and have minimal setback from
active flood plain; levees are high and
the river
along the channel edge
5. Bed materia
Assorted sized tightly packed,
Moderately packed with some
Loose assortment with no apparent
Very loose assortment with no packing.
Fs = approximate portion of
overlapping, and possibly imbricated.
overlapping. Very small amounts of
overlap. Small to medium amounts of
Large amounts of material < 4 mm. Fs
sand in the bed
Most material > 4 mm. Fs < 20%
material < 4 mm. 20 < Fs < 50%
material < 4 mm. 50 < Fs < 70%
> 70
6. Bar development
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars are For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bars
For S < 0.02 and w/y > 12, bar widths
Bar widths are generally greater than
mature, narrow relative to stream
may have vegetation and /or be
tend to be wide and composed of
1/2 the stream width at low flow. Bars
width at low flow, well - vegetated,
composed of coarse gravel to
newly deposited coarse sand to small
are composed of extensive deposits of
and composed of coarse gravel to
cobbles, but minimal recent growth of
cobbles and /or may be sparsely
fine particles up to coarse gravel with
cobbles. For S > 0.02 and w/y are <
bar evident by lack of vegetation
vegetated. Bars forming for S > 0.02
little to no vegetation. No bars for S <
12, no bars are evident
on portions of the bar. For S > 0.02
and w/y < 12
0.02 and w/y > 12
and w/y <12, no bars are evident
7. Obstructions, including
Rare or not present
Occasional, causing cross currents
Moderately frequent and occasionally
Frequent and often unstable, causing a
bedrock outcrops, armor layer,
and minor bank and bottom erosion
unstable obstructions, cause
continual shift of sediment and flow.
LWD jams, grade control, bridge
noticeable erosion of the channel.
Traps are easily filled, causing channel
bed paving, revetments, dikes
Considerable sediment accumulation
to migrate and /or widen
or vanes, riprap
behind obstructions
8. Bank soil texture and
Clay and silty clay; cohesive material
Clay loam to sandy clay loam; minor
Sandy clay to sandy loam;
Loamy sand to sand; noncohesive
coherence
amounts of noncohesive or
unconsolidated mixtures of glacial or
material; unconsolidated mixtures of
unconsolidated mixtures; layers may
other materials; small layers and
glacial or other materials; layers of
exist, but are cohesive materials
lenses of noncohesive or
lenses that include noncohesive sands
unconsolidated mixtures
and gravels
9. Average bank slope angle
Bank slopes < 3H:1 V (18 °) for
Bank slopes up to 2H:1 V (27 °) in
Bank slopes to 1 H:1 V (45 °) in
Bank slopes over 45° in noncohesive
(where 90° is a vertical bank)
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
noncohesive or unconsolidated
or unconsolidated materials or over 60°
materials to < 1:1 (45 °) in clays on
materials to 0.8:1 (50 °) in clays on
materials to 0.6:1 (60 °) in clays
in clays common on one or both banks
both sides
one or occasionally both banks
common on one or both banks
10. Vegetative or engineered
Wide band of woody vegetation with
Medium band of woody vegetation
Small band of woody vegetation with
Woody vegetation band may vary
bank protection
at least 90% density and cover.
with 70-90% plant density and cover.
50-70% plant density and cover. A
depending on age and health with less
Primarily hard wood, leafy,
A majority of hard wood, leafy,
majority of soft wood, piney,
than 50% plant density and cover.
deciduous trees with mature,
deciduous trees with maturing,
coniferous trees with young or old
Primarily softwood, piney, coniferous
healthy, and diverse vegetation
diverse vegetation located on the
vegetation lacking in diversity located
trees with very young, old and dying,
located on the bank. Woody
bank. Wood vegetation oriented 80-
on or near the top of bank. Woody
and /or monostand vegetation located
vegetation oriented vertically. In
90% from horizontal with minimal
vegetation oriented at 70-80% from
off of the bank. Woody vegetation
absence of vegetation, both banks
root exposure. Partial lining or
horizontal, often with evident root
oriented at less than 70% from
are lined or heavily armored
armoring of one or both banks
exposure. No lining of banks, but
horizontal with extensive root
some armoring may be in place on
exposure. No lining or armoring of
one bank
banks
11. Bank cutting
Little or none evident. Infrequent raw Some intermittently along channel
Significant and frequent on both
Almost continuous cuts on both banks,
banks, insignificant percentage of
bends and at prominent
banks. Raw banks comprise large
some extending over most of the
total bank
constrictions. Raw banks comprise
portion of bank in vertical direction.
banks. Undercutting and sod -root
minor portion of bank in vertical
Root mat overhangs
overhangs
direction
12. Mass wasting or bank No or little evidence of potential or Evidence of infrequent and /or minor Evidence of frequent and /or significant Frequent and extensive mass wasting.
failure very small amounts of mass wasting. mass wasting. Mostly healed over occurrences of mass wasting that can The potential for bank failure, as
Uniform channel width over the with vegetation. Relatively constant be aggravated by higher flows, which evidenced by tension cracks, massive
entire reach channel width and minimal scalloping may cause undercutting and mass undercuttings, and bank slumping is
of banks wasting of unstable banks. Channel considerable. Channel width is highly
width quite irregular, and scalloping of irregular, and banks are scalloped
banks is evident
13. Upstream distance to bridge More than 35 m; bridge is well- 20 -35 m; bridge is aligned with flow 10 -20 m; bridge is skewed to flow, or Less than 10 m; bridge is poorly
from meander impact point and aligned with river flow flow alignment is otherwise not aligned with flow
alignment centered beneath bridge
H = horizontal, V = vertical, Fs = (raction of sand, S = slope, w/y = width -to -depth ratio
Total Score

4,
PWA
A4#
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
EBX Neuse I, LLC
David Godley, EBX
909 Capability Dr Suite 3100
Raleigh, NC 27606
Determination Type:
Buffer Call
January 8, 2015
Isolated or EIP Call
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Subject: Buffer Determination
NBRRO# 14-475
Johnston County
® Neuse (15A NCAC 2B.0233)
[3 Tar - Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0259) ❑ Ephemeral /Intermittent/Perennial Determination
El Jordan (1 E] 5A NCAC 2B .0267) Isolated Wetland Determination
Project Name: Buffalo Branch Mitigation Bank
Location/Directions: Property is located at the NE quadrant of HWY 96 and Little Divine Rd.
Intersection in Johnston County, NC
Subject Stream: Buffalo Creek
Determination Date: December 19, 2014 Staff: James Graham
Feature/Flag Not
Subject
To
Buffers
A
B
C
Subject E /UP* Start@ Stop@
To
Buffers
Soil USGS
Survey Topo
X P X
X I X
X I X
(Modified Natural
Stream)
*E /I /P - Ephemeral /Intermittent/Perennial
F.
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked
"Not Subject" has been determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. TINge may be
NUrallb, Carolina
North Carolina Division of Water Resources 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 -1628 Phone [phone]
Internet: www.ncwaterqualitv.orq Location: 3800 Barrett Drive Raleigh, NC 27609 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled /10% Post Consumer Paper

Buffalo Branch
January 8, 2015
Page 2 of 2
considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water Resources
(DWR).
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that
dispute a determination made by the DWR or Delegated Local Authority may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter or from the date the affected
party (including downstream and /or adjacent owners) is notified of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Karen Higgins, DWR WeBSCaPe Unit, 1650 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, you ask for a hearing or appeal within sixty (60)
days.
The owner /future owners should notify the Division of Water Resources (including any other Local, State, and
Federal Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding the subject property (stated
above). This project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be
directed to the Division of Water Resources (Central Office) at (919)- 807 -6300, and the US Army Corp of Engineers
(Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at (919) - 5544884.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact James Graham at [phone].
Respec fully,
Danny Smith Supervisor
Water Quali Section
Raleigh Regional Office
cc: RRO /SWP File Copy
Daniel Ingram
WK Dickson_
720 Corporate Center Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27607

_. • -, �„14� :. #,e,i„1 {Iii 4� 1 1! ✓ ydlf� n n I"'.
, {rA •�'a'. •..32 x,e 4. ya
'ikll
J1 °° l•'� e'b1'.'> 'Y.;,t x�".'kr_�' 4 ?'�ih '�a° .�' '' a
'4 e5: 'LN �i ;! .aS ]°." ��a 1. tY•„ t
.,e.:." ,z�s: �, iRe �^`�,�, � ��. "'' 'e � e..•4 'IF•y, ' ak '�f' " r"'"�i, _ i.
�F {
��]-•Y^+ -. ..Ik+? a � { v. L-?�- .Y�"`� "� _ �5, ..•.�„�*���� I.r .. t.. � }'y"'i.' -�s ,.�i r. � t� �� . ;,:
N0RTH4TR
•'S4 : n il^ Y d. �:+ F " 3i�'�i. °=ri ��.,�,;, e '�' • �f 3r a i l .4 _ „�� -. '' ?
f �IS i y s it f:8` �• .'i ^- '4,. I .'g'.1.'r Y �i
• i • .� �kf• f7�`"`'1. =,., >•, ;,ya^�• s n
r r
� �t ` 7 .7 3' .•fix: y P
� •`, •�jl• �t'." -s �� � ��4 ��,�Y� a } =r•r' '� y. -' \ t..af ' '`� r � � z kj
Ra
WT
� _' f �'� +,.. J/ {V�+� � , , �t�+.r. Fr ., %, � � y "kS.K . dz, .. '1`• J.S '� z �"�'Lri ;•rrs,. ���"y� . 7 n �•�r = -
_,�"' _ F�'�rP �•a j� T .. � •�'�_`'�.'�' i x '�•��' �y .s;.� e i i• .� ..t • "c� � ^'�1'�* r 'fl
tg�� • L• •i ._- 3•L�'SY`'ii:: v� .iT:::' F= f • r -M `.iii }a ��..•, +•' f` 1� f ,3.�r.y
'�jj�
t�" 1 3 ' 7i'' �„ Fi �" a • '�'� r a.p' 1 �P¢ r • • �) r ;� '(' <.��,. E
,;r�r's+• -, � Is M ,� �,r(x.� L yY.-., '� r��� � ...� , ... � �- y,,-•-
'
` x tF .S'J' k I ' >t9 � �"�� �`y I , .F rv} i• ¢CYy �.• 1 �"•`�p`es
.z
UPC
•.'� -f rt s'ar� 1 iti• <Gr 5 SW I4 u. f k+ • "�4`
.1F _ a � �� , k y, J •
• :$ ;.'a�" -, fir, ° �x+ • ,t! ��yt} � � ,
J „E e.f•z n ,d r } Rte} 1' � j �^ bry'
• xsl. �.. 1• -, f '�yFl F E Y t, Y
` T
JF
Krl�n, fif�1�. .�! SiR� � � ��,��, 1 • 4 - ���� A� f � � •2 4
Soil Symbol Name Soil Symbol Name
Bb Bibb sandy loam, frequently flooded MaB Marlboro sandy loam, 2 - 8% slopes
BoA Bonneau sand, 0 - 3% slopes NoA Norfolk loamy sand, 0 - 2% slopes ••.�.`'
CoB Ccwartsloamy sand, 2 - 6% slopes NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 2 - 6% slopes •�
GeB Gilead sandy loam, 2 - 8% slopes PaE Pacolet loam, 15 - 25 1,b slopes
GeD Gilead sandy loam, 8 - 15% slopes Ra Rains sandy loam
GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 - 2% slopes Tn Toisnot loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam Wt Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
MaA Marlboro sandy loam, 0 - 2% slopes Source: NRCS Soil Data,,'Johnston,County
1
. .... ..._ ............. �� Figure 5. .,
© v � .. a Roads
� Soils Map .� � � X�` ,
Buffalo Branch Buffer /Nutrient Off'se't Nte 4, Proposed Easement
0 250 500 1,000 Existing Streams
Feet
Johnston County Soils
1 inch = 500 feet

J
it
Y
tit �, wi• � �� « � e��"d: ` � �:e � / I/ 1rii� ..� j
r �� .fie` � � 'y E d ''�r � .� a��E: r : '` N. . t�' a ,J •�
�'•' �rff' .✓ ��w a`b t ^. w'L'w s.:3k ,r�t'►a. F"^+t `• . {. �r
..� -!�7• f`'�F ��~ �.� / ♦t' s .a ' � `r *. }� J�N�y a ;vt •...,t � M
� r N�,. .(+�' , J i� ��,' y ) •dye a ✓, �..:l. •F .t +..w ^'r, F• �'�► `
Wit• � t C�,�\�.'r Z; .l Aaw s��� .- .s+.�� i� �� •'
y�r"rt -i.:�, . _ _ ? i�:4t i • f4 /"' _ , r 'd• f •y ► 1 tp, 0- _
�. ...,..,.,tom ~ �et �I�- , _ `'�•ys'wz �' ��i � � iii$. • ° "' I lti
��•��"'G't •t ��. � ,r.r• �.� l�'rt ej r 7 � Fj
x.,.q4 a �• , � _ iuy r• � � l.+Wr ♦ �.� r � ': � ,'�f�� ' di,,• • \`y *s
C> WAF t L
4.
^•• ♦ ssa °� it rt
i
mss+'
r�.ro« -
��
CAW
IMP
Drainage Area- 539 acres
t ,,�''.+5',,I�6 •ia►.�. •T _ _ i . y
pp �p '.r',4 � , m • R • •Q It
it
V r. - - �•yp °T'4 ,``�^�'. -�4 r"' s:fiA VU.t3��• • • ... • 4
t K�{ frog s a • r •
Is
Ch
Source:' Selma .Quadranglea�° ; ..;� �' �j -x €co righ2013 National Gec�graph�c Society, i -cubed
;now&
• f �f
Figure 2."
USGS Topographic Map
`Buffalo Branch Buffer /Nutrient Offset Site Proposed Easement
jr
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 1. Drainage area
Feet
1 inch = 2,000 feet

Correspondence

iftwl<
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
October 6, 2014
Vann Stancil
Habitat Conservation Biologist
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
215 Jerusalem Church Road
Kenly, NC 27542
Subject: Project Scoping for Buffalo Branch Site Stream Mitigation Project in Johnston County.
Dear Mr. Stancil,
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge
with respect to fish and wildlife associated with a potential stream restoration project on the attached
site (USGS site maps with approximate property lines and areas of potential ground disturbance are
enclosed). The Buffalo Branch site has been identified by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC to
provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the EBX Neu -Con Umbrella
Mitigation Bank. This site is currently active cattle pastures and bottomland hardwood swamps
surrounding unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. The stream channels have been straightened and
channelized.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the comment to
my attention at the address below. Please feel free to contact me at dingram @wkdickson.com with any
questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Daniel Ingram
Enclosures
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com
Transportation • Water Resources • Urban Development • Geomatics

lftWK
RVDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
October 6, 2014
Renee Gledhill - Earley
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 -4617
Subject: Environmental Review for Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Project in Johnston County.
Dear Ms. Gledhill - Earley,
The Buffalo Branch Site has been identified by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts through the EBX Neu -Con
Umbrella Mitigation Bank. This site is currently active cattle pasture and bottomland hardwood
swamps surrounding unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. The stream channels have been
straightened and channelized.
WK Dickson requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
archaeological or cultural resources associated with a potential stream restoration project on the
Buffalo Branch site (a vicinity and USGS site map with approximate limits of conservation easement is
attached).
An adjacent cemetery located at the intersection of Howard Road and Little Divine Road is present;
however, no impacts or encroachment is anticipated from restoration activities. The proposed
conservation easement will remain on project property to avoid any disturbance around the cemetery
parcel. No additional architectural structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted
during preliminary surveys of the site for restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of the site has
historically been disturbed due to agricultural practices and channel modifications.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence of any
historic properties. We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may
return the comment to my attention at the address below. Please feel free to contact me at
dingram @wkdickson.com with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site
disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Daniel Ingram
Enclosures
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com Transportation • Water Resources • Urban Development • Geomatics

iftwl<
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
October 6, 2014
Mr. Pete Benjamin
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636 -3726
Subject: Project Scoping for Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Project in Johnston County.
Dear Mr. Benjamin,
The Buffalo Branch site has been identified by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC to provide
compensatory mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts through the EBX Neu -Con Umbrella
Mitigation Bank. This site is currently active cattle pasture and bottomland hardwood swamps
surrounding unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. Some of the stream channels have been
straightened and channelized.
THE US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (http: / /www.fws.gov /endangered /) lists four
endangered species for Johnston County, North Carolina: Red - cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis), Tar River spinymussel (Eliptio steinstansana), dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon),
and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). We have determined that no suitable habitat for the listed
species' exists within the proposed project boundary.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered
species, migratory birds, or other trust resources from the construction of a stream restoration project
on the subject property. Maps showing the location and approximate limits of the conservation
easement are enclosed.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the comment to
my attention at the address below. Please feel free to contact me at dingramgawkdickson.com with any
questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Daniel Ingram
Enclosures
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com Transportation • Water Resources • Urban Development • Geomatics

From: Stancil, Vann F [ mailto :vann.stancil @ncwildlife.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 2:13 PM
To: Daniel Ingram
Subject: Buffalo Branch Mitigation Project
Mr. Ingram,
I'm responding to your request far issues related to fish and wildlife that may arise from the stream
restoration project on unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek in Johnston Co. I have reviewed your
letter and attached maps and do not anticipates any fish and wildlife concerns from this project.
This appears to be a good location for a restoration project. Thanks for the opportunity to review
this.
Vann F. Stancil - Special Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
215 Jerusalem Church Road
Kenly, NC 27542
919 -284 -5218
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.G. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
October 21, 2014
David Ingram
WK Dickson 8c Company, Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Re: Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, Johnston County, ER 142334
Dear Mr. Ingram:
Thank you for your letter of October 6, 2014, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and Ubs'tory
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579 or
environmental .reviewna.ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
��L Q t
✓Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 Bast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

IRT Pre - Prospectus Site Visit
Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation Bank
Neu -Con Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Johnston County, NC Neuse River Basin
Wednesday, July 301h 2014
Attendance: Bill Biddlecome (USACE)
Todd Tugwell (USACE)
Eric Kulz (NCDWR)
Emily Jernigan (USFWS)
Ely Perry (EBX Neuse)
Burt Rudolph (EBX Neuse)
David Godley (EBX Neuse)
Aaron Speaks (EBX Neuse)
Notes
• For the Hydrologic Restoration and Enhancement on Reach Al and A2 the focus should be on
functional uplift. Pre - Construction data would likely be needed to support success criteria on
these reaches. There was concern with the Hydrologic Enhancement portions and how adding
30 acres of drainage area was really enhancing the already jurisdictional feature enough to
justify a 1:1.5 mitigation ratio. EBX emphasized the increased drainage area will enhance the
adjacent wetlands which will in -turn provide longer /sustained flow in the channel which should
improve the DO and temperature in the water providing more suitable habitat for benthics and
other aquatic species. Its possible EBX Neuse might recommend receiving stream credit for
restoring /enhancing hydrology to wetlands /prior converted wetlands adjacent to the stream.
Reach Al and A2 would need to have flow for 30 consecutive days with ordinary high water
marks, stream sorting, and wrack lines. We need to answer how the upstream work enhances
the downstream hydrology.
• There was some concern that the head of Reach Al might not be a stream but rather a ditched
Rains Flat. EBX and its consultant, WK Dickson are confident that the feature is a stream which
is supported by Lidar and this topic will be revisited.
• The Buffer Enhancement showed on Figure 7 on the west side of Reach Al is not currently
included in the credit calculations and will not be included in the Prospectus.
• There is a shallow pond south of Reach A2 and west of Howard Rd that drains into A2 that may
be included in the Prospectus. There is a channelized feature north of A2 and east of Howard
Rd. that may be included in the Prospectus. The IRT stated simply buffering this feature would

not be an ideal mitigation solution and that the bed of this channel should be raised to provide
functional uplift if it is to be included.
• Why is there not a Reach B?
Reach C1 will receive a multiplier of 10% if EBX Neuse decides to buffer and protect the linear
wetland feature north of Little Divine Rd. that drains into Reach C1 approximately 100 LF
downstream of Hwy 96 on the left bank. Buffering this feature will greatly improve the
functional uplift of Reach C1 and the receiving waters. Credit for Buffer Restoration will not be
given within 50 LF of the feature as it enters Reach C1.
• The IRT commented that on Reach C2 downstream /east of Howard Rd they do not currently
support a mitigation credit ratio of 1:2.5 for the Enhancement II of fencing, planting and invasive
control as needed. Cattle have access to the stream in this reach and it will steadily degrade
over time as they access it for drinking and to cool themselves. EBX will be pursuing an
alternate action plan /mitigation credit ratio to remedy this situation with the IRT and the
landowner before stream conditions deteriorate.
• Call all of Reach E1 Enhancement II and don't specify "Headwater" it's still a 1:2.5 mitigation
ratio and shouldn't be differentiated in the credit table or on the maps.
• EBX Neuse will be in discussion with NCDOT on potential culvert replacements on Howard Rd.
and a culvert replacement or at least a clean out of the culverts at the intersection of Little
Divine Rd and Hwy 96.
The IRT recommends EBX Neuse submit a Prospectus and continue to pursue the site but revisit
Reaches Al, A2, as well as the portion of C2 downstream of Howard Rd., and C3.

- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Biddlecome, William J SAW [mailto: William .J.Biddlecome @usace.armv.mill
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 12:43 PM
To: Daniel Ingram
Cc: Tugwell, Todd SAW
Subject: RE: Buffalo Branch Mitigation Bank credits (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Daniel,
Sorry for the delay in getting back with you on this since I know you originally e- mailed me back on March 6. I've been
out in the field a lot the last couple weeks and I've had a new employee start 2 weeks ago. I have looked at the updated
table you sent with total SMU's based on using the buffer width adjustments guidance we provided to you. That all
looks good and it appears it results in only a decrease of 8 SMU's vs. the original draft proposal (3944 to 3936).
However, Todd and I have discussed your proposal for Reach A3 and we still feel a mitigation ratio of 5:1 is still
appropriate for that reach and not the 4:1 you are proposing. The difference in those ratios would decrease SMU's for
that reach by 92 (458 to 366). So overall with those two changes it would decrease the proposed SMU's for that
mitigation site by 100. Hope this helps you complete your final mitigation plan. If you have questions please contact
me. Thanks!
Bill Biddlecome
Chief, Washington Regulatory Field Office
2407 West 5th Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
(910) 251 -4558
william .i.biddlecome @usace.armv.mil
We at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch are committed to improving service to our customers. We
would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at:
htti3: / /reizulatorv.usacesurvev.com/
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Daniel Ingram [mailto:dinRram @res.us]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:45 PM
To: Biddlecome, William J SAW
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Buffalo Branch Mitigation Bank credits

Appendix C
Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analysis
Buffalo Branch Morphological Parameters
Reference Reach Existing Cross Section and Profile Charts
Buffalo Branch Stable Channel Hydraulic Design Output
HEC -RAS Data Output

Buffalo Branch Morphological Parameters
vattern
Existing'
Design
Reference Reach
Med
- --
---
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Channel Beltwidth (ft) 41.2 43.5
42.3
Al
A2
A3
B1
B2
c
Al
31
A2
Radius of Curvature (ft) 13.1 24.6
Feature
Pool
I Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow I
Pool
Shallow I
Pool
Drainajce Area (ac)
540
- --
475
516
540
10
20
21
475
1.5
516
Meander Wavelenqth (ft) 49.5 64.9
Drainage Area (mil
0.84
- --
0.74
0.81
0.84
0.02
0.03
0.03
96
0.74
96
0.81
3.9
NC Reqional Curve Discharqe (cfs)
- --
14.7
13.4
14.2
14.7
0.8
1.4
1.4
3.3
13.4
5.6
Profile
14.2
NC Regional Curve Discharqe (cfs)
- --
7.7
7.0
7.5
7.7
0.4
0.6
0.7
7.0
Shallow Length (ft) 4.0 19.9
11.5
7.5
- --
Design /Calculated Discharge (cfs)
- --
17
- --
- --
--
- --
- --
- --
23
14
13.6
- --
15
- --
Dimension
- --
- --
7
36
7
36
Pool Length (ft) 6.9 21.6
17.1
- --
- --
- --
- --
BF Width (ft)
8.5
10.9
9.8
19.3
12.3
11.3
5.4
5.4
9.4
- --
9
9.4
- --
9
Floodprone Width (ft)
35.6
50
17
34
34
33
10
9
>50
>50
>50
>50
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
11.8
11.0
9.0
15.0
12.8
5.0
2.5
2.8
9.9
1521
11.3
9.9
350
11.3
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1.4
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.1
0.4
0.5
0.5
1.1
534
1.2
1.1
1.2
BF Max Depth (ft)
2.2
1.7
1.4
1.2
1.7
0.7
0.9
0.9
1.6
1.03
2.1
1.6
1.29
2.1
Width /Depth Ratio
6.2
11.9
10.7
24.8
12.3
25.7
11.4
10.5
9.0
7.3
9.0
7.3
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
1.8
1.7
>2.2
>2.2
1.8
1.7
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
0.0025
>2.2
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.2
11.9
10.2
19.9
13.2
11.5
6.0
5.7
10.2
10.1
10.2
10.1
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.2
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.5
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.1
Substrate
3 NC Regional Curve equations source: Sweet and Geratz (2003)
Sand
Gravel /Sand
Gravel /Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Gravel /Sand
Gravel /Sand
vattern
Min Max
Med
- --
---
- --
- --
- --
- --
Min
Max
Min
Max
Channel Beltwidth (ft) 41.2 43.5
42.3
31
53
31
53
Radius of Curvature (ft) 13.1 24.6
18.4
___
___
___
___
___
___
14
25
14
25
Radius of Curvature Ratio 1.2 2.3
1.7
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
1.5
2.7
1.5
2.7
Meander Wavelenqth (ft) 49.5 64.9
50.7
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
58
96
58
96
Meander Width Ratio 3.8 4.0
3.9
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
3.3
5.6
3.3
5.6
Profile
Shallow Length (ft) 4.0 19.9
11.5
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
4
23
4
23
Run Length (ft) 7.8 23.0
13.6
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
7
36
7
36
Pool Length (ft) 6.9 21.6
17.1
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
5
24
5
24
Pool -to -Pool Spacing (ft) 40.3 109.8
63.1
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
28
99
28
99
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft) 285
1005
1002
1521
530
572
350
1012
325
Channel Length (ft) 375
1033
1043
1830
534
588
360
1310
392
Sinuosity 1.32
1.03
1.04
1.20
1.01
1.03
1.03
1.29
1.21
Water Surface Slope Oft), 0.0023
- --
- --
- --
- --
- --
Channel Slope (ft/ft) 0.025
0.004
0.004
0.0025
0.0088
0.004
0.025
0.0026
0.0025
Rosgen Classification E5
G4c
G5c
E5
G5c
G5c
G5c
E5
E5
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions
data
2 NC Regional Curve equations source: Doll et al. (2003)
3 NC Regional Curve equations source: Sweet and Geratz (2003)

189
188
c
° 187
a�
w
186
185
Upstream
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach Cross Section 1 - Riffle
0 5 10 15 20
Distance (ft)
25 30 35
tReference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

192
191 -
190
189
° 188
Lj 187
186
185
184
0
Upstream
i
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach Cross Section 2 - Pool
F T - ' t -
5 10 15 20 25'
Distance (ft)
Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull —
30
Floodprone Area
35 40

Upstream
W111
189
188
° 187 v s
a�
w 186
185
184
0 5
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach Cross Section 3 - Pool
10 15 20 25
Distance (ft)
--*--Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
i 0
30 35

Upstream
Downstream
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach CrossSection 4 - Riffle
190
189
188
C
°— 187
a�
w
186
185
184
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance (ft)
--*--Reference Reach Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

188
187.5 — X
187 - -"- nl, x I
X
186.5
186
CO0
185.5
w 185
184.5
184
183.5
183
0 50
Buffalo Branch Reference Reach Profile
x
+ X y = - 0.0026x + 187.3
\ 1 + i + RZ = 0.7323
I X +
X_ X ), X n 4- I +
V
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Channel Distance (ft)
t bed water srf f bankfull o x- section o riffle crest o pool ■ run
glide x LT + RT - c Linear (LT) Linear (RT)

Buffalo Branch Reach Al
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 10, D50(mm) = 2.0, D16(mm) = .50
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 14
Upstream Channel
Energy
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
23.49
Base Width (ft)
3
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.0026
Right
Side Slope
Left
Right
Side Slope
2
2
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.055
0.055
Stable Channel
Energy
Median Channel Width (ft)
10
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
0.005
Width
Left
Right
Side Slope
2
2
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.055
0.055
Computed Stable Channels
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
1
1.8
0.00385
0.0526
0.92
1.66
0.22
0.44
Lower
2
1.7
0.002988
0.0503
0.95
1.56
0.21
0.31
Lower
3
1.5
0.002609
0.0481
0.94
1.52
0.22
0.25
Lower
4
1.4
0.002389
0.0459
0.92
1.5
0.22
0.21
Lower
5
1.3
0.002243
0.044
0.89
1.48
0.23
0.18
Lower
6
1.1
0.002159
0.0421
0.85
1.47
0.24
0.15
Lower
7
1
0.002103
0.0407
0.82
1.47
0.25
0.14
Lower
8
1
0.002044
0.0389
0.78
1.46
0.26
0.12
Lower
9
0.9
0.002035
0.0378
0.74
1.45
0.27
0.11
Lower
10
0.8
0.002029
0.0368
0.71
1.45
0.28
0.11
Lower
11
0.8
0.002038
0.0357
0.67
1.44
0.29
0.1
Lower
12
0.7
0.00204
0.0353
0.65
1.43
0.3
0.09
Lower
13
0.7
0.002071
0.0344
0.61
1.42
0.3
0.09
Lower
14
0.6
0.002086
0.0338
0.59
1.42
0.31
0.08
Lower
15
0.6
0.00213
0.0334
0.56
1.41
0.32
0.08
Lower
16
0.6
0.002166
0.0328
0.54
1.4
0.32
0.08
Lower
17
0.6
0.002202
0.0324
0.52
1.39
0.33
0.08
Lower
18
0.5
0.002233
0.0321
0.5
1.38
0.33
0.07
Lower
19
0.5
0.002264
0.0319
0.48
1.38
0.34
0.07
Lower
20
0.5
0.002315
0.0314
0.46
1.37
0.34
0.07
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution for Minimum Stream Power * * * * * **
9.9 0.8 0.002038 0.0367 0.71 1.45 0.28 0.11 Lower

Buffalo Branch Reach A2
Hydraulic Design Data
Stable Channel Design Results - Copeland Method
d84(mm) = 10, D50(mm) = 2.0, D16(mm) = .50
Temperature (F) 55
Specific Gravity of Sediments 2.65
Unit Weight of Water (lb /cu ft) 62.385
Viscosity (sq ft /s) 1.32E -05
Discharge (cfs) 15
Upstream Channel
Energy
Sediment Concentration (ppm)
21.87
Base Width (ft)
3
Channel Slope (ft /ft)
0.0025
Right
Side Slope
Left
Right
Side Slope
2
2
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.055
0.055
Stable Channel
Energy
Median Channel Width (ft)
10
Valley Slope(ft /ft)
0.005
Width
Left
Right
Side Slope
2
2
Roughness Eq
Manning
Manning
Roughness Value
0.055
0.055
Computed Stable Channels
Bottom
Energy
Comp
Hyd
Froude
Shear
Width
Depth
Slope
n -Value
Radius
Velocity
Number
Stress
Regime
1
1.9
0.003708
0.0526
0.95
1.66
0.21
0.44
Lower
2
1.7
0.002876
0.0505
0.98
1.56
0.21
0.31
Lower
3
1.6
0.002509
0.0484
0.98
1.52
0.21
0.25
Lower
4
1.5
0.002297
0.0462
0.96
1.5
0.22
0.21
Lower
5
1.3
0.002148
0.0445
0.93
1.49
0.23
0.18
Lower
6
1.2
0.002074
0.0425
0.89
1.48
0.24
0.16
Lower
7
1.1
0.002018
0.041
0.85
1.47
0.25
0.14
Lower
8
1
0.001952
0.0395
0.82
1.46
0.26
0.12
Lower
9
0.9
0.001935
0.0381
0.78
1.46
0.26
0.11
Lower
10
0.9
0.001927
0.0373
0.75
1.45
0.27
0.11
Lower
11
0.8
0.001936
0.0361
0.71
1.44
0.28
0.1
Lower
12
0.8
0.001951
0.0354
0.68
1.43
0.29
0.09
Lower
13
0.7
0.001964
0.0347
0.65
1.43
0.29
0.09
Lower
14
0.7
0.001987
0.034
0.62
1.42
0.3
0.09
Lower
15
0.7
0.002014
0.0333
0.59
1.41
0.31
0.08
Lower
16
0.6
0.002034
0.0333
0.57
1.4
0.31
0.08
Lower
17
0.6
0.00208
0.0326
0.55
1.39
0.32
0.08
Lower
18
0.6
0.002105
0.0324
0.53
1.39
0.33
0.07
Lower
19
0.5
0.002143
0.032
0.51
1.38
0.33
0.07
Lower
20
0.5
0.002181
0.0316
0.49
1.37
0.34
0.07
Lower
* * * * ** *Solution for Minimum Stream Power * * * * * **
10 0.9 0.001943 0.0368 0.74 1.45 0.27 0.11 Lower

Appendix D
Buffalo Branch Design Plan Sheets

VICINITY MAP
NTS
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT
NEUSE RIVER BASIN: CU 03020201
APRIL 2015
LOCATION: JOHNSTON, NORTH CAROLINA
RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC
909 CAPABILITY DRIVE, SUITE 3100
RALEIGH, NC 27606
P rCOMPANY
400 0 200 400 800
HORIZ. 1 inch = 200R.
DRAWING LIST TABLE
DRAWING NUMBER
DRAWING TITLE
COVER
E1
EXISTING CONDITIONS INDEX
E2
EXISTING CONDITIONS
E3
EXISTING CONDITIONS
E4
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
2
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
3
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
4
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
5
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
6
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
7
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
8
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
9
PLAN & PROFILE REACH A
10
PLAN & PROFILE REACH B
11
PLAN & PROFILE REACH B
12
PLAN & PROFILE REACH B
13
PLAN & PROFILE REACH C
F1
FENCING PLAN
P1
PLANTING PLAN
M1
MONITORING PLAN
ES1
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN
ES2
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES
D1
DETAILS
D2
DETAILS
D3
DETAILS
D4
DETAILS
D5
DETAILS
DESIGN CONSULTANT
w'%WK
DICKSON
community Infrastructure consultants
720 CORPORATE CENTER DR
RALEIGH, NC 27607
(919) 782 -0495
NC LICENSE NO. F -0374
r

SEE DWG E4
SCALE:1 ' =200'
N
U-N."" =-
SEE DWG E3
I
l � i
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
X
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
—50— —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — —
— 46 — — — — —
EXISTINGTOPOFBANK ----
te- - - - -ie
SEE DWG E2:i /
\\\'A
EXISTING CHANNEL CENTERLINE
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - --
x - - - -- x —
EXISTING TREELINE
=tnZ
U Z r
EXISTING WETLAND
E
00
W
—max
D
ZO
mQ
z
F-
O F
z
Z
ar
�E�=
L L O
�
Z O
Z)
DO
LU
W }}
H J
0
Q m
d
L
4
L
H
— — — —
— -_
7LITTLE DEVINE RD SCN 1938-
SCALE:1 ' =200'
N
U-N."" =-
SEE DWG E3
I
l � i
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
X
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
—50— —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — —
— 46 — — — — —
EXISTINGTOPOFBANK ----
te- - - - -ie
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK -----
as-- - - -ae-
EXISTING CHANNEL CENTERLINE
EXISTING FENCELINE - - - --
x - - - -- x —
EXISTING TREELINE
=tnZ
U Z r
EXISTING WETLAND
E
00
W
EXISTING TREE
D
ZO
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 BHT EXIST CONDOWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(v) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
0
FULL SCALE: 1 -200
200 400
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1" = HALF SCALE f;
w
� N
0 N
J O
a
z
0
U
Z
O
U
Z m
O p
LL
zz
l o Ir
0 O Z
a m C t7
O
z
° 65Q
Y 65 J
¢ CC a
X
W
z
w
°Z—
0
w
U
O
=tnZ
U Z r
E¢
00
W
ZO6
C a Z
D
ZO
mQ
z
F-
O F
z
Z
ar
�E�=
L L O
�
Z O
Z)
DO
LU
W }}
H J
Q m
d
L
4
L
H
z
0
�U
Z
¢ m
U
Z
N m
0
3
z¢Zm
a
O
O 0 2
a
PROJ. DATE:
MAY
2014 ,
G.C.:
FM
G.C. DATE:
OCT
2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
E1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

/ �210-
/ / X___ _ _ _ 209 _ _ _ — — PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
/ / +/ / // _X — DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD LEGEND
/ / / / - - -- - - =zoe- - - -- DB4398,PG291
/ // "/ % — — — — — _ _ X _ EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — — 50 — —
1 / / .� ,i. _ _207- - -_ —__ __ - - -__— - - - -_
/ /" / / (f'-`F -- - - - - -- — �'° - -_ EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR ---- 46 - - - --
/ / ��_ �_$ - - - - - -- -206 -- EXISTING TOP OF BANK ----- iE-- - - -TS-
�` '/ I _�$a �� — _ - - - - -- EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
" / I �_�� - - - -_ X205— — � � � X _
" "I ����!\\ - -- 204-- - - - - -- X = �\ \\� �� \ EXISTING CHANNEL CENTERLINE
___� -- 203 - -- �� \ ,
I \ a '� _ _ \ _ X- — \ \ \ EXISTING FENCELINE - - - -- x - - - -- x —
{ \ / �� -- f,1[�� 202 `_ —_ �� \ �__ \
I• I — - -_ — _ d ��Z_Y \ X �— \ \ \ EXISTING TREELINE M. . . . :- .- .- . -lY-�
� I / ( / � � \ \ \ \ � � � EXISTING WETLAND
11 / I I I/ /��/ // \\ 11 8g �T \\ \\ \ \\ \\ \\ \v EXISTING TREE
x I / I 1 I � \\ �� \ \ \ \
1V �• // REACHB v �1� ��1 vv vv x
PAUL H. HOWARD, JR. F/ j // // i A �1A A \� A A v` �A\
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD / / // �II� \� \\ vv v PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
DB 4398, PG 291 �\ �v ' j °/ 1 �1 v �� v, DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
A /� �I I vv �x DB 4398, PG 291
X- J- V/ 1 v VV v v A v v V A
\ �Y / / A A /�� _ - >_ yvwV y v �x _ - - -- X - /
z / /�� // � // / / ,� � _tee- v vpy v� v v A �m - - -- ��--- - - - -tia
/ 1 � \ / I _ zo6 -- / / I �-;�i� = =�e��° = -- _� ten\ \ \ \ � \ � � °�
\ 1 \ \ �/ /� .ice // / / �� \��j r— —!� —_ / / / ��l / G � �\� 9 / \\ �\ \ � �\ ---- _ - - - -_ /
\ \ 1` a// j / i // / / Jp3� \\ \ \\ (a / \ _ \ \-- ------- . - - - -- /
I I /v b- ..� i ,/ / - 1 v v v� _ �` v 1 REACH A
IIII \ / \\ // 1 `\ • ry// //,, _ -\ / // ^\ \/ �// 'I� \ \rY �, \ \\ w
1 ` —__— x',95_ - -�—
v �� / •I - 11 A I REACH C/ o /.
\Ot�� 1 \ IA � \ \. ,o A. A V 1 / 11 11 V � _- �
\7� m 11V( o v /� // \ v��o�� A / /./
�o\ \\ A AV %/� ���v� /Till vV Ill l / ^V A ��. A�.� -- �/. �.0
Z 0 111111 V / /� ��_ v /� /\ �t /�G v vv ���,, - F-
1 / ,ab gj �� l \
V A�� \� �v_ �� �� //% �� ��� _ - - - - - -- \�_ �V����
30 "RCP A11� / \ j /// �"j - - -�_ �� - _-- _---- ®- VAINd�h�� ��_ - - -_- �_ �� - -v
EIN18 "RCP \VA \ \\ /i� /� +�° - -- /�� A//��b, -/ -- A �V•
N INV= 203.26 \ \ \\ T\ //f /1/ /^ -_ -_�i r �. / / /%/ -_\ -` ` \ - -_ -- ��--- - - -_`\ �\\ �\�� \�
JB(NO V AV i l / /// / / / /// / �_- -- A -_� / -_ �� v v
/ _ / / i 24 "CPP pa/ / �/ / �� - -- �� A V v
ACCESS) �/ i _ _ _NE IGN =202.65 /� /� / v i _ -- A A
54 "RCP f - 116 "RCP / - ,-- _- - - - - -- l j / /i �- \ \\ / /� \\ \ �, �I \ 1
_ 1 - 204 � SW INV= 202.30 �� / / \ �. / � � I �
}� NE INV= 200.90 205 - -206-- A/ / \ \ / - - --- \ \ l I \�
wlNV= zoz.ls �j \1� \ / �� � - -20� —__ ,, I / / \ �/
EINV= 201.34 / A Aokr��A \V A i __ / / / v v� / / �\ V A \ V v
54^ RCP / 1 \ V I f _ -`� -- _ _ -� _ = -x — <-�= . / - A - / / - - - v V v A v _
W INV= 202.26 h i - X— -- - - '_ i gam= af-t- - _�'�- _ &i✓- _ - -- L / / - A A \ _
EINV= 201.49 �= I _ - \ _ - - _ - _ 9 = �1 ° = -`_�1 �- 'X� —�,� / - ��- QHP °c.
IIII \�I \ \ � - II // _ - - -ate = ___jai =_�a� �-u _ \ \ \ -� \
18" RCP hHll', �� \ _ - _ - LITTLE DE- - _z - �� =ice '-
_ _ — — — — _ _ — EVINE RD — -- — — �1�
w wv= 2oo.97 _ _ _ NCSR 1938 — �— — _ — _
_ _ za^ RCP - (60' PUBLIC R/,t) - -- ?�
54" RCP I \\ NE INV= 202.95 18" RCP _
NINV= 202.32 SW INV= 203.38 - _
SINV = 202.69 r IT APPEARS PIPES NE INV= 202.63 _ _
/ ��; I / CONNECT SW INV = 202.94 ,- -
54 "RCP \ UNDERGROUND - - -
N INV= 202.29 ����
SINV= 202.73 18" RCP
S INV= 202.42
30" RCP /
S INV= 799.50 I I
NINV =?
II SCALE:1 ' =60'
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL oe wlxautneu' .O BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -O6- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT EXIST COND.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(v) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.conn
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
FULL SCALE: 1"=60
60 120
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1" = HALF SCALE f;
w
H '�
D N
C N
O a
a
z
0
U
y
z
0
U
z 0
oF p
a LL
v 0
U z
l o Ir Z
0 0
N o U'
z
° O 6Q
Y N J i
cc cc a
LU Z Z
�I- O
2 U) 5
Q0O
0 00
m(r30 Z
OFF- F
Z_ 1n
ILL. LU
DO O
w
z
a
x N
X U
IL z
w x
z w
on a
z mw
ZF
z D
n
z o
w >>
U J
M
a-
I31
ii
z
OU
2
H
U
z
¢ m
LU
Z_
x
a
0
3
Z¢Z-3
a
O
O
C a
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014
G.C.: FM
G.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
E2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291
I
PAUL H. HOWARD, JR. o
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291 �I
REACH A X °�TjI
� \ / I /igbi
V1 DE aPI pl /
I o WOOD B 11 IRS / !
0'I- / �_ __ V AND SH RSA/ 791
/-48 CMP ✓ �Yl
NW INV =191 i
99, / \III`II IM I SE INw- e�
^`196-
N
LLI
O
/
Z
W
w - p
/
w
Z J y141 II \II 1
T / /
/ — 193
/
% 48 "CMP /1y,
\ NW INV = 191.93 r
\ SE INV= 190.74
— / IIU II
IZ II
\. Ion
:100 I
Q �
- -- _ _ AO I Iltll
, ---- _198 - -"—
--- - - - - -- - -
T Ip01 hid
• —''- -199 -- — _
-200
— _201��_ _ — OHP —
__ :4-- 202 —=-9HP-----OHP-----
OHP----
203 GRANT-- C •
— = = -- -204 -- (NO DEED REFERENCE
0 o .o
X207 _— _
LITTLE DEVINE RD NCSR 193
(60' PUBLIC RIW) — — —
MATCHLINE - SEE DWG NO. E4
I
REACH P '
' / 1
I. •ll •
PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
m I� DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291
/ I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
SCALE:1 " =60'
LEGEND
—
EXISTING CONTOUR MAOR L
—50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — —
— 46-----
EXISTING TOP OF BANK ----- r
re-- - - -rB-
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 BHT EXIST COND.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.conn
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
0
FULL SCALE: 1"=60
60 120
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE f;
ui
� N
H N
O a
a
z
LD
U
y
z
0
U
Z Q
O p
LL
Q z
z
to rz
O 0
a w LU
z
° O iiQ LU
Y S2 J
¢ ¢ a
w
W Z Z _
Z
tp -} O
l: H mi
_ Fn z ES z w
ZOO O m¢
¢aZ a Zm
w
O F V F z j
2 X ¢w
O W
LL. z o
M U ~
¢ C
Z
lL Ijj ¢
4 F �U
z ¢ m
U
UJ
Z_ a
0 3 z¢Zm
a O O C '0
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014 ,
Of FM
G.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
E3
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014 ,
Of FM
G.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
E3
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4197, PG 252
II
II
II
III
�m
J)
II CURTIS WAYNE THORNE
DB 1072, PG 24
—� PB 6, PG 267
I
I�
II
• I
I
REACH A
. I
I
I�
0
PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291
MATCHLINE - SEE DWG NO. E3
SCALE:1 " =60'
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
I
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
50 —50—
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR
EXISTING
I
_
— 46 --- — —
EXISTING TOP OF BANK
�
m
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
---- 5E- - - - -ES
EXISTING CHANNEL CENTERLINE
=
U Z Z
EXISTING FENCELINE - -
- -- x - - - -- x —
EXISTING TREELINE
O
EXISTING WETLAND
D
EXISTING TREE
a o
COPYRIGHT O, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 BHT EXIST COND.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(v) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae",
0
FULL SCALE: 1"=60
60 120
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1" = HALF SCALE f;
w
� N
H N
O a
a
0
U
Q
y
0
z
O p
LL
Q 0
U Z
O 2
O Z Z
w LL O
¢ m 0 U
Z
� O QW
Y 65 J
W
cc cc a
W Z
w
_
I—
Z
O
�
m
TpH}}
FZ
H
=
U Z Z
Q
Z
U U'
Z W
ZOO
O
ma
Q H U
¢ Z
U
a o
Q
0 V)
U
z m
w
O F
F
z j
2
X
2N
o
LL O
LL
W
z
w >
DO
U ~
<Q
Z
IL
<
Z
H
O
U 6 U
¢ m
U
Z
N m
LU
0
3
IS
a
O
O
C a
PROJ. DATE:
MAY
2014 ,
G.C.:
FM
G.C. DATE:
OCT
2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
E4
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

NOTL PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN IN PLANVIEW
REPRESENT FLOODPLAIN GRADING ONLY. CHANNEL / /�/q'/•�,y / // -jQ / / , �0
GRADING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS AND PROFILE THIS DWG. / // / / //00 A/ ..
18" RCP /
N INV = 203.26
18" RCP /
WINV= 200.9] 0'A 4
JB (NO
\ \\ ACCESS) /
54 "^RCP /
/ 54" RCP
N INV= 202.32
S INV =202.69
I /
IT AP
PPARS
/ /PIPES_
CONNECT
UNDFJ2GROUND
\ \ 2pS
Q
U
d
54,, D-
C)
C)
4 +00 C \ �; t+n
N
LU
- J
_
\ \ . Potio
o /
212 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - 212
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
183
EXISTING CONTOUR
-5G- - -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
FROM
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
188
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
STRUCTURE
m
U
Z
BANK*
M R
STA I ELEV
STA
208 -
(\
m
O
N tr0 N
N N
tM
N N N
,
W
N
0 +00
0 +97
1 +00
2 +00
BRUSH TOE
3 +00
4 +00
- 208
L
1 m
on
1 +63
- - --
n
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
1 +87 199.32
GRADE ALONG
- - --
- --
BRUSH TOE
2 +03 - --
2 +20
- - --
L
LOG TOE
I >
2 +44
198.96
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL
rn
on
_EXISTING
STREAM CENTERLINE
- --
BRUSH TOE
3 +28 - --
3 +54
- - --
L
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
3 +64 198.84
W
>
PROPOSED
BRUSH TOE
>
>
W
J
R
BRUSH TOE
4 +36 - --
4 +56
- --
L
LOG TOE
-
4 +82
198.36
-
TOP OF BANK
4 +97 1 198.53
W
w
- --
` RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED
LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM
I
q
w
w
I o
e
_PROPOSED
CHANNELBOTTOM
204 -
I ¢
N
204
200
20C
h
6 m N0 Oi
SO on
m m
M
tc
N N
°6
196 -
> m
w m
°' rn
m
r m rn
rn
m m
u'qi
uNi
vroi
u°i
196
>
W W r J
w ww w W
m W
m > r
w Ww
w w
W
w W
>
W
A m> >
> L 111
W J W o
N
>
J
> >
w
W W
> m
J w W>
W >
W
w
>
w N N m
> m w
W
m
J>
m
�>
T
>
w>
o W
rn>
W
T
>
-
W
h o w
m h ro
W ow
w
W w° °
w
N
Oo W ro W
00 W
On
> >
W w
W
w
W
>
J w
W
>
W W
i
U%
+ O ON •+-
r
+ to
m
N
<O
O V m
W
M '5
^ w rO N
m W
o N
N
w f`
°O
.�-
¢ +O
N
r0 N
O
+ +
+ O N
N
No
N W
192
N m m
m
to
F F w w
¢
F
m N
n
m N N¢
r+n ¢
¢ N
< ° +v
f ° °¢
v
¢
° F<
'v
m v
H
192
F
m
N
N
y F 0 N w
to
m
w
rn
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
183
EXISTING CONTOUR
-5G- - -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
FROM
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
188
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
STRUCTURE
m
U
Z
BANK*
M R
STA I ELEV
STA
1�
O N O N
M
6
W
V O M
O
N tr0 N
N N
tM
N N N
a7 N
N N
W
N
0 +00
0 +97
1 +00
2 +00
BRUSH TOE
3 +00
4 +00
5 +00
- 3.20 _ - 1.50 -
BANKFULL STAGE
1.6
1
4
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
I. 90
1.80 3.60 _
BANKFULL STAGE
2.10
l
4
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH
9.0
575 1.50
BANKFULL STAGE 1
I
2.10
1
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
9.0
150 .7S
BANKFULL STAGE
210 lI
if
/1
rL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
REACH Al
STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
STRUCTURE TABLE
EXISTING CONTOUR
-5G- - -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
FROM
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
TO
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
STRUCTURE
EXISTING WETLAND
U
Z
BANK*
- - - - T8
STA I ELEV
STA
ELEV
W
Q J
z 6
LOG GRADE CONTROL
0 +69 199.60
- --
- - --
--
BRUSH TOE
0 +84 - - --
0 +97
- - --
R
BRUSH TOE
1 +14 - - --
1 +30
--
L
BRUSH TOE
1 +48 - - --
1 +63
- - --
R
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
1 +87 199.32
- - --
- - --
- --
BRUSH TOE
2 +03 - --
2 +20
- - --
L
LOG TOE
2 +38 199.0
2 +44
198.96
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL
2 +55 199.12
- - --
- --
- --
BRUSH TOE
3 +28 - --
3 +54
- - --
L
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
3 +64 198.84
- - --
- --
- --
BRUSH TOE
4 +05 - - --
4 +19
198.48
R
BRUSH TOE
4 +36 - --
4 +56
- --
L
LOG TOE
4 +76 198.37
4 +82
198.36
R
LOG GRADE CONTROL
4 +97 1 198.53
- - --
- - --
- --
` RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED
LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR
-5G- - -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- - 46 - - - - -
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5Q
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
EXISTING WETLAND
U
Z
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
- - - - T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
- - - - Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
W
Q J
z 6
CHANNEL
W
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - - - X
EXISTING TREELINE
z
¢
EXISTING TREE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
O F�
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
SHEET DP
SHEET
(SEE DETAIL D5)
BRUSH TOE
F¢❑
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
g
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
CD
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
DWG D2)
O a
U
VEGETATED SILL
H
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112)
W
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
a
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
M
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FM
LOG SILL
O.C. DATE:
(SEE DETAIL DWG 134)
DRAWING NUMBER:
1
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112)
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
DOUBLE LOG DROP
O
(PROFILE)
o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
O
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 062014 \CADMPlan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, INC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NO JCENSE No. F03]4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE f;
Hm
O N
r N
24
QL
� I h
O (
U
❑ ¢O
LL �
a z o
° o w k
Y N
r PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
Z
x
U o
U
Z
LU Z
cr
LU �
=
(�
Z
m
x U z
LLQl
LU
W
Q J
z 6
0 O
W
2°o
Z
Q U
Q Z
J
w0
z
¢
O F�
CL
wN
J -U)
Z
F¢❑
LL Q
g
¢
I-
CD
W
Il
W
O a
U
<
Z
H
2
2 m
N A
W
C7
Z
3
x.' u
z oc
O
O¢aM
a
PROJ. DATE:
M
O.C.:
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
1
r PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

NOTE: PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN IN PLANVIEW
/ REPRESENT FLOODPIAIN GRADING ONLY. CHANNEL
GRADING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS AND PROFILE THIS DWG.
REACH Al
N
212 - I I I I I I I I I
208 -
I I I I I I I I I I - 212
- 208
9.40
3.20 - _ 1.50 -
BANKFULL STAGE
1.60 \ /
1
ti
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
9.0
_ 3.60 1.80 3.60 _
BANKFULL STAGE
f
2.10
l
4
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH
9.0
5]5 1.50
BANKFULL STAGE 1
I
2.10
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
9.0
1.50 5.75
1 BANKFULL STAGE
L Ifl
1
r
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
REACH Al
STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
m
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
-50- -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
EXISTING GRADE ALONG
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
STRUCTURE
EXISTING WETLAND
z
z z
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
- - - - T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
- - - - Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
STA
w I
PROPOSED
EXISTING FENCELINE
CI
CENTERLINE NE
5 +15
ON
L
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
5 +38
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
R
SHEET DP
SHEET
(SEE DETAIL D5)
5 +56
_
on _
TOP OF BANK on
-
rn
5 +86
N
m
r m
VEGETATED SILL
L
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
6 +30
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
- - --
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
-
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
6 +36
W �
w
LOG TOE PROTECTION
rn >
> w
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
rn
> >
6 +80
rn
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
6 +96
rn
- - --
LOG VANE
--
P6
204 -
w w xw\ m
rv- �"°' \ w
N
w
®�
w w
w �o
L
>
w
W
LU U.1
W w
m
(PROFILE)
W
w
L
w
W
>
W
-
204
W
\ w
8 +66
197.55
to
-
°n
w
+
8 +94
PROPOSED N
9 +01
197.20
w
ry
w
--
9 +37
-
�ci
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
9 +79
+ _ fo
- - --
o
-
' RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCL.) LOOKIf' i
CHANNEL BOTTOM
o+
Nmi
on
m
on
¢
w
200 - 7
- --
_
-0.26%
- - -
--
--
-
200
/��
-
196 -
-196
o
m
m °'
N
rn$ ^ m m
io
o
r
m r m
°m
y
m
w •- •-
> °' °' > m
rn
,n N
m m .-
o^m°,
°' r-:
umi,
r
r
> J
>w w
J
w w w
-w > w >
>w
w > J
> > > >>
>
°' m>
On
rn m
rn
rn
m
m
m
rn
r_
I
m w W w
w w
w w mL
yy�
w w w w
w
w w
w
w > >
w
>
>
w
ri
M V
m m
o
N _ W
W rn uai m
w W
w
w
w
j W
W
_J
w
w
d:
192 - + 'g
N + +
,+n ,� m °+ ^
+
"'
+ w m
o
u-N `° f
m
°+°
8 °m
° �g w
o
w
w
oc
w-
192
my
m W w
u°+t ri ¢ to
tAQ m
m
to
to
¢ y Q
+ ^
H H
¢
M
w
w¢
+
rn
rn
uP
°'
+
rn
N
f
fw
N
Q~ F F
m N N
m
¢ m m
on
N
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
w
188
NP
V
W m
N
Ili
<
Ill O
m W
C
O
N
N
O
N
°
188
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
N
8 +00
9 +00
10 +00
9.40
3.20 - _ 1.50 -
BANKFULL STAGE
1.60 \ /
1
ti
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
9.0
_ 3.60 1.80 3.60 _
BANKFULL STAGE
f
2.10
l
4
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH
9.0
5]5 1.50
BANKFULL STAGE 1
I
2.10
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
9.0
1.50 5.75
1 BANKFULL STAGE
L Ifl
1
r
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
REACH Al
STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
-50- -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- - 46 - - - - -
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
STRUCTURE
EXISTING WETLAND
z
z z
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
- - - - T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
- - - - Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
STA
CHANNEL
pE
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - -- X
EXISTING TREELINE
5 +15
EXISTING TREE
L
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
5 +38
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
R
SHEET DP
SHEET
(SEE DETAIL D5)
5 +56
BRUSH TOE
- --
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
-
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
5 +86
DWG D2)
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
6 +03
VEGETATED SILL
L
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
6 +30
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
- - --
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
6 +36
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
6 +52
LOG TOE PROTECTION
R
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
6 +65
LOG SILL
6 +80
(SEE DETAIL DWG 134)
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
6 +96
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
- - --
LOG VANE
--
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
7 +02
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL
8 +08
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
STRUCTURE TABLE
W
W
FROM
TO
°
N
STRUCTURE
Q
z
z z
LU
BANK'
m
STA
ELEV
STA
ELEV
pE
BRUSH TOE
5 +02
- --
5 +15
-
L
LOG TOE
5 +38
198.28
5 +45
198.20
R
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
5 +56
198.30
- --
--
-
BRUSH TOE
5 +86
- - --
6 +03
-
L
LOG STRUCTURE
6 +30
198.08
- - --
-
-
BRUSH TOE
6 +36
- --
6 +52
-
R
LOG TOE
6 +65
197.90
6 +80
197.84
L
LOG STRUCTURE
6 +96
197.95
- - --
-
--
BRUSH TOE
7 +02
- - --
7 +29
-
L
BRUSH TOE
8 +08
--
8 +20
-
L
BRUSH TOE
8 +32
-
8 +49
-
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL
8 +66
197.55
- --
-
--
LOG TOE
8 +94
197.25
9 +01
197.20
R
BRUSH TOE
9 +21
--
9 +37
-
L
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
9 +79
197.26
- - --
-
-
' RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCL.) LOOKIf' i
DOWNSTREAM
LOG SILL O
(PROFILE) o
DOUBLE LOG DROP O
(PROFILE) o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
(PROFILE)
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: IAProieoWEBX12014005400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IRO NC- O62014\CADU Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -AOril 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, INC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
No. U-SE No. F03]4 1
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE
Ill
H m
O N
~ N
O a
a
Z 0
O
rL Z
M }
J
o ¢ O
o a
a w o Z
° O wn
r S2
¢ ¢ EL
Q.C. DATE: IOCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
W
W
Q
°
N
Q�
UI Z
Q
z
z z
LU
x
m
to Z
11QUJ
=
pE
Z
Z O U
Q U
LLO
z o
z�
¢�
m¢Z
PO
W
O N
CL
Q g Z
.6
F o
tL x
LL
�
Z
U
¢
�
n
d
Zm
O a
U
Z
2 m
A
E-
W
CO
Z
3
¢yww
Z¢zm
O
0<a M
a
0
PROJ. DATE:
IMAY
2014
O.C.:
FM
Q.C. DATE: IOCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

Q
LU / �\
CD
CD
�
Z
c0
1 / I
/ I
( I
\ I
� I
NOTE: PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN IN PLANVIEW
REPRESENT FLOODPLAIN GRADING ONLY. CHANNEL
GRADING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS AND PROFILE THIS DWG.
/ r �
�Z�QO
\
REACH A2
ENHANCEMEN T
I / Q.
I A v A I I I Ill (STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
/ SC6LE:1 " =30'
208 — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 208
PROPOSED 6 <. N
on TOP OF BANK m °' m '6 m
204 o w w w w J ,� — 204
cwi a w w N EXISTING GRADE ALONG w w J
J 0
m F N
STREAM C/ EI NTERLINE PROPOSED
CHANNEL BOTTOM F m �FU o F d
a w
+ + M
to +
200 g — — — — — — — — — — _ — __ M
—
200
1 \ I \
_ 11 ;,�_ i�\
196 — \ / \ \I /1 / — 196
on c. II — ----
_ Or A 01 M q�i 16 '6 m N
> J > > > m _m m m
w J w w w w w w w w w W w w J w J J J W> > w Or Of
LU
192 —m uwriN w w "�' �' w° wvwv M ww wm W LU w wj —192
n ao m w W r W
° ° 0 0 g' ° t c1 a+ r+ + v ° m u N
+o Q o o +o + + in m c+v c4 -+ vmi +
a a a a a s a M M V -
N
N N N N m y N N Q
188 — N — 188
SCALE: HOR 1" =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
184 184
m Ol Ol � m m O2 m
Co 10 +00 11 +00 12 +00 13 +00 14 +00 15 +00
NOTES:
9.40
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
3.20 _ _ 1.50 _ DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
,BANKFULL STAGE
\ / 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING OT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
1.6 y0 THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLLOW W BACK BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
1 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
FL ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
_ 3.60 1.80 3.60 _ 6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
BANKFULL STAGE I ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
f REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
2.10
l
4 LEGEND
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — —50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
9'0 PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
BANKFULL STAGE EXISTING WETLAND - - -
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. fff — _ _ — TB
1}
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — Be
2.10
1 PROPOSED CENTERLINE
CHANNEL
NEL - --
EX STING FENCELINE — X
EL EXISTING TREELINE
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING TREE
9.0
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
5.75
LIMITS OF PROPOSED L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BANKFULL STAGE DOUBLE LOG DROP
1 (SEE DETAIL SHEET D5)
BRUSH TOE
210 (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
if / (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
4- VEGETATED SILL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
SECTION SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
REACH Al BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85 (SEE DETAIL DWG 03)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
NOTE: (REACH A2 -STA 13 +85 TO 21 +171 LOG SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE LOG VANE -
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS FLOODPLAIN SILL ®�
D1 &D3. (SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH < 6" TO ONLY THOSE LOG GRADE CONTROL
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION. (PROFILE)
LOG SILL O
(PROFILE) o
DOUBLE LOG DROP O
STRUCTURE TABLE (PROFILE) o]
FROM TO BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
STRUCTURE BANK' (PROFILE)
STA ELEV STA ELEV
LOG STRUCTURE 10 +37 197.13 -- - - -- - - --
BRUSH TOE 10 +43 - -- 10 +61 - - -- R
BRUSH TOE 10 +78 - - -- 10 +93 - - -- L
BRUSHTOE 11 +31 - - -- 11 +50 - - -- R
BRUSH TOE 11 +65 - -- 11 +74 - - -- R
LOG GRADE CONTROL 12 +11 196.66 - - -- - - -- - - --
LOG STRUCTURE 13 +04 196.44 -- - - -- - - --
BRUSH TOE 13 +12 -- 13 +38 J - - -- L
DOUBLE LOG DROP 13 +81 196.25 - - -- - - -- - - --
RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVAUD, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: 1:1ProieoWEBX12014005400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-20141CADMI'lan Set12014005800 SHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
WD &SON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickscn.com
NO u—SE No. F03]4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE f;
O N
F N
O a
a
� I h
O (
U '
° O
LL �
a z w
I ° o � k
Y N
¢I¢ 1:
z
2
U o
OR
Z
\
W
H H �
=
0
ro
= In :Z:)
0 z
¢
z z
Z O O
w
o
O
~Q Z
J
w0
z
OO
,
¢
z
0
O F
✓
w
REACH Al
od
�o
—P2 RESTORATION
Z
v
fSTA 0 +62 48 TO 13
+87 84)
Q
LU / �\
CD
CD
�
Z
c0
1 / I
/ I
( I
\ I
� I
NOTE: PROPOSED CONTOURS SHOWN IN PLANVIEW
REPRESENT FLOODPLAIN GRADING ONLY. CHANNEL
GRADING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS AND PROFILE THIS DWG.
/ r �
�Z�QO
\
REACH A2
ENHANCEMEN T
I / Q.
I A v A I I I Ill (STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
/ SC6LE:1 " =30'
208 — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 208
PROPOSED 6 <. N
on TOP OF BANK m °' m '6 m
204 o w w w w J ,� — 204
cwi a w w N EXISTING GRADE ALONG w w J
J 0
m F N
STREAM C/ EI NTERLINE PROPOSED
CHANNEL BOTTOM F m �FU o F d
a w
+ + M
to +
200 g — — — — — — — — — — _ — __ M
—
200
1 \ I \
_ 11 ;,�_ i�\
196 — \ / \ \I /1 / — 196
on c. II — ----
_ Or A 01 M q�i 16 '6 m N
> J > > > m _m m m
w J w w w w w w w w w W w w J w J J J W> > w Or Of
LU
192 —m uwriN w w "�' �' w° wvwv M ww wm W LU w wj —192
n ao m w W r W
° ° 0 0 g' ° t c1 a+ r+ + v ° m u N
+o Q o o +o + + in m c+v c4 -+ vmi +
a a a a a s a M M V -
N
N N N N m y N N Q
188 — N — 188
SCALE: HOR 1" =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
184 184
m Ol Ol � m m O2 m
Co 10 +00 11 +00 12 +00 13 +00 14 +00 15 +00
NOTES:
9.40
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
3.20 _ _ 1.50 _ DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
,BANKFULL STAGE
\ / 3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING OT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
1.6 y0 THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLLOW W BACK BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
1 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
FL ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
_ 3.60 1.80 3.60 _ 6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
BANKFULL STAGE I ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
f REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
2.10
l
4 LEGEND
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — —50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
9'0 PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
BANKFULL STAGE EXISTING WETLAND - - -
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. fff — _ _ — TB
1}
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — Be
2.10
1 PROPOSED CENTERLINE
CHANNEL
NEL - --
EX STING FENCELINE — X
EL EXISTING TREELINE
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING TREE
9.0
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
5.75
LIMITS OF PROPOSED L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BANKFULL STAGE DOUBLE LOG DROP
1 (SEE DETAIL SHEET D5)
BRUSH TOE
210 (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
if / (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
4- VEGETATED SILL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
SECTION SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
REACH Al BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85 (SEE DETAIL DWG 03)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
NOTE: (REACH A2 -STA 13 +85 TO 21 +171 LOG SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE LOG VANE -
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS FLOODPLAIN SILL ®�
D1 &D3. (SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH < 6" TO ONLY THOSE LOG GRADE CONTROL
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION. (PROFILE)
LOG SILL O
(PROFILE) o
DOUBLE LOG DROP O
STRUCTURE TABLE (PROFILE) o]
FROM TO BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
STRUCTURE BANK' (PROFILE)
STA ELEV STA ELEV
LOG STRUCTURE 10 +37 197.13 -- - - -- - - --
BRUSH TOE 10 +43 - -- 10 +61 - - -- R
BRUSH TOE 10 +78 - - -- 10 +93 - - -- L
BRUSHTOE 11 +31 - - -- 11 +50 - - -- R
BRUSH TOE 11 +65 - -- 11 +74 - - -- R
LOG GRADE CONTROL 12 +11 196.66 - - -- - - -- - - --
LOG STRUCTURE 13 +04 196.44 -- - - -- - - --
BRUSH TOE 13 +12 -- 13 +38 J - - -- L
DOUBLE LOG DROP 13 +81 196.25 - - -- - - -- - - --
RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVAUD, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: 1:1ProieoWEBX12014005400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-20141CADMI'lan Set12014005800 SHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
WD &SON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickscn.com
NO u—SE No. F03]4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE f;
O N
F N
O a
a
� I h
O (
U '
° O
LL �
a z w
I ° o � k
Y N
¢I¢ 1:
z
2
U o
OR
Z
W
H H �
=
0
ro
= In :Z:)
0 z
¢
z z
Z O O
w
o
O
~Q Z
J
w0
z
OO
,
¢
z
0
O F
a
w
QrLZ
od
�o
LL x
LL
°
Z
v
m
g
d
Zm
O a
w
w
L)
U
Z
J
F
III:
2 m
N A
W
I
z
Z
3
¢yww
Z¢zm
O
O =o-2
a
¢
PROJ. DATE:
M
O.C.:
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
3
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

■
■
■
■
■
I
204 -
200 -
196 -
192 -
188 -
184 -
180
15 +00
2
J
zo y�
a
O�
\c °o
N
N
Z
J
r J
rQ
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I — 204
— 200
EXISTING GRADE ALONG
[-STREAM CENTERLINE
— 196
—50— — —
\� - - - - --
192
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
W Z
EXISTING WETLAND
U 2
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
a
CHANNEL
It
�
EXISTING FENCELINE
i
EXISTING TREELINE
2°o
EXISTING TREE
IL O
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
i
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
2
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
�\
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
m
DWG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
D2)
Z m zi
VEGETATED SILL
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
<
z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
z
Z
3
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O¢a=M
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROJ. DATE:
LOG SILL
Of
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
OCT 2014
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
4
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROJ. NO.:
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
REACH
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
A2
O
/ I
o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
10
ENHANCEMENTI
l zz-
(STA 13 +85 TO 21 +1_7)
C) 00
- --
- - - --
-
,
___17 +00
- - - - --
18 +00
_ - - - -- _As +0 ,
LJj
FtEACH A2
Q
ENHANEEMENTI
(STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
"
r \
\ r
\ PAUCH. HowARD, JR. " "
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB4398,PG291
-- -- -_ -_
\ -- SCALE:1 " =30'
204 -
200 -
196 -
192 -
188 -
184 -
180
15 +00
2
J
zo y�
a
O�
\c °o
N
N
Z
J
r J
rQ
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I — 204
— 200
EXISTING GRADE ALONG
[-STREAM CENTERLINE
NOTE: (REACH A2 -STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS
D1 & D3.
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH <6" TO ONLY THOSE
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION.
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG F1.
STRUCTURE TABLE
STRUCTURE FROM TO BANK*
— 188 STA ELEV STA ELEV
LOG GRADE CONTROL 17 +47 193.65 - - -- — —
LOG GRADE CONTROL 18 +21 193.40 - -- — —
LOG GRADE CONTROL 19 +84 192.25 - - -- — —
* RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
— 184 DOWNSTREAM
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
180
ro No
Gm0 yNy V o ro 'i V N
T m W T m —
16 +00 17 +00 18 +00 19 +00 20 +00
LEGEND
— 196
—50— — —
\� - - - - --
192
NOTE: (REACH A2 -STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS
D1 & D3.
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH <6" TO ONLY THOSE
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION.
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG F1.
STRUCTURE TABLE
STRUCTURE FROM TO BANK*
— 188 STA ELEV STA ELEV
LOG GRADE CONTROL 17 +47 193.65 - - -- — —
LOG GRADE CONTROL 18 +21 193.40 - -- — —
LOG GRADE CONTROL 19 +84 192.25 - - -- — —
* RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
— 184 DOWNSTREAM
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
180
ro No
Gm0 yNy V o ro 'i V N
T m W T m —
16 +00 17 +00 18 +00 19 +00 20 +00
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR
—50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — —
— — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
W Z
EXISTING WETLAND
U 2
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
a
CHANNEL
It
�
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE
2°o
EXISTING TREE
IL O
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
2
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
�\
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
m
DWG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
D2)
Z m zi
VEGETATED SILL
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
<
z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
z
Z
3
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O¢a=M
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROJ. DATE:
LOG SILL
Of
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
OCT 2014
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
4
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROJ. NO.:
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
DOUBLE LOG DROP
O
(PROFILE)
o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
O
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELEI-IONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I:1ProieoWEBX12014005400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-20141CADU Plan Set12014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
DD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NO U—SE No. F03]4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE ,
O N
~ N
O a
a
� I h
o (
v "
° ¢O
LL �
z
° o w k
Y rn
ccIit C
W
Z
2
U o
U
Q
W Z
2
U 2
rtw�
a�
N Z
QUQ
W
a
= Z 0
ZOU
It
�
z
2°o
a 0 z
IL O
¢ w
EL
OFU)
ww
2
Q
UL
UL 0)
z
4
F o
Q
m
d
Z m zi
W
W
Oa
U
<
z
H
¢
2 m
N A
0
W
I
z
Z
3
¢ Ili u
Z¢zm
O
O¢a=M
a
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
C.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
4
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

awo I UELAPIDATED / I /
Y E I W000 BUILDING
sHELrE s i
II �I `al /•
if I Gl /
�4_SVAPE THE LEFT BANK NWINV819 e4� I`` I I III II�/ II I _ - - - -- - --
�/ - ,
USING SOD MATS SE INV =191.n �xJ V/ II II I III I I x - --
(STA20+86 TO 21 +17) I It 1/ 1, III �,
/
195
21 +00 WooDS
16+G1 / i 16,GT Za
0
o - 1e9 I I x
o i till/ / X
+ "46" CMP I, I III II I 1
NW INV= 191.93
QREACH A_� SE INV =190 j4 - III I� I' I 141
ENHANCEMENT (srAl3+ssro2l +n) /
J r I * I111I 111 11 I I �� I x INSTALLFORD CROSSING
I loll
U I I j`1
II II II III I 1 I REACH A2
11 II I II I I P1 RESTORATION- i
* VIII III I I 1 I 1 I 1 (STA 22 +08 TO 26 +00)
y 3 I �I \1 so-
111111 II
II I
�I� I �
I I I
* r wl 7 �1'I p III I II 190- ee P OWARD, JR.
IE DWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291
SCALE:1 " =30'
204 - i i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 - 204
200 _PROPOSED - 200
T TOP OF BANK
I I w J m W w Do >_
W W w >
w W w w W W W w W
196 i w w w w ww w w w w- 196
TEXISTING GRADE ALONG I I N N - -- N N o + o a s $ a
STREAM CENTERLINE I I F ,°a v
I w /--- ¢- - - - -- Nom- a a < a a a a a
-0.25% tTJ y UD _ N 41 t0 f9 to N
192 T - /// \ - 192
-_- - - --
(wYl ! o
INSTALL FORD CROSSING w m m °m W ` rn W °m W °m °>
w w w w w m w°w > 188 - w 188
w w w w w
Nm IT IT T w
w
N Q N N a N N N N N ry ry
a a a a
N
_
PROPOSED
184 CHANNELBOTTOM - 184
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
180 180
m N I° Iq uwi N N cn
s rn rn rn rn rn °m rn rn
20 +00 21 +00 22 +00 23 +00 24 +00 25 +00
M
- 3.20 _ - 1.50 -
BANKFULL STAGE
1.6
1
4
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
I. 90
BANKFULL STAGE
2.10
l
4
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH
9.0
575 1.50
BANKFULL STAGE
2. 0
1
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
9'
1 so 5.75
BANKFULL STAGE
1
2.10 �I
rL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS
SECTION
REACH A2
STA 22 +08 TO 26 +00
NOTE: (REACH A2 -STA 13 +85 TO 21 +17)
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS
D1 & D3.
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH < 6" TO ONLY THOSE
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION.
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG F1.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR -
-50- -
E)I ISTING CONTOUR MINOR - -
- - 46 - - - - -
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Z
EXISTING WETLAND
U
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
- - - - T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
- - - - Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
22 +01 191.70
CHANNEL
BRUSH TOE
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - - - X
EXISTING TREELINE
LOG GRADE CONTROL
EXISTING TREE
UL
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
BRUSH TOE
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
BRUSH TOE
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
23 +68 - --
BRUSH TOE
LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
g
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
LOG TOE
D2)
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
DWG
24 +29 - - --
VEGETATED SILL
LOG TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
24 +58 - --
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
- -- --
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
25 +12 - --
LOG TOE PROTECTION
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
a
LOG SILL
< c_
(SEE DETAIL DWG 134)
M
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
FM
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
O.C. DATE:
LOG VANE
DRAWING NUMBER:
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
)
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
STRUCTURE TABLE
W
W
z
FROM
TO
STRUCTURE
Z
BANK*
U
STA ELEV
STA ELEV
FORD CROSSING
21 +89 191.72
22 +01 191.70
- --
BRUSH TOE
22 +38 - - --
22 +67 - - --
R
LOG GRADE CONTROL
22 +76 191.38
UL
¢w
BRUSH TOE
23 +16 --
23 +32 - - --
L
BRUSH TOE
23 +48 - --
23 +68 - --
R
LOG STRUCTURE
23 +82 191.19
g
z?
LOG TOE
24 +15 - - --
24 +29 - - --
R
LOG TOE
24 +51 - - --
24 +58 - --
L
LOG GRADE CONTROL
24 +69 191.01
- -- --
- - --
BRUSH TOE
24 +97 -___
25 +12 - --
R
* RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
DOWNSTREAM
LOG SILL O
(PROFILE) o
DOUBLE LOG DROP O
(PROFILE) o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
(PROFILE)
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 062014 \CADMI'lan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
DD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(t) 919.782.9672
www.Wkdickson.com
No. U-SE No. ­4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
1. HALF SCALE f;
Hm
O N
F N
O a
a
� I h
o (
v
° ¢O
LL �
a z o
° O w.
Y rn
¢I¢ [
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
W
W
z
U
Z
Q
U
~Z N
Q
mc0
a y
DU
UJ
¢
wUQ .6
!
J
o °
z
CIE
UL
¢w
mO
30
0_(n
J Z
=
d
zn
w
Q 2
06
F o
LL °
g
z?
m
d
a
W
W
0
U
<
~
¢
Z
o
N m
H
W
L�
Z
3
¢mww
Z¢zm
O
COO
O
a
< c_
PROJ. DATE:
M
O.C.:
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
5
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

r/
REGRADE /SMOOTH BOTH BANKS;
_ — — _ - INSTALL COIR MATING & LIVE STAKES
195
- - - / / - - - - - / (STA 27 +94 TO 28 +22)
/ X
Q
- -_ - --
a 6C / p "
U
W
REACH A3
ENHANCEMENT II (LOW) "
/ r
� cT � � \ p �` ) (STA 26 +00 TO 44 +30)
Q
LID
F.00 a efi \ �`\ 26 +p0 31 30. " - - =83 x = B 30' Lu
LU
oa
F- p " o
p cr ✓ / + REMOVE AND (1)
r /
DISPOSE OF OLD LU
aor �Y_ —_0s� \ /g0✓/ �' " _ - -_" " .FENCE " Z
- REACH A2 9O� V PAUL H. HOWARD, JR. " v
API RESTORATION ~
I-
(STA 22 +08 TO 26 +00) _���g // BEBBIE EbWARDS HOWARD c
- / DB4398 " C
�a = — Via— ,end " ',FIGZ91 =X
190 — X
X
C- X X .CE X X\ X e X --
SCALE:1 " =30'
200 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 200
_PROPOSED
TOP OF BANK
iz
>
196 196
W w
_ EXISTING GRADE ALONG
STREAM CENTERLINE
F N N N f
192 — — — — ( — 192
PROPOSED `- -`_ ____
CHANNEL BOTTOM \ - -
188 - > j - 188
� w w
Q N ry
N N N
184 — — 184
180 — — 180
SCALE: HOR 1 " =30'; VERT 1 " =3'
176 176
oNr' m m rn °°' °m °°' ci °m °m °°' °m rn
25 +00 26 +00 27 +00 28 +00 29 +00 30 +00
NOTES:
9.40
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
3.20 1.50 DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
BANKFULL STAGE 2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING OT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
1.6 y0 THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLLOW W BACK BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
1 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
FL ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
_ 3.60 1.80 3.60 _ 6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
- _ BANKFU _ - BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
LL STAGE I ENGINEER.
7. NO ENHANCEMENT
EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENH
f REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
2.10
l
4 LEGEND
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — —50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
9'0 PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 5Q
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
BANKFULL STAGE 1} EXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. LLL — _ _ — TB
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — BB
2.10
1 PROPOSED CENTERLINE
CHANNEL
NEL - --
EXISTING FENCELINE — X
EL EXISTING TREELINE
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING TREE
9.0
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
5.75
LIMITS OF PROPOSED L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BANKFU_ LL STAGE DOUBLE SHEET DP
SHEET
1 (SEE DETAIL D5)
BRUSH TOE
210 (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
if / (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
4- VEGETATED SILL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
SECTION SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
REACH A2 BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
STA 22 +08 TO 26 +00 (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112)
FLOODPLAIN SILL ®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
(PROFILE) (IAjJ�
STRUCTURE TABLE
LOG SILL O
STRUCTURE FROM TO BANK' (PROFILE) o
STA ELEV STA ELEV
BRUSH TOE 24 +97 -- 25 +12 _ -- R DOUBLE LOG DROP
(PROFILE)
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE 24 +69 190.78 — - - -- - - --
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
' RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING (PROFILE)
DOWNSTREAM
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLVCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I:\ProieoWEBX12014005400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-2014\CADMI'lan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NO U—SE No. ­4 ;
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE f;
O N
F N
O a
a
� I h
O (
U '
° O
LL �
a w
cc w
° k
Y N
i
it C
Z
Q
U
US Z
Q
U 2
N ~Z
Q
mcW0
Q J
UDO
LU
¢
J,
Q U
LU
0
�
UL
z
¢w
mCi0
H
O
> ~
0
= =
d
Z
w n
ate=
LL
od
�o
LL °
g
�?
m
In
W
d
w
0 a
U
<
Z
I
¢
2 m
N A
I-
W
I
C7
Z
�
¢w u
Zzm
O
O¢
a
a0
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
6
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

CC
C
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO D D CKSON
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION. community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS. Urban Development + Geomatics
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT 720 Corporate Drive
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL. Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN, (1)919.782.9672
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER WkrIICkson.Com
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED. Ng, U—SE No. Faa�a
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — —50—
—
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR rjQ
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
EXISTING WETLAND _ _ _ _
2" =FULL SCALE
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. — — — — TB y 1" = HALF SCALE
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — — — — Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF , H m
CHANNEL O N
EXISTING FENCELINE - - -- X N
J O
EXISTING TREELINE d
EXISTING TREE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
F
U
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
U)
DOUBLE LOG DROP
Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET D5)
0
s
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)\LQ
z
0 0
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)!GG
¢ }
J
VEGETATED SILL
DETAIL DWG D2)
O ¢ 0
0 CO
(SEE
W
y Z~
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
O N F
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
y U) Q
W W W cc
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
cc D_
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG SILL
Jul
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
U
z
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
2
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
�Ux
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112)
U
FDETAIL WIN SILL
®�
W
H
2 U Z
Q m =
(SEE DETAIL DWG DO)
��
N
(B
= 0
Z
IM F Q�Q
LOG GRADE CONTROL
(
U U
O U
W W
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ\
a Z
LL Z p
LOG SILL
m�o
�¢w
(PROFILE)
S
O ~ Z
W y
Q =
Z F D
DOUBLE LOG DROP
LL O
Q
(PROFILE)
0
IM
F
d Z m
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
0 Q
(PROFILE)
O
J ¢ U
Q
z
F- 2 m
N A
W
z
Z ¢www
3 ¢zm
Z
O
a
O¢a0
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
Q.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
7
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
COPYRIGHT @, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-2014\CADD\Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -Atcril 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen

SCALE:1 " =30'
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO D D CKSON
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION. community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS. Urban Development + Geomatics
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT 720 Corporate Drive
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL. Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN, (1)919.782.9672
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER WkdICk50n.Com
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED. Ng, U—SE No. Faa�a
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR — —50—
—
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR rjQ
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
EXISTING WETLAND _ _ _ _
2" =FULL SCALE
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. — — — — TB y 1" = HALF SCALE
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — — — — Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF , H m
CHANNEL O N
EXISTING FENCELINE — — — — X N
J O
EXISTING TREELINE d
EXISTING TREE
Z
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
0
LIMITS OF PROPOSED L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
rn
DOUBLE LOG DROP Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET D5) s 0
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)\LQ
Z ~
0 0
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)!GG ¢ }
J
VEGETATED SILL O ¢ 0
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2) W 0 CO
¢ 6n Z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O O N
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3) y >N Q
W W W
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE ¢ ¢ D_
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG SILL Jul
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4) U
Z
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE 2
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2) �U�K
LOG VANE
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112) U
US = U Z
FLOODPLAIN SILL Q =
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4) �� F (_ ¢ m (B
Fn
Z Lu Q
� = = Q F
LOG GRADE CONTROL ( U Z 0 0 W W¢
(PROFILE) (IAjJt Z U J g p
CC a Z W O
S m(� ¢�
LOG SILL U o
(PROFILE) U~ U d W N
Q = t6 D
DOUBLE LOG DROP LL O Z
¢
(PROFILE) 0 "j g F
M d z Fn
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O ( Q
(PROFILE) J ¢ U
Q F- 2 m
Z N A
(0
W Z ¢ ww
Z u
3 ¢Zm
a O C)
PROJ. DATE: M
Of FM
Q.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
8
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-2014\CADD\Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -AOril 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen

\ \ REACH A3 PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
X ENHANCEMENT 11(LOW) DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
X — (STA 26 +00 TO 44 +30)
x DB 4197, PG 252 a ,
x
x X .YL Q6 +00
0
13
ei
_13
d'
/
U-1
PAUL H. HOWARD, JR.
DEBBIE EDWARDS HOWARD
DB 4398, PG 291
}
/
y
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR
50- - -
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — —
— — 46 --- — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
SQ
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
,Q2
EXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — T8
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — Be
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
m
F
CHANNEL
Q
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE
EXISTING TREE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
mCi0
I—
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE DROP
a
(SEE DETAIL SHEET SHEET D
Q T-
BRUSH TOE
D
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
�\
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
m
DWG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
D2)
O a
VEGETATED SILL
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
<
Z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
z
Z
3
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O¢a�
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
PROJ. DATE:
LOG SILL
Of
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
OCT 2014
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
9
(SEE DETAIL DWG 112)
PROJ. NO.:
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
(PROFILE)
(IAjJ�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
DOUBLE LOG DROP
O
(PROFILE)
o]
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
O
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 06-2014\CADD\Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH A.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
DD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(1) 919.782.9672
W W W.Wkdickson.com
NO U—SE No.
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
HALF SCALE ,
r
H m
O N
F N
O a
a
h
O (
v '
°
0 LL �
N
° o w k
Y rn
i
it C
W
Z
Q
2 tp
U
o
Z
¢
LU
=
2
H
(n N Z
m
F
Z
O
Q
JU
Z
J
¢w
mCi0
I—
O
Q
> H
O 1n
a
Z
Q T-
o
D
LLL L
°
Z
g
U
X?
m
d
O a
W
W
A
<
Z
H
¢
2 m
N n
LU
I
z
Z
3
¢www
Z¢Zm
O
O¢a�
a
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
9
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

216 -
212 -
208 -
_ EXISTING GRADE ALONG
STREAM CENTERLINE
1
204
200 - ---- - - - - -_
196 -
SCALE: HOR 1 " =40; VERT 1 " =4'
- 216
- 212
- 208
- 204
- - - -_ - 200
- 196
192
EXISTING CONTOUR
—50— — —
V'C-o,
Z� Qp CI `
192
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
6Q
o
q
\x. � Q
N
z ?
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — TB
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — BB
Q \V Q
m
}
LCE X LCD X
X LG : X LCL
X LC. X � X LCG X
LCFX L (� LC XE-
LCD
/
G
0
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
mop
V
p
L�
DOUBLE
a
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
Q�Z
BRUSH TOE
"h
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
�\
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
M
DWG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
D2)
z
O a
VEGETATED SILL
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
<
Z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
Z
z
3
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
,
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O¢a�
LOG TOE PROTECTION
—
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
♦ PROJ. DATE:
LOG SILL
LU
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
x
_- - - - X - - - - - x - - - - -- X - - -
- - x - - _- -- X - - - -
is --
- x _ _-
—_ - �
LOG VANE
10
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
J
f t
(PROFILE)
LU
LOG SILL
0 +00
-
1±08 -- - - -
- -- _ _ —205
— — 3 +00
4+ + CD
(PROFILE)
a{
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
2_+_00
(PROFILE)
O
- ee - - = -�
g-
- --
= -sue - =...
LU
-
TB
J
�
I
REACH Bt
ENHANCEMENTII
I
I I
/
//
\
\
IS 0+0 0 +00 TO 5 +34)
I
SCALE:1 "41
216 -
212 -
208 -
_ EXISTING GRADE ALONG
STREAM CENTERLINE
1
204
200 - ---- - - - - -_
196 -
SCALE: HOR 1 " =40; VERT 1 " =4'
- 216
- 212
- 208
- 204
- - - -_ - 200
- 196
192
EXISTING CONTOUR
—50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — —
192
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
6Q
o
q
05 o
N
z ?
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — TB
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — BB
O O C G
m
0 +00
Q
1 +00
2 +00
3 +00
4 +00
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR
—50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — —
— — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
6Q
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
Q�a
W Z
EXISTING WETLAND
N
z ?
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
— — — — TB
EXISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — BB
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
J
CHANNEL
Q
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE'�3
o
EXISTING TREE
0
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
mop
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
a
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
Q�Z
BRUSH TOE
�o
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
�\
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
M
DWG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
D2)
z
O a
VEGETATED SILL
W
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
<
Z
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
O
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
Z
z
3
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O¢a�
LOG TOE PROTECTION
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
♦ PROJ. DATE:
LOG SILL
Of
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
OCT 2014
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
10
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
f t
(PROFILE)
�WT�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
DOUBLE LOG DROP
O
(PROFILE)
a{
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
O
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 062014 \CADD\Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH B.dwq -April 21. 2015 - Frasier Mullen
WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(t) 919.782.9672
www Wkdicksc n.com
NO.0 —SE NO. F 4
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE I;
HO
O N
F N
O a
a
Z
U
° Q 1
WO 1
Co
° O
Y rn
�Iw I
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
W
Z
Q
2 ip
xU o
W �
Q�a
W Z
m
N
z ?
cc
H
ro W
Q
J
_ 5
Q
W
Z O C
_
o
c Q Z
0
Q W
mop
Ir
Z�
0 P:
a
W ¢
Q�Z
o6
�o
LL =
LL
°
Z
U
M
g
d
z
O a
W
W
U
U
<
Z
H
¢
2 m
N A
W
I
Z
z
3
¢www
Z¢Zm
O
O¢a�
a
♦ PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
10
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

' — _ _ — _ _ _ — — \ \ \
B ENHANCEMENT I
(STA 5 +45 TO.1'�+22)
x00
-2-00
y REACH 131 INSTALL LOG TOES FROM STA
13+45
TO STA 7 +19 TO NARROW THE
ENHANCEMENT II BOTTOM WIDTH OF THE CHANNEL TO
(STA 0 +00 TO 5 +34) APPROX 6' TO 9'. BACKFILL BEHIND
LOG TOES AND TIE INTO EXISTING
\ GROUND AT ELEV: 198.0'. '
/r
SCALE: 1 " =30' //
208 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I — 208
204 — — 204
EXISTING GRADE ALONG ._
STREAM CENTERLINE
200 — — 200
196 — - - - - - -- � -- — 196
192— — 192
188 — — 188
SCALE: HOR 1 " =40'; VERT 1 " =4'
184
184
m
6 a
rn .6
m rn 14
m m rn
oJ m m
m
4 +00
5 +00
6 +00
7 +00
8 +00
NOTES: �
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO D� K W V /��(��)
N
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION. community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS. Urban Development + Geomatics
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT 720 Corporate Drive
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL. Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN, (1)919.782.9672
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER WkrIICkson.COm
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED. Ng, U—SE No. Faa�a
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG D2 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR —50— —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR 5O
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
EXISTING WETLAND _ _ _ _
2" =FULL SCALE
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. — — — — TB y 1" = HALF SCALE
E %ISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — — — — BB
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF w rn
CHANNEL O N
EXISTING FENCELINE — — — — X N
J O
EXISTING TREELINE d
EXISTING TREE
Z
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
U
LIMITS OF PROPOSED L�
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
rn
DOUBLE LOG DROP Z
(SEE DETAIL SHEET D5) s 0
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)\LQ
Z
9 O
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)!GG ¢ }
J
NOTE: (REACH 132 -STA 5 +45 TO 11 +221 wo ¢ O
VEGETATED SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2) w O a
1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR F- 66 p Z
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O ° O rwi)
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE r - ¢
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS j w W
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE w D_
D1 & D3. (SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED
OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. LOG TOE PROTECTION '
3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH < 6" TO ONLY THOSE (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION. LOG SILL
Jul
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4) U
Z
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE _
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
STRUCTURE TABLE ®� z m Z z
FLOODPLAIN SILL = Q =
FROM TO (SEE DETAIL DWG DO) �� I— cc
W Q p1 (7
STRUCTURE BANK' Tn H iQ a
STA ELEV STA ELEV U Z j OC Z
LOG TOE 5 +45 - - -- 7 +20 - - -- R LOG GRADE CONTROL
(PROFILE) a 0 0U J Z o
LOG STRUCTURE 7 +53 197.20 - -- — - - -- O � Q Z
"RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING (PROF LE) 8 0 F O a w
DOWNSTREAM J — Z ¢o
DOUBLE LOG DROP O LE a: = Z Q
(PROFILE) a{ LL 0 F
z In
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O m d 0 Q
(PROFILE) lij J ¢ U
Q f- 2 m
Z N A
z
W Z ¢ ww
Z u
3 ¢Zm
a O
C)
PROJ. DATE: M
Of FM
Q.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
11
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONSTOTHIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Projects \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- D62014 \CADMPlan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH B.dwq -April 21. 2015 - Frasier Mullen

/ X\�X NOTES:
C X L— / / / / G4� / / KOO / / / 1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
/ q
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONEAREAOF THETREESTOBESAVED.
/ — — — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — ' / / o % y / 5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
/ — REACH T I — / / EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
ENHANCEMENT \ — i ' / / / /' /�j / l TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
/ (STA 5 +45 TO 11 +22) _ — — — — — / / / �X.0 /� / a THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
— _ _ _ / / — — _ _ _ — — — — — — / ^ / �, / / / / y f t 6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
Z / BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
JQ /� / I � 00 ENGINEER.
— — — — \ / / / / ,� / / / /+/ / y 7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE T DAMAGED REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY BY THE ENGINEER.
11+0() � / // / l / y y r 8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
'Lpp�SQ °— E6
Q -- /�- --
rN LEGEND
e t /
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR —50 — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — — — — 46 — — — — —
s
REACH At y // PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR rjQ
/ ✓ / }[�O 7 // / /
/ P2 RESTORATION / y / PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR �Q2
— (STA 0 +75 TO 13 +85)
EXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING TOP OF BANK. — — — — T8
E %ISTING BOTTOM OF BANK — — — — BB
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
CHANNEL
- --
EXISTING FENCELINE — X —
EXISTING TREELINE
REACH A2 /
ENHANCEMENTI y
(STA 13 #85 TO 21 +17) i p / / EXISTING TREE
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK LCE
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
SCALE:
/ CONSERVATION EASEMENT
+ / /
DOUBLE LOG DROP
(SEE DETAIL SHEET D5)
BRUSH TOE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3) MT(/ {
208 — 208 PROPOSED DETAIL DWG D2)
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
VEGETATED SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2) v
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS O
(SEE DETAIL DWG 03)
204 — — 204
BEDDED LOG
DETAIL DING D3)
(SEE DETAIL DWG 03)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
_EXISTING GRADE ALONG — (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
STREAM CENTERLINE NOTE: (REACH B2 -STA 5 +45 TO 11 +22) LOG SILL
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
200 — — 200 1. ALL IRREGULAR BANKS ARE TO BE SMOOTHED AND /OR LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
SOD MATS INSTALLED TO ADDRESS ALL RUTS /GULLIES (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
RESULTING FROM CATTLE ACCESS. COIR MATTING & LIVE LOG VANE
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG BANKS THAT ARE (SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
REGRADED /SMOOTHED PER TYPICAL DETAILS ON DWGS
D1 & D3. FLOODPLAIN SILL ®�
_ 2. NO EXISTING TREES OVER 6" DBH ARE TO BE DAMAGED (SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — OR REMOVED UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
--- - - - - -- 3. MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL WITH A DBH<6 "TO ONLY THOSE n
LOG GRADE CONTROL
196 — - ------- ------ -- --- - - - -`` — 196 NECESSARY FOR ACCESS OR CONSTRUCTION. (PROFILE)
LOG SILL O
(PROFILE) o
STRUCTURE TABLE DOUBLE LOG DROP
192 — — 192 (PROFILE)
FROM TO BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE O
STRUCTURE BANK
STA I ELEV STA ELEV (PROFILE)
— — LOG STRUCTURE 8 +51 195.20 - - -- -- --
LOG STRUCTURE 9 +17 196.20 - - -- — —
188 — — 188 VEGETATED SILL 10 +45 - -- 10 +67 — R
LOG GRADE CONTROL 10 +69 196.20 - - -- — —
`RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BANK LOCATIONS ARE REFERENCED LOOKING
— — DOWNSTREAM
SCALE: HOR 1 " =40'; VERT 1 " =4'
184 184
n 16
cn� v m
cn rn m m m m
8 +00 9 +00 10 +00 11 +00
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .O BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Prclects \EBX12014D05400RA - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 062014 \CADD\Pian Set\2014005800 BHT REACH B.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
DAEMON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(t) 919.782.9672
wwwWkdickso,com
No. U—SE No. ­4 ;
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE I;
LU
O N
I— N
O a
a
Z I
U
° Q 1
0 1
Co
° O co
Y N
L I
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
w
Z
2
U o
a�
UU Z
m
N
z z
� H`-
FT
x
r,
`U
m
¢ wJ
_
x
Q
w
Z O
�_
Z o
Q Z
LL
¢ w
mop
0
z �
F
000
a
w¢
Q�Z
od
�o
LL x
LL
°
Z
v
M
g
d
Zm
O a
W
Lu
U
U
Z
¢
xm
N A
W
I
z
Z
3
Z¢zm
O
O¢a0
a
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
12
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

1\�
\ \ V \ \ REACHC
REMOVE EXISTING ULVERT
/
— ENHANCEMENT II / III II
VUA A IA A AND REGRADE STREAM EGRADE STREAM BANKS, M BANKS, \ (STA 0 +17 TO 3 +97)
\
�\ l � INSTALL COIR MATIN & LIVE \ INSTALL COIR MATING &
\ VVAAm A \6TAKES \\ QIVE STAKES
Q *QQ +00 I AI II \\
3l '
\VA 1 +00 \ \\ 2 +00 / v )�10 I II
— _ =
\ WRCP
\ NE INV= 202.6yy \ � \ _ E9 -- — �= � T$— - -Tg -
SW INV =202
\
24 "CPP
\ \\ \ NE INV=202_BS
sW INV =2a2a6
��vvv�v vv vv Iv SCAL6i 3�'
212 — I I I I I I I I I I — 212
208 — — 208
—EXISTING GRADE Ir 111 STREAM CENTERLINE LONG
( I
204 — ( I — 204
200 — — _ — _ — 200
196 — 1 — 196
192 — — 192
SCALE: HOR 1 " =40'; VERT 1 " =4'
188 188
on
f` f0 f0 rro N M A O N
N N N lV C N A A m m
N
0 +00 1 +00 2 +00 3 +00 4 +00
NOTES:
1. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS.
3. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND BYPASS PUMPING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MODIFIED AT
THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMPACT SOIL AROUND ROOTS OR TREES TO REMAIN,
AND SHALL NOT DAMAGE SUCH TREES IN ANY WAY. EXCAVATED OR OTHER
MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED, PILED OR STORED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE AREA OF THE TREES TO BE SAVED.
5. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL
EXCAVATION AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED INSIDE THE EXISTING CHANNEL
TO BE ABANDONED AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. FILL ALL ABANDONED DITCHES WITHIN THE PROPOSED EASEMENT PER CHANNEL
BACKFILL DETAIL SHOWN ON DWG 02 UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE
ENGINEER.
7. NO EXISTING TREES ARE TO BE DAMAGED OR REMOVED ALONG ENHANCEMENT
REACHES UNLESS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
8. FOR PROPOSED FENCING LOCATIONS, SEE DWG Fl.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR
—50— — —
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR — —
— — 46 — — — — —
PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR
rjQ
PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR
U
W Z
EXISTING WETLAND I.
z
EXISTING TOP OF BANK.
—��— — TB
E %ISTING BOTTOM OF BANK
— — — — BB
PROPOSED CENTERLINE OF
a
z
CHANNEL
J_
EXISTING FENCELINE
- - -- X —
EXISTING TREELINE
°
¢ w
EXISTING TREE
Er
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
OJ � rj
LIMITS OF PROPOSED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
L�
DOUBLE
-6
SHEET DP
(SEE DETAIL D5)
SHEET
LL =
LL
°
BRUSH TOE
U
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
� { /
PROPOSED CHANNEL PLUG
W
DWG D2)
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
U
VEGETATED SILL
H
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
v
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS
Z¢zm
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
O
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D3)
C)
LOG TOE PROTECTION
M
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FM
LOG SILL
O.C. DATE:
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
DRAWING NUMBER:
LOG GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURE
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
LOG VANE
c
(SEE DETAIL DWG D2)
FLOODPLAIN SILL
®�
(SEE DETAIL DWG D4)
LOG GRADE CONTROL
f t
(PROFILE)
�WT�
LOG SILL
O
(PROFILE)
o
DOUBLE LOG DROP
O
(PROFILE)
a{
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
O
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .O BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \Prolecte \EBX1201400540019A - Buffalo Branch Stream Mitigation, IPO NC- 062014 \CADD \Plan Set\2014005800 BHT REACH B.dwq -April 21, 2015 - Frasier Mullen
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(t) 919.782.9672
wwwWkdickson.com
No. U—SE No. ­4 ;
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE I;
H
O N
F N
O a
a
Z I
U
0
co
° o
Y N
�L� I
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
w
z
Q
0
x
W �
N
U
W Z
U
z
_ jW
cr
a
z
Z O_ C)
J_
z
c ~ Z
W
°
¢ w
Er
Z
OJ � rj
[L
w
Q�Z
-6
Fo
LL =
LL
°
Z
U
Z)
�
CO
E
Il
z m
O a
W
w
U
z
H
¢
2 m
N A
W
I
z
Z
3
Z¢zm
Ir
O
=0
C)
PROJ. DATE:
M
Of
FM
O.C. DATE:
OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
13
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

INSTALL 2,544 LF (TOTAL) OF
WOVEN WIRE FENCE. SEE
DETAIL DWG D5
REMOVE 2,468 LF (TOTAL)
OF EXISTING FENCE.
@� TIE PROPOSED
X REMOVE 2,468 LF (TOTAL) FENCE INTO
/ . �� \ OF EXISTING FENCE. EXISTING. I�
d`I
�X ..x —_� T—X
TIE PROPOSED — _ —
\ FENCE INTO �F. ".
EXISTING. —
f
/r
- .-
b �
I
OHt} OHP OH
_ V B
'UTTLe DEVINE RD �yOgR jg38 -- L '•
/ SCALE:1 ' =100'
LEGEND
TIE PROPOSED
FENCEINTO
EXISTING.
EXISTING FENCE — — — — X 1
PROPOSED FENCE )(
COPYRIGHT O, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .O BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO O- 580ae8717
C)
FULL SCALE: 1" =100
0 100 200
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCAL
w
H m
O N
O�
� a
a
z
O
U
y
Z
O
U
Z
O 0 p
LL
Q z
U z
wo ¢ z
O O
a z W U
Z
° Ua)
Y N J
tE
¢ CC o.
Z
w
z
=�
LU
F-LU�Z
H
U
to
_ z
oa x
z
7
z00
z
g
w
m¢
<
�z a
�S
M 0
z
w m
OJ �
U
W
z D
¢ N
I¢i22
UL 0
LL
z o
n
J
U
a M
z
4
F
Q
ODU
z
¢ m
U
I
O
Z
3
i
a
V 1I1 I
�
o
REMOVE 2,468 LF (TOTAL)
OF EXISTING FENCE.
A
\ ! 1 .:
\
• '
! . f . ' //
A 1
( �2 •�� \
00\ \\
I 111 11 A
G.C.:
V.
G.C. DATE:
@� TIE PROPOSED
X REMOVE 2,468 LF (TOTAL) FENCE INTO
/ . �� \ OF EXISTING FENCE. EXISTING. I�
d`I
�X ..x —_� T—X
TIE PROPOSED — _ —
\ FENCE INTO �F. ".
EXISTING. —
f
/r
- .-
b �
I
OHt} OHP OH
_ V B
'UTTLe DEVINE RD �yOgR jg38 -- L '•
/ SCALE:1 ' =100'
LEGEND
TIE PROPOSED
FENCEINTO
EXISTING.
EXISTING FENCE — — — — X 1
PROPOSED FENCE )(
COPYRIGHT O, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .O BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO O- 580ae8717
C)
FULL SCALE: 1" =100
0 100 200
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCAL
w
H m
O N
O�
� a
a
z
O
U
y
Z
O
U
Z
O 0 p
LL
Q z
U z
wo ¢ z
O O
a z W U
Z
° Ua)
Y N J
tE
¢ CC o.
Z
w
z
=�
LU
F-LU�Z
H
U
to
_ z
oa x
z
7
z00
z
g
w
m¢
<
�z a
�S
M 0
z
w m
OJ �
U
W
z D
¢ N
I¢i22
UL 0
LL
z o
n
J
U
a M
z
4
F
Q
ODU
z
¢ m
U
I
O
Z
3
x
N n
www�
a
zxzm
o
00Mi
aa�
PROJ. DATE:
MAY
2014
G.C.:
FM
G.C. DATE:
OCT
2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
F1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00.
RA

PLANTING TABLE
Permanent Riparian Seed Mix
W
}
HH
U
2
(n Z
Percent
Z
UZ 7
Common Name
Scientific Name
Composition
¢0O d
Cr ¢ Z q
Virginia Wildry e
Elymus virginicus
25%
oE� z
Swachgress
Panic— virgatum
25%
li p a
� �
Liftle Blue Stem
Sch,,,,hynum scopanum
25%
W
Soft Rush
Juncus e#usus
25%
Live Staking and Live Cuttings Bundle Tree
Species
z¢Zm
a O
O
Percent
C a
Common Name I
Scientific Name
Composition
Q.c.:
Silky dogwood
Corms amomum
20%
OCT
Silky willow
Selix sencea
20%
P1
Black willow
Seim nigra
60%
20140058.00. RA
Riparian Planting
Percent
Common Name
Scientific Name
Habitat
Composition
River birch
Betula nigre
Riparian
10%
Willow oak
Q— phellos
15%
Swamp chestnut oak
Q.— michauxil
10%
Water oak
Que7cus nigre
15%
American sycamore
Platanus occidenralis
15%
Black gum
Nyssa sytvatica
10%
Overoup oak
Q— lyreta
Welland
10%
Bald cypress
Tc -d,.. distichum
Wetland
15%
NOTES:
1. Bare root planting is proposed for all areas within the easement not
designated for live staking.
2. Bare net planting density is
approximately 680 stems per
acre.
3. Live stakes are proposed along the outside of meander bends and along
both banks of straight reaches adjacent to pools.
4. Permanent near!,, seed mix shall be applied to all disturbed
areas within
the conservation easement at a
to of 151bs/acre.
q.
T
'Silii
��5-
PLANTING NOTES
ALL PLANTING AREAS
1. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT
VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT EROSION CONTROL
MEASURES AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY TO ENSURE MEASURES ARE FUNCTIONING
PROPERLY.
2. DISTURBED AREAS NOT AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE TEMPORARILY VEGETATED WITHIN IO
WORKING DAYS. UPON COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING, PERMANENT VEGETATION SHALL
BE ESTABLISHED FOR ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS. SEEDING SHALL
BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
3. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED PRIOR TO PLANTING BY DISC OR
SPRING -TOOTH CHISEL PLOW TO MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES. MULTIPLE PASSES SHALL
BE MADE ACROSS PLANTING AREAS WITH THE IMPLEMENT AND THE FINAL PASS SHALL
FOLLOW TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS.
4. COIR FABRIC MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE CUT WITH PLANTING IMPLEMENTS, THE SMALLEST
OPENING NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE EACH PLANT SHALL BE CUT INTO COIR FABRIC
USING A SHARP KNIFE OR SHEARS. NO HOLES LARGER THAN 12 INCHES SHALL BE MADE.
51 SPECIES SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED SUCH THAT 3 TO PLANTS OF THE SAME SPECIES ARE
GROUPED TOGETHER.
6. BARE ROOT PLANTINGS SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET ##.
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED ACCORDING TO DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET ##.
7. TREATMENT /REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES, PINES AND SWEET GUMS LESS THAN 6" DBH
SHALL BE PERFORMED THROUGHOUT THE PLANTED AREA.
8. RIPARIAN SPECIES SHALL BE PLANTED WITHIN 30' OF A STREAM CHANNEL.
9. WETLAND SPECIES SHOULD ACCOUNT FOR AT LEAST 50% OF ALL PLANTED STEMS IN
EXISTING WETLAND AREAS.
>I
/I
I
J
%°-vim -- _�•����'� •�s�� •�Zv� -rte
IIIII i ®� �! ®�� ����4��• • �•�������! j � ��i3a� �r�jYt: +may ����� ®®
I — '
I
— 'CHI— — — _
OHP
P
P —OFP I L
LIITLE DEVINE RD NCSR 7938 - a — - -.X _
SCALE:1 ' =100'
PLANTING LE
xl
II
I
I
I
I�x
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GEND
RIPARIAN PLANTING l� J
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .O BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 BHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(f) 770.955.0338
v, lwwWkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO- 564,867!7
0
FULL SCALE: 1" =100
0 100 200
2" = FULL SCALE
�I 1" = HALF SCALE I;
H �
� N
C N
J O
a
z
0
U
y
Z
O
U
Z Q
OF p
a LL
ME 0
U Z
O Z
0
O z
W LL O
¢ N 0 U
Z
O QWQ
Y N> J
Q W Q
cc cc a
LU z
W
}
HH
U
2
(n Z
=d i
Z
UZ 7
Z w
¢0O d
Cr ¢ Z q
¢¢
m
z m
W u
oE� z
z5
li p a
� �
z 0
w
Co
U ~
W
Q Q
za
Ill
4 F
Z H
0U
¢ m
Ud
0 3
z¢Zm
a O
O
C a
r PROJ. DATE:
MAY
2014 ,
Q.c.:
FM
Q.C.DATE:
OCT
2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
P1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

SCALE:1 ' =100'
II
1�X
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
J
VP
PROPOSED MONITORING
CROSS - SECTION
PROPOSED STAGE RECORDER
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLYCOPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.com
ea NCENSE NO O- 580ae8717
C)
FULL SCALE: 1" =100
0 100 200
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCAL
w
H m
O N
C1 N
J O
a
z
0
0
U
Q
r
w
z
0
U
Z
O 0 p
LL
Q z
U Z
to ¢
O Z O
a w ❑ c7
z
I ° O cawai�
Y N J
LU
LU z z
F— W Z
UZZ S
ZO0 Z
q Q Z Q
M90 O O
OF-ai
Z Z
LSO
m�
w
Z
a
x N
X U
IL z
m i
z w
m ¢
z;;
ZF
Z
z ❑
w �
U J
¢ Q
F- 0_
L L
z ¢
0U
4 H
z
¢ m
x
U Z
N y
O
z ¢
a o
o °a
PROJ. DATE:
MAY
2014
G.C.:
FM
G.C. DATE:
OCT
2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
M1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
w
zm
a0

LEGEND
EXISTING TREELINE !"`lYY-YYYY,
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE Lw
PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SILT FENCE -
STAGING /STOCKPILE AREA }
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
%--/
TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING i,%
TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE: 30.7 ACRES
TOTAL AREA OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT: 31.7 ACRES
210"
_too too too
_-
b
1 '
PROPOSED TEMPORARY
CROSSING. SEE DETAIL
SHEET D5.
I t 1 \I 11 \ \ E
\ V A V A
/j
--loo
f 1
�Op \ X - - -- — D vo
X
'' p
dtr
o
o
c —
.� off
- -- — — oHP
LIITLE DEVINE RD NCSR 1938
y / EXISTING CROSSING. — — _ — — - -- — —� —
SCALE:1 " =100'
ROPOSEDTEMPORARY
RAVEL CONSTRUCTION ,
NTRANCE. SEE DETAIL <OD
HEET D1. .
/ P
IDATIE `toD G
�b1lDl E9 l/ �
PROPOSED FORD
CROSSING. SEE DETAIL
SHEET D4.
COPYRIGHT M, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL J BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
xl
II
I
I
I�x
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
J
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.conn
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
0
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE
w
D N
O
J O
a
z
0
U
z
0
U
O 0
� O
O
w z
o r z
O O
a N ° U
z
° O Qwn
Y 65 J
W
cc cc a
z
O_
J W
.0 C
IL z z =
xUx
0 W Z
Z F-
N 2
z :0::) Z Z W
Q O O � Q
Is a z z
o m
ar �
Z
= Z T¢
UL p O z 0
Z Fn w
M I= U m
LU Z d
w IL Q
4 F �U
z ¢ m
x
U
UJI z_ a
0 3 Lu -
3°v °xo ao
a O O ¢ a
Ir
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014
G. C.: FM
G.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
ES1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA
PROPOSED FORD
CROSSING. SEE DETAIL
SHEET D4.
COPYRIGHT M, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL J BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 SHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
xl
II
I
I
I�x
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
J
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.conn
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
0
FULL SCALE: 1"=30
0 30 60
2" = FULL SCALE
y 1. = HALF SCALE
w
D N
O
J O
a
z
0
U
z
0
U
O 0
� O
O
w z
o r z
O O
a N ° U
z
° O Qwn
Y 65 J
W
cc cc a
z
O_
J W
.0 C
IL z z =
xUx
0 W Z
Z F-
N 2
z :0::) Z Z W
Q O O � Q
Is a z z
o m
ar �
Z
= Z T¢
UL p O z 0
Z Fn w
M I= U m
LU Z d
w IL Q
4 F �U
z ¢ m
x
U
UJI z_ a
0 3 Lu -
3°v °xo ao
a O O ¢ a
Ir
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014
G. C.: FM
G.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
ES1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE - FALL
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES RATE (LB /ACRE)
RYE (GRAIN) 120
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS -AUG. 15 - DEC. 15
COASTAL PLAIN AND PIEDMONT -AUG. 15 - DEC. 30
SOILAMENDMENTS
FOLLOW SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB /ACRE GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE
AND 1,000 LB /ACRE 10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LB /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, NETTING, OR A
MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A
MULCH ANCHORING TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REPAIR AND REFERTILIZE DAMAGED AREAS IMMEDIATELY. TOPDRESS WITH 50
LB /ACRE OF NITROGEN IN MARCH. IF IT IS NECESSARY TO EXTEND TEMPORARY
COVER BEYOND JUNE 15, OVERSEED WITH 50 LB /ACRE KOBE (PIEDMONT AND
COASTAL PLAIN) OR KOREAN (MOUNTAINS) LESPEDEZA IN LATE FEBRUARY OR
EARLY MARCH.
TEMPORARY SEEDING - LATE WINTER /EARLY SPRING
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES
RYE (GRAIN)
ANNUAL LESPEDEZA (KOBE IN PIEDMONT
AND COASTAL PLAIN, KOREAN IN MOUNTAINS)
OMIT ANNUAL LESPEDEZA WHEN DURATION OF TEMF
EXTEND BEYOND JUNE.
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS -ABOVE 2500 FT: FEB. 15 -MAY 15
BELOW 2500 FT: FEB. 1 -MAY 1
PIEDMONT -JAN. 1 -MAY 1
COASTAL PLAIN - DEC.1 -APR. 15
RATE (LB /ACRE)
120
50
ORARY COVER IS NOT TC
SOIL AMENDMENTS
FOLLOW RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB/ACRE GROUND
AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB /ACRE 10 -10-10 FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LB /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT, NETTING OR A
MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS A
MULCH ANCHORING TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REFERTILIZE IF GROWTH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, REFERTILIZE AND MULCH
IM- MEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE.
EROSION CONTROL:
GENERAL NOTES
1. REVIEW CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. ALL PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY EROSION
CONTROL STRUCTURES (LE ROCK CHECK DAMS, SILT FENCE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES) SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO
THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE LAND- DISTURBING ACTIVITY.
2. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AREAS SHOWN ARE TO GUIDE CONTRACTOR DURING CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH
ENGINEER IF ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROUTES WILL IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF CONSTRUCTION.
3. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SEEDED PER THE SPECIFICATIONS IN THE SEEDING SCHEDULE SHOWN ON THIS
SHEET.
4. MULCH: APPLY 2 TONS /ACRE GRAIN STRAW AND ANCHOR STRAW ON ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS.
5. EROSION CONTROL:
A. INSTALL PERMANENT VEGETATIVE COVER AND THE LONG -TERM EROSION PROTECTION MEASURES OR STRUCTURES AS DIRECTED BY
ENGINEER UPON CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. APPROPRIATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE PLACED BETWEEN THE
DISTURBED AREA AND AFFECTED WATERWAY AND MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENTLY VEGETATED.
B. PROVIDE FOR HANDLING THE INCREASED RUNOFF CAUSED BY CHANGED SOIL AND SURFACE CONDITIONS. USE EFFECTIVE MEANS TO
CONSERVE EXISTING ON-SITE SOIL CONDITIONS.
C. DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY. USE
TEMPORARY PLANT COVER, MULCHING, AND /OR STRUCTURES TO CONTROL RUNOFF AND PROTECT AREAS SUBJECT TO EROSION
DURING CONSTRUCTION.
D. ALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROLS ARE TO BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS AND AFTER ANY STORM
EVENT OF GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION DURING ANY 24 -HOUR PERIOD. MAINTENANCE OF SEDIMENT TRAPPING
STRUCTURES SHALL BE PERFORMED AS NECESSARY PER THESE INSPECTIONS. SILT FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON
PLANS.
E. STABILIZATION MEASURES SHALL BE INITIATED AT THE END OF EACH DAY IN PORTIONS OF THE SITE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
HAVE TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. GROUNDCOVER MUST BE ESTABLISHED PER THE "GROUND COVER SCHEDULE"
SHOWN ON THIS SHEET IN AREAS WHERE CONSTRUCTION HAS TEMPORARILY CEASED. ALL AREAS WHERE FINAL GRADE HAS BEEN
ESTABLISHED SHALL BE PERMANENTLY STABILIZED WITHIN 2 CALENDAR DAYS.
F. CONTRACTOR MUST TAKE THE NECESSARY ACTION TO MINIMIZE THE TRACKING OF MUD ONTO THE PAVED ROADWAY FROM
CONSTRUCTION AREAS. DAILY REMOVAL OF MUD /SOIL MAY BE REQUIRED.
G. ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF
ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND ALL DISTURBED AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED. ADDITIONAL CONTROL DEVICES MAY BE REQUIRED
DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ORDER TO CONTROL EROSION AND /OR OFF SITE SEDIMENTATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL
TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM OF 500 LINEAR FEET OF
STREAM MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
H. EROSION CONTROL MATTING (SEE DETAIL SHEET 01) SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL BANKS FROM
APPROXIMATELY 2.0' TO 3.0' ABOVE TOP OF BANK DOWN TO CHANNEL TOE.
I. SILT FENCING TO BE INSTALLED AROUND INDICATED STOCKPILE AREAS TO PREVENT LOSS OF SEDIMENT. STOCKPILE AREAS MAY BE
RELOCATED UPON APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
J. ASPHALT TACKIFIER SHALL NOT BE USED.
K. ALL NECESSARY MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO PREVENT OIL, TAR, TRASH, AND OTHER POLLUTANTS FROM ENTERING THE ADJACENT
OFF SITE AREAS.
L. WETLANDS /STREAMS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED AS DESIGNATED IMPACT AREAS.
M. ACTIVITIES MUST AVOID DISTURBANCE OF WOODY RIPARIAN VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA TO THE GREATEST EXTENT
PRACTICABLE. REMOVAL OF VEGETATION MUST BE LIMITED TO ONLY THAT NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHANNEL.
N. NO ONSITE BURIAL OR BURNING OF VEGETATION OR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS WILL BE PERMITTED. VEGETATIVE DEBRIS SHALL BE
STOCKPILED AND DISPOSED OF ONSITE PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
O. ANY GRADING BEYOND THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHOWN ON THE PLAN IS A VIOLATION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA EROSION CONTROL
ORDINANCE, AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE.
P. PLEASE REFERENCE PLAN SHEET DETAILS AND NCDENR STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
Q. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION
SITE.
R. THE LOCATIONS OF SOME EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY HAVE TO BE ALTERED FROM THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS IF DRAINAGE
PATTERNS CHANGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
S. IF IT IS DETERMINED DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT SIGNIFICANT SEDIMENT IS LEAVING THE SITE (DESPITE THE
PROPER IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES), THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAND
DISTURBING ACTIVITY IS OBLIGATED TO TAKE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIVE ACTION.
TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE - SUMMER
SEEDING MIXTURE
SPECIES RATE(LB/ACRE)
GERMAN MILLET 40
IN THE PIEDMONT AND MOUNTAINS, A SMALL-STEMMED SUDANGRASS MAY BE
SUBSTITUTED AT A RATE OF 50 LB /ACRE.
SEEDING DATES
MOUNTAINS - MAY 15 -AUG. 15 PIEDMONT -
MAY 1 -AUG. 15 COASTAL PLAIN - APR.
15 -AUG. 15
SOIL AMENDMENTS
FOLLOW RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOIL TESTS OR APPLY 2,000 LB /ACRE GROUND
AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE AND 750 LB /ACRE 10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER.
MULCH
APPLY 4,000 LS /ACRE STRAW. ANCHOR STRAW BY TACKING WITH ASPHALT,
NETTING OR A MULCH ANCHORING TOOL. A DISK WITH BLADES SET NEARLY
STRAIGHT CAN BE USED AS AN ANCHORING TOOL.
MAINTENANCE
REFERTILIZE IF GROWrH IS NOT FULLY ADEQUATE. RESEED, FERTILIZE AND
MULCH IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EROSION OR OTHER DAMAGE.
SITE AREA DESCRIPTION
PERIMETER DIKES, SWALES, DITCHES
AND SLOPES
HIGH QUALITY WATER (HOW) ZONES
SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1
GROUND COVER SCHEDULE
STABILIZATION TIME FRAME STABILIZATION TIME FRAME EXCEPTIONS
7 DAYS
7 DAYS
7 DAYS
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER 14 DAYS
ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SLOPES 14 DAYS
FLATTER THAN 4:1
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DESCRIBED IN THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND NOTES. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MAY BE PHASED -IN TO
THOSE AREAS OF THE PROJECT CURRENTLY BEING WORKED ON. THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY OR RELOCATE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TO MAKE
ADJUSTMENTS FOR UNFORESEEN FIELD CONDITIONS SO LONG AS PROPER CONSTRUCTION IS MAINTAINED TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY AND USEFULNESS OF
THE PROPOSED MEASURES. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND MULCH AT THE END OF EACH
DAY,
2. IN GENERAL, STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED FROM AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
3. EXISTING WETLANDS CANNOT BE ENCROACHED UPON UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IF NOT APPROVED AS DESIGNATED IMPACT AREAS. HIGH
VISIBILITY FENCING MUST BE PLACED AROUND ALL EXISTING WETLANDS THAT ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND /OR ARE LOCATED
WITHIN THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
4. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
5. STOCKPILE AREAS MAY BE RELOCATED UPON THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. SILT FENCING MUST BE INSTALLED AROUND ALL STOCKPILE AREAS.
6. THE WORK TO RESHAPE THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE PERFORMED USING EQUIPMENT WORKING FROM THE TOP OF THE EXISTING STREAM BANK, WHERE
POSSIBLE.
7. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WILL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE ACTIVE CHANNEL TO PERFORM WORK IF POSSIBLE. PLATFORMS SHOULD BE USED TO CROSS
CHANNEL WHERE ACCESS IS NOT POSSIBLE.
B. NO MORE CHANNEL SHALL BE DISTURBED THAN CAN BE STABILIZED BY THE END OF THE WORK DAY OR PRIOR TO RESTORING FLOW TO
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL SEGMENTS.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY CONTROL DEVICES ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED. A MAXIMUM OF 200
LINEAR FEET OF STREAM MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
10. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL MUST BE PLACED WITHIN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE AREAS,
11. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE EXISTING CHANNEL IS BEING MAINTAINED, . TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAMS AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE -WATER
THE WORK AREA AS DESCRIBED IN THE DETAILS.
12. WHEN THE PROPOSED CHANNEL HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO PREVENT EROSION, ALL TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAMS WILL BE REMOVED FROM
THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN DESIGNATED SPOILS AREAS PRIOR TO
REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY PUMP AROUND DAM.
13. AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH ROCK STRUCTURES, BOULDER TOE STABILIZATION, AND LOG TOE STABILIZATION ARE CALLED FOR ON THE PLANS, TEMPORARY
COFFER DAMS AND BYPASS PUMPING WILL BE USED TO DE -WATER THE WORK AREA, EXCEPT AT LOCATIONS IN WHICH THE NORMAL FLOW CAN BE DIVERTED
AROUND THE WORK AREA WITH THE USE OF AN EXISTING CHANNEL. WHEN THE TOE HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY STABILIZED TO RESTRAIN EROSION ALL
TEMPORARY COFFER DAMS WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE ACTIVE STREAM CHANNEL AND NORMAL FLOW RESTORED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE
DISPOSED OF IN DESIGNATED SPOILS AREA PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY COFFER DAM.
14. MATERIAL THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE STREAM WILL BE RE- DEPOSITED OUTSIDE OF THE ACTIVE CHANNEL AND ITS FLOODPLAIN.
15. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STABILIZATION OF ALL DISTURBED GRASSED AREAS AT THE TOP OF THE CHANNEL BANKS WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
SEEDING AND MULCHING SPECIFICATION AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
16. RE- FERTILIZE AND RE -SEED DISTURBED AREAS IF NECESSARY.
17. TEMPORARY AND /OR PERMANENT IMPACTS TO EXISTING WETLANDS SHALL BE AVOIDED TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. HIGH VISIBILITY FENCING SHALL BE
INSTALLED AROUND ALL EXISTING WETLANDS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND /OR ADJACENT TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
STREAM CONSTRUCTION iEQl- 1FNCF:
1. CONDUCT PRE - CONSTRUCTION MEETING INCLUDING OWNER, ENGINEER, ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS, AND OTHER AFFECTED PARTIES.
2. OBTAIN EROSION CONTROL PERMIT FROM NCDENR - LAND QUALITY SECTION AND ALL OTHER APPROVALS NECESSARY TO BEGIN AND
COMPLETE THE PROJECT.
3. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT UTILITIES ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO THE
COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. CALL NC ONE -CALL (PREVIOUSLY ULOCO) AT 1- 800 - 632 -4949 FOR UTILITY LOCATING SERVICES 48
HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION AND DEPTH OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
4. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, STABILIZED GRAVEL ENTRANCE /EXIT AND ROUTES OF INGRESS AND EGRESS SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AS SHOWN ON
THE PLANS AND DETAILS.
5. PREPARE STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS OR AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
ANY EXCESS SPOIL FROM STREAM CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED TO CONSTRUCT CHANNEL PLUGS AS SHOWN ON PLANS.
B. INSTALL PUMP AROUND APPARATUS AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AT UPSTREAM END OF PROJECT. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, MOVE PUMP
AROUND OPERATION DOWNSTREAM. (SEE DETAILS ON SHEET D1)
7. CONSTRUCT UPSTREAM PORTION OF THE CHANNEL FIRST, WORKING IN AN UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION.
B. ROUGH GRADING OF CHANNEL SHALL BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STRUCTURES.
9. INSTALL STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND DETAILS. PRIOR TO FINE GRADING, OBTAIN APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER ON INSTALLATION
OF STRUCTURES.
10. UPON COMPLETION OF FINE GRADING, INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING OR SOD MATS ALONG CHANNEL BANKS.
11. FILL AND STABILIZE ABANDONED SEGMENTS OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL PER DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
12. ALL IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND PUMPING APPARATUS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE STREAM AT THE END OF EACH DAY TO RESTORE NORMAL
FLOW BACK TO THE CHANNEL.
13. DURING STREAM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE WORK AREA SHALL BE STABILIZED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
14. INSTALL LIVE STAKE, BARE ROOT, AND CONTAINERIZED PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED ON PLANTING PLANS.
NONE
NONE
IF SLOPES ARE 10' OR LESS IN LENGTH AND ARE
NOT STEEPER THAN 2:1, 14 DAYS ARE ALLOWED
7 DAYS FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 50 FEET IN
LENGTH
NONE (EXCEPT FOR PERIMETERS AND HWQ ZONES)
COPYRIGHT 0,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME: I: \PROJECTS \EBX\2014005400RA - BUFFALO BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION, IPO NC -06- 2014 \CADD \PLAN SEM014005800 BHT PLANTING.DWG April 21, 2015 FRASIER MULLEN
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
2120 Powers Ferry Road
Suite 100
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(V) 770.955.5574
(1) 770.955.0338
www.wkdickson.cont
ea NCENSE NO- 5&Oae6717
IL ,
H �
� N
O
J O
a
z
O
0
U
r
to
O
Z ¢
O_ p
O
Z
O Z
0
O z
w w O
¢ N 0 U' LU Z
� O QWQ
Y 65 J
¢ CC a
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014
Of FM
Q.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
ES2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00.RA
CIO
W
I-
O
Z
W Z
J
O
~
Z
(D
_
C)
Q
1.-
O
'5 z
U�
x(nZ
U
=ai
ZOO
Z
W
Z W
AQ
U
C a Z
g
Z o
DO (5
p
W
wm
2
O
Q7
x
Z
¢¢
LL- O
� �
O
z 0
W
DO
O
Q
Q Q
L
W
L
Z a-
0
Z
F
0
¢ m
0
Z
3
x
N N
zwI
0
a
O
O
C a
PROJ. DATE: MAY 2014
Of FM
Q.C. DATE: OCT 2014
DRAWING NUMBER:
ES2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00.RA

SIVfflffi 15 F LICABLE- M AREAS:
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SHEET OR OVERLAND FLOW PATH LENGTH TO THE FENCE IS 100 -FEET.
WHERE THE MAXIMUM SLOPE STEEPNESS (NORMAL [PERPENDICULAR] TO FENCE LINE) IS
2H:1 V.
THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CONCENTRATED FLOWS GREATER THAN 0.5 CFS.
DO NOT PLACE SILT FENCE ACROSS CHANNELS OR USE IT AS A VELOCITY CONTROL BMP.
CONSTRICTON 'PFC.1RCATON5L
1. USE A SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC OF AT LEAST 95% BY WEIGHT OF POLYOLEFINS OR
POLYESTER, WHICH IS CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER AS CONFORMING
TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM D 6461. SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN
ULTRAVIOLET RAY INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 6 MONTHS
OF EXPECTED USABLE CONSTRUCTION LIFE AT A TEMPERATURE RANGE OF 0' TO 120' F.
2. ENSURE THAT POSTS FOR SEDIMENT FENCES ARE 1.33 LBAINEAR FT STEEL WITH A
MINIMUM LENGTH OF 5 FEET. MAKE SURE THAT STEEL POSTS HAVE PROJECTIONS TO
FACILITATE FASTENING THE FABRIC.
CONSTRUCTION:
1. CONSTRUCT THE SEDIMENT BARRIER OF EXTRA STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FILTER FABRICS.
2. ENSURE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SEDIMENT FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 24 INCHES
ABOVE THE GROUND SURFACE. (HIGHER FENCES MAY IMPOUND VOLUMES OF WATER
SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE FAILURE OF THE STRUCTURE.)
3. CONSTRUCT THE FILTER FABRIC FROM A CONTINUOUS ROLL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE
BARRIER TO AVOID JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN THE
FILTER CLOTH ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST WITH 4 FEET MINIMUM OVERLAP TO THE NEXT
POST.
4. EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC WITH 6 FEET POST SPACING DOES NOT REQUIRE WIRE
MESH SUPPORT FENCE. SECURELY FASTEN THE FILTER FABRIC DIRECTLY TO POSTS.
WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES SHOULD HAVE MINIMUM 50 POUND TENSILE STRENGTH.
5. EXCAVATE A TRENCH APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES WIDE AND 8 INCHES DEEP ALONG THE
PROPOSED LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER.
6. PLACE 12 INCHES OF THE FABRIC ALONG THE BOTTOM AND SIDE OF THE TRENCH.
7. BACKFILL THE TRENCH WITH SOIL PLACED OVER THE FILTER FABRIC AND COMPACT.
THOROUGH COMPACTION OF THE BACKFILL IS CRITICAL TO SILT FENCE PERFORMANCE.
8. DO NOT ATTACH FILTER FABRIC TO EXISTING TREES.
MAINTENANCE:
INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL MAKE ANY
REQUIRED REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY.
SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME
INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE IT PROMPTLY.
REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR
THE NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID
UNDERMINING THE FENCE DURING CLEANOUT.
REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA
TO GRADE AND STABILIZE IT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY
STABILIZED.
INSTALLATION NOTES
SITE PREPARATION
GRADE AND COMPACT AREA.
REMOVE ALL ROCKS, CLODS, VEGETATION, AND OBSTRUCTIONS SO THAT MATTING
WILL HAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL.
PREPARE SEEDBED BY LOOSENING 3 TO 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ABOVE FINAL
GRADE.
TEST SOILS FOR ANY NUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND SUBMIT SOIL TEST RESULTS TO
THE ENGINEER. APPLY ANY TREATMENT SUCH AS LIME OR FERTILIZERS TO THE
SOIL IF NEEDED,
SEEDING
SEE SHEETS ft. ##, ## FOR SEEDING REQUIREMENTS.
APPLY SEED TO SOIL BEFORE PLACING MATTING.
INSTALLATION - STREAM BANK
SEE GRADING NOTES ON PLAN AND PROFILE SHEETS AND ON SHEET## FOR
INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE EROSION CONTROL
MATTING.
OVERLAP ADJACENT MATS 3" (IN DIRECTION PARALLEL TO FLOW) AND ANCHOR
EVERY 12" ACROSS THE OVERLAP. THE UPSTREAM MAT SHOULD BE PLACED OVER
THE DOWNSTREAM MAT.
EDGES SHOULD BE SHINGLED AWAY FROM THE FLOW OF WATER,
LAY MAT LOOSE TO ALLOW CONTACT WITH SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH TIGHT.
ANCHOR MAT USING BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINS.
CUT 8" x 8" TRENCH ALONG TOP OF BANK FOR MATTER INATION AS SHOWN IN
FIGURES 182. EXTEND MAT 2 TO 3 FEET PAST TOP OF BANK.
PLACE ADJACENT ROLLS IN THE ANCHOR TRENCH WITH A MINIMUM OF 4" OVERLAP.
SECURE WITH BIODEGRADABLE STAKES OR PINES, BACKFILL ANCHOR TRENCH,
AND COMPACT SOIL.
STAPLE AT 12' INTERVALS ALONG OVERLAP.
STREAM BANK MATTING TO BE INSTALLED FROM TOE OF BANK TO A MINIMUM OF
2.0' PAST TOP OF BANK. SEE FIGURE 3 FOR TERMINATION AT TOP OF BANK.
IF MORE THAN ROLL IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE CHANNEL FROM THE TOP OF
BANK DOWN TO THE TOE, THEN OVERLAP MATTING BY A MINIMUM OF 1'.
EROSION CONTROL MATTING MUST MEET OR EXCEED THE
FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:
• 100 %COCONUT FIBER(COIR) TWINE WOVEN INTO
HIGH STRENGTH MATRIX.
• THICKNESS - 0.351N. MINIMUM.
• TENSILE STRENGTH -1032 LB /FT MINIMUM
• SHEARSTRESS- 4.5LBS /SQFT
• FLOW VELOCITY- OBSERVED 12 FT /SEC
• WEIGHT -23 OZ/SV
• OPEN AREA (MEASURED) -48%
• SLOPES - UP TO A MAXIMUM OF I:1
1.25 LB./LINEAR FT. STEEL POSTS\ L
EXTRA STRENGTH
FILTER FABRIC,
BACKFILL TRENCH I
COMPACTED EARTH
USE EITHER FLAT - 807701
OR V- BOTTOM TRENCH
SHOWN BELOW
FILTER FABRIC\
1"
COMPACTED ry
EARTH O
RUNOFF °
- Iff II
1 .. :d
FILTER
FABRIC
FLAT - BOTTOM TRENCH DETAIL
FLOW
L ~'B
A A
B
PLAN VIEW
SEE NOTE
SEE NOTE L
HEAVY DUTY PLASTIC TIE
LOWEST POINT f L VELND
FOR STEEL POSTS _
EARTH SURFACE
SECTION A -A
BURY FABRIC NOTE: END OF DIKE AT GROUND LEVEL TO BE
HIGHER THAN THE LOWEST POINT OF FLOW
CHECK. SUFFICIENT SANDBAGS ARE TO BE
PLACED TO PREVENT SCOURING.
SILT FENCE INSTALLATION
FILTER FABRIC\
COMPACTED
EARTH p
F-
RUNOFF m
6T v
� -III III y
FILTER FABRIC
V- SHAPED TRENCH DETAIL
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
ITS
"_Y -IN MATTING PE"
FIG. i OR FIG. 2
KEY -IN AND /OR
STAKE MATTING
JUST ABOVE
CHANNEL TOE
v
- TRENCH APPROX.
SOIL PILE 8" WIDE X 8" DEEP
FROM TRENCH
FLOW
I I-
1 ROW OF STAPLES
OR STAKES, MIN. OF
24" O.0
TRENCH APPROX.
8° WIDE x e" DEEP
SOIL PILE
FROM TRENCH
FLOW �I
__-- -- � 18" -' 1
I
i ROW OF STAPLES
= On
OR STAKES, MIN. OF
/INTAKE
24" O.0
STEP 1
STEP 1
1 ROW OF STAPLES 1 ROW OF STAPLES
FLO� STAKES. MIN. OF OR STAKES, MIN. OF
IS
r� 18° O.0 12° O.0
FLOW -`
/ �OW
SOIL FILLED
FROM SOIL PILE,
COMPACT WITH FOOT _ SOIL FILLED
FROM SOIL PILE,
STEP 2 COMPACT WITH FOOT
STEP 2
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2
EROSION CONTROL MATTING
NTS
SANDBAG BARRIERS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF THREE LAYERS OF
SANDBAGS, THE BOTTOM LAVER SHALL CONSIST OF 3 ROWS OF BAGS, THE
MIDDLE LAVER SHALL CONSIST OF 2 ROWS OF BAGS AND THE TOP LAYER SHALL
CONSIST OF 1 ROW OF BAGS. THE RECOMMENDED DIMENSION OF A FILLED
SANDBAG SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 0.5 FT X 0.5 FT X 1.5 FT.
SANDBAG IMPERVIOUS DIKE
ITS
MIDDLE LAYER // TOP LAVER
BOTTOM LAYER
EARTH SURFACE
TRENCH 0.25' DEEP ONLY WHEN
ENDS OF BAGS IN ADJACENT PLACED ON EARTH SURFACE
ROWS BUTTED SLIGHTLY
TOGETHER
SECTION B -B
PURPOSE:
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHOULD BE USED AT ALL POINTS WHERE TRAFFIC WILL BE
LEAVING A CONSTRUCTION SITE AND MOVING DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC ROAD.
CONSTRICTION SPFCIFICATONS-
1. CLEAR THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AREA OF ALL VEGETATION, ROOTS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE
MATERIAL AND PROPERLY GRADE IT.
2. PLACE THE GRAVEL TO THE SPECIFIC GRADE AND DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DETAIL, AND
SMOOTH IT.
3. PROVIDE DRAINAGE TO CARRY WATER TO A SEDIMENT TRAP OR OTHER SUITABLE OUTLET.
4. USE GEOTEXTILE FABRICS BECAUSE THEY IMPROVE STABILITY OF THE FOUNDATION IN LOCATIONS
SUBJECT TO SEEPAGE OR HIGH WATER TABLE.
NOTES:
1. EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED ONLY IN DRY AND /OR
ISOLATED SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.
2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS
FROM STREAM FLOW.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN
BE STABILIZED IN ONE WORKING DAY. A MAXIMUM OF 200 FEET
MAY BE DISTURBED AT ANY ONE TIME.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING
PUMP SIZE SUFFICIENT TO PUMP BASE FLOW.
5. DIKE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED OF NON- ERODIBLE MATERIALS
SUCH AS SANDBAGS.
=UENCF OF CONSTRUCTON FOR TYPICAL PUMP AROUND
1. INSTALL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTFALL USING CLASS
A RIP RAP AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED
PROJECT WORKING AREA.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND
THE TEMPORARY PIPING THAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW
FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK AREA TO THE STABILIZED
OUTFALL.
3. INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4. INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND DEWATERING
PUMPING APPARATUS IF NEEDED TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED
AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSE SHALL BE OF
SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER
WILL ALSO BE PUMPED TO AN OUTFALL STABILIZED WITH CLASS
A RIP RAP.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT
AND DEWATER BEFORE REMOVAL OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE.
WHEN DEWATERING AREA, ALL DIRTY WATER MUST BE PUMPED
THROUGH A SILT BAG. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE/PIPING STARTING WITH THE
DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST.
6. ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE ALL RIP RAP
AND IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH
SEED AND MULCH.
7. ALL WORK IN CHANNEL MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE REMOVING
IMPERVIOUS DIKE.
FLOW
jj
¢ U
HOSE
LASS A
= On
STONE
/INTAKE
N
PUMP
C7
z
PUMP
MAINTENANCE:
WORK
MAINTAIN THE GRAVEL PAD IN A CONDITION TO PREVENT MUD OR SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING THE DE- WATERING AREA
CONSTRUCTION SITE. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH 2_ INCH STONE. AFTER EACH PUMP
RAINFALL, INSPECT ANY STRUCTURE USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT AND CLEAN IT OUT AS NECESSARY.
IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALS SPILLED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC
ROADWAYS, OR AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS. IMPERVIOUS
DIKE
TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
NTS
FLOW DISCHARGE HOSE
GFNFRAL NOTES: LO CLASSA
1. CONSTRUCT DAM ACCORDING TO NCDENR EROSION g �! 5 WASHED STONE
CONTROL MANUAL. STONE
2. ROCK DAM RIPRAP SHALL BE 50 /50 MIX OF CLASS AND NOTE: HOSE SHOULD BE
II A A KEPT OUTSIDE OF WORK
3. PLACE ROCK DAM AS SHOWN ON PLANS. EXTEND CLASS SILT BAG AREA
B RIP RAP ROCK APRON 5 FEET DOWNSTREAM FROM TOE LOCATION
OF ROCK DAM.
STABILIZED OUTFALL FILTER FABRIC
CLASS A STONE
1.5' THICK I
5' -0' MIN. CLASS B g.J
ROCK APRON
PLAN DISCHA
ES
SPILLWAY 2:1 GROUIND HOSE
- 1 MIN OF j/ 5 W (SPILLWAY)
3:1 WASHED STONE MIN 2/3 STREAM WIDTH STABILIZED - 15'7020'
CLASS I AND 2 OUTFACE CLASS
aFLOW ASTONE I --
II RIP RAP
1.5' THICK \ \:•v ? „ \:�� i, /»"
CLASS B 2' -2' MIN. BELOW
ROCK APRON LOWEST BANK
LEVEL (MIN)
1
.. CLASS I AND FILTER FABRIC
CUTOFF FILTER II RIP RAP FILTER 8" OF CLASS A
TRENCH FABRIC SECTION A -A FABRIC STONE
SECTION B -B EXISTING
CHANNEL
SILT BAG PROFILE
TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAM PUMP AROUND & DEWATERING DETAIL
NTS NTS
COPYRIGHT O, W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME:
MV WVD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f)
91 9.782. 9672
.W
wwwkdickson.com
NC. �CMSE N0. ­4
Ill
H m
O N
O�
� a
a
O_
tJ
� Q
O
Q N LE
_O CO
Y N W
Q J
it it
Q2 U
UI Z
F- W
F
0 Z
Z
z0O L J
Z
OAF LU
Z
LL x
LL O
m �
Lu
(D
z o
X
W z
�Z
U =
W
Q W
z o
Z o
W
K j
z n
Z �
W O
H -
Z Q
O a
6i
jj
¢ U
<
H
= On
Z
N
W
C7
z
¢ � .. u
0
3
Z¢
zm
O
co
O¢a�
a
PROJ. DATE:
IMAY2014
O.C.:
FM
C.C. DATE:
- - --
DRAWING NUMBER:
D1
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

LOG SHOULD BE
BURIED IN BANK
AT LEAST 4 FEET
BOTTOM OF BAI
h B DTHULL I
PLAN VIEW
TOP OF BANK
FLOW _ SCOUR POOL
LOG SHOULD TIE -IN TO
4%l6% STREAM BANK AT APPROX 12
STREAMBED TO 3/4 OF THE BANK HEIGHT
LOG
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES-
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 8 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 20 FEET LONG, RELATIVELY
STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
2. VANE LOG ARMS SHOULD BE BURIED INTO THE BANK AND BED A MINIMUM OF 4 FEET.
3. SET ELEVATION OF TOP OF LOG CROSS PIECES TO DESIRED ELEVATION OF STREAMBED.
4. REBAR (5/8" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3'
FROM END OF LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT 5' OFFSETS. LAST REBAR
SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED AS
A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR.
5. PRE —DRILL HOLES FOR REBAR WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT.
6. DRIVE REBAR THROUGH LOGS AND BEND ENDS AS SHOWN.
LOG VANE
NTS
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE
SHALL BE PLACED BY OLD CHANNEL TO BE oy�
OVERLAPPING DIVERTEO� /�
WITH THE FLOW OF WATER
NEW CHANNEL TO BE CHANNEL BLOCK
CONSTRUCTED
PLAN VIEW
COMPACTED BACKFILL UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
(12 "LIFTS) 15 MINIMUM
,s
FINISHED GRADE
lip 77
"CAL SECTION
CHANNELPLUG
NTS
BANKFULL ELEVATION
NEW CHANNEL BED SHALL
BE TREATED AS SPECIFIED
IN PLANS
REBAR RCA I-E
ANCHOR
�.' CHANNEL INVERT
LOG TOE
FLOW
1
I I
I �
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND
RECENTLY HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 10 ", MIN LENGTH = 14'
3. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL
EVERY 1.5 ALONG THE LOG
4, DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF REBAR.
PLANTED COIR
FIBER ROLL
NORMAL WATER
LEVEL
DENSE COIR MATTING �-
(ROLANKA BioD- Mat(!D90 OR
EQUIVALENT)
WOOD STAKE
SECTION VIEW
n 0
g�
ZZ
PROPOSED
STREAM BED
FLOW
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL 0' TO 4')
�x/
B
FILTER FABRIC —
REBAR OR DUCKBILL
ANCHOR
TACK FABRIC
TO LOG
SECTION A -A
PROPOSED
STREAM BANK
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
SECTION B -B
REBAR (5 18" MIN. DIAMETER, 4' MIN.
LENGTH) OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS
INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURERS
LOG GRADE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS (TYP.)
NTS
BACKFILL AREA BETWEEN BANK AND COIR FIBER
ROLL (APPLY PERMANENT SEED MIX & COM MATING)
BANK
PLANTED COIR FLOW
SCOUR POOL TO BE
WOOD
Z
FORMED NATURALLY
COARSE BACKFILL
\���� \ %\j \\ DIAMETER E METER CAN EXPOSED
\� 6, �/\ PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
z 3
¢www ZOzm
m 0
m
m
°
=2
B
o
o k K °o
ENDOF ROLL APPROX
O 00 0
NOTES:
a
POINT REFERENCED IN
CHANNEL TOP
201* 30'
STRUCTURE TABLE
OF BANK
h B DTHULL I
PLAN VIEW
TOP OF BANK
FLOW _ SCOUR POOL
LOG SHOULD TIE -IN TO
4%l6% STREAM BANK AT APPROX 12
STREAMBED TO 3/4 OF THE BANK HEIGHT
LOG
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES-
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 8 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 20 FEET LONG, RELATIVELY
STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
2. VANE LOG ARMS SHOULD BE BURIED INTO THE BANK AND BED A MINIMUM OF 4 FEET.
3. SET ELEVATION OF TOP OF LOG CROSS PIECES TO DESIRED ELEVATION OF STREAMBED.
4. REBAR (5/8" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3'
FROM END OF LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT 5' OFFSETS. LAST REBAR
SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED AS
A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR.
5. PRE —DRILL HOLES FOR REBAR WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT.
6. DRIVE REBAR THROUGH LOGS AND BEND ENDS AS SHOWN.
LOG VANE
NTS
FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE
SHALL BE PLACED BY OLD CHANNEL TO BE oy�
OVERLAPPING DIVERTEO� /�
WITH THE FLOW OF WATER
NEW CHANNEL TO BE CHANNEL BLOCK
CONSTRUCTED
PLAN VIEW
COMPACTED BACKFILL UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
(12 "LIFTS) 15 MINIMUM
,s
FINISHED GRADE
lip 77
"CAL SECTION
CHANNELPLUG
NTS
BANKFULL ELEVATION
NEW CHANNEL BED SHALL
BE TREATED AS SPECIFIED
IN PLANS
REBAR RCA I-E
ANCHOR
�.' CHANNEL INVERT
LOG TOE
FLOW
1
I I
I �
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND
RECENTLY HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 10 ", MIN LENGTH = 14'
3. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL
EVERY 1.5 ALONG THE LOG
4, DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF REBAR.
PLANTED COIR
FIBER ROLL
NORMAL WATER
LEVEL
DENSE COIR MATTING �-
(ROLANKA BioD- Mat(!D90 OR
EQUIVALENT)
WOOD STAKE
SECTION VIEW
n 0
g�
ZZ
PROPOSED
STREAM BED
FLOW
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL 0' TO 4')
�x/
B
FILTER FABRIC —
REBAR OR DUCKBILL
ANCHOR
TACK FABRIC
TO LOG
SECTION A -A
PROPOSED
STREAM BANK
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
SECTION B -B
REBAR (5 18" MIN. DIAMETER, 4' MIN.
LENGTH) OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS
INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURERS
LOG GRADE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS (TYP.)
NTS
BACKFILL AREA BETWEEN BANK AND COIR FIBER
ROLL (APPLY PERMANENT SEED MIX & COM MATING)
BANK
PLANTED COIR FLOW
1 25' FIBER ROLL
WOOD
Z
STAKES
N
\���� \ %\j \\ DIAMETER E METER CAN EXPOSED
\� 6, �/\ PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
z 3
¢www ZOzm
2.0' TO 3.0'
O
=2
KEY IN UPSTREAM
PLAN VIEW
ENDOF ROLL APPROX
24 FT INTO BANK
NOTES:
1. DESIGNER TO MARK LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
SILLS IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
2. INSTALL STAKES ON X CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL.
MINIMUM OF TO TJ OF LOG
WOOD DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
TOP OF STAKE SHOULD NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL.
3. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (APPROX 2in DEEP) FOR
PLACEMENT OF ROLL.
NOTES;
1. INSTALL STAKES ON X CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL.
VEGETATED SILL DEFLECTOR
NTS
MIN. 25' 1 =_ 1 - MAX. 75'
TOP OF
BANK- - - - - --
EXISTING
CHANNEL
BOTTOM
COMPACTED BACKFILL
(18' LIFTS)
NOTES:
1. FILL EXISTING CHANNEL TO BANKFULL ELEVATION WHEN POSSIBLE.
2. CHANNEL MUST BE FILLED IN 12" TO 18" UFTS,
3. IF CHANNEL CANNOT BE COMPLETELY FILLED TO TOP OF BANK, FILL
TO TOP OF BANK FOR 25' OUT OF EVERY 100' SEGMENT.
CHANNEL BACKFILL
NTS
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BEAT LEAST 8 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 5A FEET LONG, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, AND
HARDWOOD.
2. CABLE ANCHORS SHOULD BE PLACED VTO T FROM EACH END OF LOG. REBAR (5/8' MINIMUM DIAMETER
3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR CABLE ANCHORS PER DIRECTION OF
ENGINEER.
3. IF REBAR IS USED, PRE -DRILL HOLES WITH 5/8' DRILL BIT.
BANKFULL ELEVATION
114 TO 11S OF LOG
DIA ETERCANBEEXPOSED
G
�I PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
PROPOSED BED
MINIMUM OF 2/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
EXISTING CHANNEL INVERT
8" MINIMUM LOG
DIAMETER (TYP.)
INSTALL CABLE ANCHOR AS SHOWN. DRILL
(OR SAW CUT) PILOT HOLE THROUGH LOG $
TO Y OF THE WAY DOWN SO THAT ANCHOR
CABLE IS NOT EXPOSED.
LOG TOE PROTECTION
NTS
BANKFULL ELEVATION.
jj
H
¢ On
=
Z
N
\���� \ %\j \\ DIAMETER E METER CAN EXPOSED
\� 6, �/\ PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
z 3
¢www ZOzm
\\
i
O
=2
PROPOSED BED
¢a
MINIMUM OF TO TJ OF LOG
WOOD DIAMETER BEDDED BELOW
STAKES CHANNEL INVERT
12" LOG DIAMETER (TYP.)
NOTES;
1. INSTALL STAKES ON X CENTERS ON EACH SIDE OF ROLL.
TOP OF STAKE SHOULD NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL.
2. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (DEPTH APPROX j TO 3 OF
LOG DIAM) FOR PLACEMENT OF ROLL,
3. COIR LOGS SHALL BE 10 FT LONG AND HAVE A DIAMETER
OF 121N.
COIR LOG (TOE PROTECTION)
NTS
COPYRIGHT 0, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL .0 BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME:
DD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(V) 919.782.0495
(f)
91 9.782. 9672
www.Wkdickso"Com
NC. NCENSE NO.
W
H �
❑ N
N
J O
z
O
U '
o ¢ 1
O(
N CJ
° Cl CO
Y N
it �[Uri I
W Z
M W
h
CD w Z
Z
q O J_
[ Q Z Q
DO (r3 O W
C) F
Z
W 2
LL p
m �
W
Q o
X
W z
M Z
U =
7
M W
H-
~ o
Z o
W
O
> S
> n
LU d
W �
Q
Z m
O
Q
L
<
jj
H
¢ On
=
Z
N
0 W
z 3
¢www ZOzm
O
=2
a
¢a
PROJ. DATE: M
Of FM
C.C. DATE: - - --
DRAWING NUMBER:
D2
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

F(Ow
TYPICAL SECTION
NOTE:
WATTLES ARE TO BE INSTALLED 4' O.C. BY CUTTING AN APPROXIMATELY 4° WIDE TRENCH
PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREAM BANK JUST ABOVE BASEFLOW ELEVATION. INSERT THE WATTLES,
ANCHORING WITH STAKES, AND TIGHTLY BACKFILL WITH TOPSOIL. WATTLES SHALL CONSIST OF 5 TO 10
STEMS, 0.25" TO 0.5" IN DIAMETER. MINIMUM LENGTH IS 4.5 FEET. AT LEAST 3.0 FEET SHALL BE INSTALLED
WITHIN THE BANK. WATTLES SHOULD BE INSTALLED ATM ANGLE OF 20° TO 30° TO THE STREAM BANK
AND SHOULD POINT DOWNSTREAM. FILL VOIDS OF EXPOSED PORTION OF WATTLE WITH PINE STRAW (IF
READILY AVAILABLE ON- SITE).
WATTLE
PROPOSED
CHANNEL BED
JS TO OF BUNDLE
DIAMM ETER BELOW
PROPOSED STREAM BED
USE STICKS AND LOGS OF VARYING SIZES 1 " -4" DIAMETER AND
V -3' LONG. WOODY DEBRIS SHALL BE HELD IN PLACE USING
TWINE AND WOODEN STAKES AND SHALL BE PLACED ACCORDING
TO DESIGN PLANS AND AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
WOODY DEBRIS BUNDLE
COIR FIBER
MATTING
PLAN
BANKNLL ELEVATION
TYPICAL SECTION
NOTE: USE DEAD BRUSH AND TOPS 0.5 TO 2.0 INCHES IN DIAMETER. TIE BUNDLES
WITH TWINE AND STAKE TO THE CHANNEL BED. IF PINE STRAW IS READILY
AVAILABLE ON -SITE, ADD TO BUNDLE.
DEAD BRUSH
NOTE:
WHEN INSTALLING SMALL WOODY DEBRIS STRUCTURES AS LOCATED
ON THE PLAN SHEETS, CONTRACTOR SHALL ALTERNATE BETWEEN
WATTLE, SMALL LOG, AND DEAD BRUSH STRUCTURES BASED ON
READILY AVAILABLE MATERIALS AND PER DIRECTION OF THE
ENGINEER.
SMALL WOODY DEBRIS & HABITAT STRUCTURES
NTS
CABLE LOGS
TOGETHER
NOTES:
1. CROSS LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES IN DIAMETER\
0 75" TO T
AND A MINIMUM OF 12 FEET IN LENGTH.
/
2. LOG TOES SHOULD BE AT LEAST 8 INCHES IN DIAMETER
60,
AND A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET IN LENGTH.
—mob
A EBUD
3. ALL LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT.
BUD
4. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON
NAIL EVERY 2' ALONG THE LOG.
I
5. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING
SIDE BRgNCH I
FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
PROPOSED STREAM BANK
1
LOG TOE
ANGLE 1111
PLAN VIEW
REFERENCED IN
PURE TABLE
COIR FIBER
MATTING
POINT REFERENCED IN STREAM BANK
STRUCTURE TABLE
(BED ELEVATION)
NOTCH LOGS TO FIT GRADE
LOG TOE CONTROLLOGS
CABLE ANCHOR (TYP.)
PROFILE VIEW
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
NTS
COIR FIBER
MATTING
BANKFULL ELEVATION c7
ROLANKA BIO –D 40
OR EQUIVALENTS
LEAF PACK 1.0" —/ V X10" WOODEN STAKE, 1X1
TO 3.0" THICK SPACING
SECTION A -A
UMITS OF BANKFULL CHANNEL
FABRIC INTO74T M'BED.
COMPACT DISTURBED
STREAM BED.
LLio
A
WOODEN STAKE
,u v—V OF LEAF PACK
LEAF PACK
COIR MATTING
COMPACTED SOIL
LIVE STAKES
SMALL BRANCHES
AND BRUSH
I
.M.P.., DEPTH MM ._.._ S7 _.. _.. _.. _..114 MAX POOL DEPTH
SMALL LOGS AND /OR
LARGE BRANCHES
SECTION A -A
A
Fo-
CHANNE TOP
OF BANK
A
CHANNEL
BOTTOM OF BANK
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
COIR FIBER
MATTING
0 75" TO T
CABLE
ANCHORS
/
I
I
OS'T01.5'
—mob
A EBUD
\FLOW
BUD
I
�\
SIDE BRgNCH I
FILTER FABRIC
REFERENCED IN
PURE TABLE
COIR FIBER
MATTING
POINT REFERENCED IN STREAM BANK
STRUCTURE TABLE
(BED ELEVATION)
NOTCH LOGS TO FIT GRADE
LOG TOE CONTROLLOGS
CABLE ANCHOR (TYP.)
PROFILE VIEW
BEDDED LOG STRUCTURE
NTS
COIR FIBER
MATTING
BANKFULL ELEVATION c7
ROLANKA BIO –D 40
OR EQUIVALENTS
LEAF PACK 1.0" —/ V X10" WOODEN STAKE, 1X1
TO 3.0" THICK SPACING
SECTION A -A
UMITS OF BANKFULL CHANNEL
FABRIC INTO74T M'BED.
COMPACT DISTURBED
STREAM BED.
LLio
A
WOODEN STAKE
,u v—V OF LEAF PACK
LEAF PACK
COIR MATTING
COMPACTED SOIL
LIVE STAKES
SMALL BRANCHES
AND BRUSH
I
.M.P.., DEPTH MM ._.._ S7 _.. _.. _.. _..114 MAX POOL DEPTH
SMALL LOGS AND /OR
LARGE BRANCHES
SECTION A -A
A
Fo-
CHANNE TOP
OF BANK
A
CHANNEL
BOTTOM OF BANK
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
COIR FIBER
MATTING
0 75" TO T
FLAT TOP ENO
OS'T01.5'
—mob
A EBUD
BUD
I
z—
SIDE BRgNCH I
REMOVED ATSLIGHT
1
ANGLE 1111
IN 18"
1
WATER TABLE
v
v
45 DEGREE
TAPERED BUTT END
MATTING
TOP OF BANK
SECTION VIEW
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE
SPACED 3 FEET APART,
ALTERNATE SPACING.
DETAIL
LIVE STAKES SHOULD BE LONG ENOUGH
TO REACH BELOW THE GROUNDWATER
TABLE. (GENERALLY, A LENGTH OF 2 TO
3 FEET IS SUFFICIENT.) ADDITIONALLY,
THE STAKES SHOULD HAVE A DIAMETER
IN THE RANGE OF 0.75 TO 2 INCHES.
MIR FIBER
ING
NOTE:
1. ACCEPTABLE SPECIES INCLUDE BLACK WILLOW (SALIX NIGRA), SILKY WILLOW
(SALIX SERICEA) AND SILKY DOGWOOD (CORNUS AMMOMUM).
2. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED IN AN AREA EXTENDING 3 FEET OUT FROM
TOP OF BANK TO JUST BELOW BANKFULL.
LIVE STAKE
NTS
NOTES:
1. OVER EXCAVATE THE OUTSIDE BEND OF THE CHANNEL. PLACE
LARGER BRANCHES AND LOGS IN A CRISS -CROSS PATTERN. LOCK IN
PLACE WITH FILL COVERING 8 INTO 18 IN OF THE LARGER
BRANCHES /SMALL LOGS.
2. PLACE SMALLER BRANCHES AND BRUSH OVER THE LARGER
BRANCHESISMALL LOGS AND COMPACT LIGHTLY TOGETHER.
BACKFILL AND COMPACT TO LOCK IN PLACE,
3. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL (COIR) MATTING OVER COMPACTED SOIL
AND KEY IN PER MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.
4. INSTALL 2 TO 4 ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ABOVE THE SMALL BRANCHES
AND BRUSH LAYER.
BRUSH TOE
NTS
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON&CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME:
DD CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f)
91 9.782. 9672
.W
wwwkdickson.COm
NC. LICENSE NO. ­74 ;
Iii
O N
O�
� a
a
� I h
O (
v '
❑ ¢O
LL �
Q N
° o w k
Y N
i
it C
W
2 0
=r
N
z w Z
Z
F- W U (=0
Z 03
aZa O L) J Z o
OCaZ w w
m(jo LU o
0 F y
UL = W O
UL
O a�
m z m
Z Q
Q U
Z N
0 z
W Z ¢ �w u
3 Z¢Zm
a O O¢a0 CO
PROJ. DATE: M
Q.C.: FM
Q.C. DATE: - - --
DRAWING NUMBER:
D3
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

FLOW NOTE:
REBAR 1/2" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH
TYPICAL) SHOULD BE PLACED V TO T FROM END OF
LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT 6'
A OFFSETS. LAST REBAR SHOULD BE PLACED I'703'
FROM END OF LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE
MINIMUM DIAMETER 12" USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR, 2 PER LOG.
6.
LOSS
REBAR
A, PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN SURFACE
LENGTH VARIES
DOWNVALLEY R
6" (TYR.)
BANKFULL LIMITS OF
PROPOSED CHANNEL
PLAN VIEW
FLOODPLAIN SILL
NTS
-A TO Yz OF
BUNDLE DIAMETER
SAW KERFS BELOW PROPOSED
STREAM BED
PROPOSED
CHANNELBED
NOTES
1. USE LOGS OF VARYING SIZES 6 " -15" DIAMETER AND 4' -8' LONG. LOGS
SHALL BE HELD IN PLACE 'NTH REBAR OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS, MODEL
68-DBi OR EQUIVALENT, AND PLACED ACCORDING TO DESIGN PLANS AND
AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
2. ALL LOGS SHALL BE "ROUGHED UP" WITH A CHAINSAW PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION. SAW KERFS SHALL BE 0.25" TO 2.0" IN DEPTH.
TYPICAL SECTION A -A
TOP OF BANK
FLOW
SECTIONAL VIEW A - A'
A
A
27-4%
STREAMBED _
LOG SHOULD BE -
ED R I IN BANK
AT LEAST 3 FEET AI _S IA
LOG - -._,�
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES IN DIAMETER, 10 TO 16 FEET LONG,
RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, AND HARDWOOD.
2. LOG ARMS SHOULD BE BURIED INTO THE BANK AND BED A MINIMUM OF 3
FEET.
3. SET ELEVATION OF TOP OF LOG CROSS PIECES TO DESIRED ELEVATION OF
PROPOSED GROUND OR STREAMBED.
4. REBAR (5/8" MINIMUM DIAMETER 3' MIN. LENGTH TYPICAL) SHOULD BE
PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF LOG. ADDITIONAL REBAR TO BE PLACED AT
5' OFFSETS. LAST REBAR SHOULD BE PLACED 1' TO 3' FROM END OF
LOG. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR REBAR.
5. PRE -DRILL HOLES FOR REBAR WITH 5/8" DRILL BIT.
6. DRIVE REBAR THROUGH LOGS AND BEND ENDS AS SHOWN.
TYPICAL SECTION B -B
LIMITS OF BANKFULL CHANNEL
LARGE WOODY DEBRIS
INTO
Conservation Area
Pr Uxi by 1h S= 4 NertL C Um
No Mowing - No Cutting
T.T.. NY U-1....
F:z}I
SIGN SPECIFICATIONS:
• MATERIAL: ALUMINUM
• GAUGE:.032
• SIZE: 6 "X6"
• BACKGROUND COLOR: COATED CHROME YELLOW
• PRINT COLOR: BLACK
• MOUNTING HOLES: 2 HOLES CENTER TOP AND
BOTTOM 3 /6' DIAMETER 6' ON CENTER AND 2 HOLES
CENTER TOP AND BOTTOM 3116" DIAMETER 7 3/8" ON
CENTER
• ROUND CORNERS: 1/4" RADIUS
NOTES:
1. CONSERVATION AREA SIGNS SHALL BE ATTACHED TO A TREE, T -POST,
U- CHANNEL POST. OR SQUARE STEEL POST.
2. ALL POSTS MUST HAVE A LENGTH OF 6.0 FEET AND BE BURIED TO
DEPTH OF 2.0 FEET.
3. SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED ON POSTS USING W ALUMINUM DRIVE
RVETS.
4. THE TOP 0.5 FEET OF T -POSTS OR U- CHANNEL POSTS SHALL BE PAINTED
YELLOW.
5. USE 3Yz'ALUMINUM NAILS TO INSTALL SIGN ON TREES, LEAVING Yz" OF THE
NAIL EXPOSED.
ERMA
r T
i
CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SIGN
NTS
LIM STREAM CHANNEL
SURFACE FLOW
�1 DIVERSION
STONE APPROACH
SECTION: 2:1 MIN.,
5:1 MAX. SLOPE ON
CLASS A STONE OVER
ROAD
FILTER FABUC
SURFACE FLOW
DIVERSION
EXISTING STREAMBANK
CLASS A
STONE
FILTER FABRIC
NOTES:
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ON -SITE
BEFORE WORK BEGINS.
3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF $TREAMBANKS. DO NOT
Q EXCAVATE CHANNEL BOTTOM. COMPLETE ONE SIDE BEFORE
STARTING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
4. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING PERPENDICULAR TO FLOW.
5. GRADE SLOPES TO A MINIMUM OF 2:1 SLOPE, MAXIMUM
6. MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN THE CONSTRUCTION
ROAD DOES NOT ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL.
7. A STABILIZED PAD OF NATURAL CLASS A STONE, 6 TO 9
8 INCHES THICK, LINED WITH FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE USED OVER
THE BERM AND ACCESS SLOPES.
e. FILTER FABRIC USED SHALL BE NCDOT TYPE 2 ENGINEERING
FABRIC OR EQUIVALENT.
9. WIDTH OF THE CROSSING SHALL BE SUFFICIENT (8' MIN.) TO
ACCOMMODATE THE LARGEST VEHICLE CROSSING THE CHANNEL.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE
ACCORDING TO EQUIPMENT UTILIZED.
11. TEMPORARY CROSSINGS ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE.
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
FORD CROSSING
Nis
CHANNEL
BOTTOM OF�II
BANK
COARSE BACKFILL
B
CHANNEL TOP
OF BANK
I I
I I
I I
I
I I I
A PRECI.NSTRUCTED
POOL; 2' WIDE BY 4'
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW VEW LONG (TYR)
PROPOSED
STREAM BED
FLOW = MIN. 5.0'
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (i" TO 5 ")
FILTER FABRIC-/
(804.2.11 CLASS 2) TACK FABRIC
TO LOG
REBAR OR DUCKBILL
ANCHOR
///- -- COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (1" TO 5")
///-COARSE
PRECONSTRUCTED POOL;
APPROX. 1' TO 1.5' DEEP
PROPOSED STREAM BANK
Ijj
HEADER LOG­,
<
H
=
Z
FOOTER LOG
�
LU
z
Z
¢LUww
REBAR (5/8" MIN. DIAMETER, 4'
3
MIN. LENGTH) OR DUCKBILL
ANCHORS INSTALLED PER
C,
MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS
(TYP.)
SECTION FII
LOG SILL
NTS
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT
HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 12 ", MIN LENGTH = 20'
NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED
COMMON NAIL EVERY 1.5' ALONG THE LOG
3. DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF
REBAR.
COPYRIGHT @,W.K. DICKSON &CO., INC. ALLRIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USEOFTHE CONTENTS OFTHIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, INWHOLEORIN PART, WITHOUTWRITTEN CONSENTOFW.K. DICKSON &CO.,INC., ISPROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BEVALID, TRUECOPIES.
FILE NAME:
�D CKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f)
91 9.782. 9672
www.Wkclicksom.com
NC. NCENSE No.
Q� U
W Z
� W
F
~ Z
z0UO
Z
0
Z
LL �=
LL
m �
Ill
H m
O N
O�
J O
a
z 0
rL Z
}
J
O
O U
¢ N 0 Z
° O 1
¢Icc EL
W
(D
2 0
= o
X
W U
M Z
U =
¢7
w
z o
Z o
ED
In
K j
> n
Z
W O>
Q J
z m
O a
U ¢
lL
Ijj
¢ U
<
H
=
Z
N
�
LU
z
Z
¢LUww
I
3
Z¢zm
O
C,
a
PROJ. DATE:
IMAY2014
O.C.:
FM
C.C. DATE:
- - --
DRAWING NUMBER:
D4
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00. RA

16 FT MAX
LINE POST WOVEN WIRE BARBED OR LINE POST
ELECTRIC
WIRE
r
LINE PANEL
BARBED OR
ELECTRIC WIRE� J�LINE POST
4" TO 6 °T WOVEN WIRE:
ASTM CLASS 3 GALVANIZED.
TOP AND BOTTOM WIRES MIN. 12 GAUGE.
WOVEN WIRE K INTERMEDIATE AND STAY WIRES MIN.
GROUND LINE_ 2 12 1/2 GAUGE.
n �
Z r I 6
o �
WOVEN WIRE WITH ONE BARB DETAIL
LINE POSTS (WOODEN): MIN. 41N. DIAM. OR 41N, SQUARE.
LINE POSTS STEEL : STUDDED OR PUNCHED T U OR Y SHAPED WITH ANCHOR PLATES.
MIN. WEIGHT 1.3 LBS.IFT. (EXCLUDING ANCHOR PLATE). POSTS SHALL BE DRIVEN A MINIMUM OF 18" DEEP AND MUST BE AT
LEAST 5.5 FT IN LENGTH
SPECIESANDTREATMENTFORALLWOOD: USE UNTREATED DURABLE POSTS OF SPECIES SUCH AS RED CEDAR,
BLACK LOCUST OR OSAGE- ORANGE WITH BARK REMOVED, OR NON- DURABLE WOOD THAT IS PRESERVATIVE
PRESSURE TREATED (0.40 LBS. /CUBIC FOOT CCA, OR EQUIVALENT NON —CCA TREATMENT). DO NOT USE RED
PINE.
WOVEN WIRE FENCE (NRCS DETAIL 382A)
NTS
BANKFULL
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO 6 ")
O�
B
' HEADER LOG
i LO /W /y INVERT ELEVATION
COARSE AGGREGATE
POINT REFERENCED IN BACKFILL(2 "TO 6 ")
STRUCTURE TABLE
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO 6
FOOTER 1`
LOG
LOS
LOW _ _ V
HIGH �C
C' LOG BURIED * -.
6' BANK MIN 5FT
4T REFERENCED IN
STRURURETABLE� � 1_ LO MgN 5FT IN
PLAN VIEW
I
PROFILE B -B'
OF
DOWNSTREAM LOG
DOUBLE LOG DROP
NT
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC (TVP.)
DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
USING THE KBC PLANTING BAR
j 2 inch 11
AI
40M i N I w
4. PULL HANDLE OF 5. PUSH
6. LEAVE
BAR TOWARD HANDLE
PLANTER, FIRMING FORWARD
COMPACTION
HOLE OPEN.
SOIL AT BOTTOM. FIRMING SOIL
AT TOP.
WATER
THOROUGHLY.
PLANTING NOTES:
NOTES:
PLANTING BAG
BARE ROOTS SHALL BE PLANTED 6
p FT. TO 10 FT. ON CENTER, RANDOM
DURING PLANTING, SEEDLINGS
SPACING, AVERAGING 8 FT. ON
SHALL BE KEPT IN A MOIST CANVAS
8 OR SIMILAR CONTAINER TO
I�I�
CENTER, APPROXIMATELY680
PR EVENT THE ROOT SYSTEMS FROM
PLANTS PER ACRE.
DRYING.
KBC PLANTING BAR
!�
PLANTING BAR SHALL HAVE A
BLADE WITH A TRIANGULAR CROSS
SECTION, AND SHALL BE 12 INCHES
LONG, 4 INCHES WIDE AND 1 INCH
THICK AT CENTER.
ROOT PRUNING
ALL SEEDLINGS SHALL BE ROOT
PRUNED, IF NECESSARY, SO THAT NO
ROOTS EMEND MORE THAN 10
INCHES BELOW THE ROOT COLLAR:
BARE ROOT PLANTING
NTS
}OF LOG /
DIAMETER (TYP)
FOOTER
LOG V/
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (2" TO 6 ")
PROFILE A -A'
OF
N LOG
MIN 5FT MIN 5FT
� I
I
MIN 5FT MIN 5FT
S
4'706' HEADER LOG
INVERT ELEVATION
r MAX ALLOWABLE
/ DROP OF 0.5 FT
MAX DEPTH
PROFILE C -C'
NOTES:
t. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY
HARVESTED.
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
MIN DIAM. = 10 ", MIN LENGTH = 15'
S. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3' 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 15
ALONG THE LOG
TOP OF BANK 70E OF BANK
RIP RAP APPROACH
(S' MIN) / TIMBER MAT CROSSING TIMBER MAT APPROACH
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED
FLOW i PARALL
u Y.—W.
EL
1 1
I
I
�� PERPENDICUTAR
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
PLAN VIEW
dI
CARRIAGE BOLT,
_PICA L
CLASS B RIP RAP
TIMBER MAT INSTALLED
PERPENDICULAR
TIMBR MAT
TOP OF BANK INSTAELLED PARALLEL
0
0 0
11
FILTER FABRIC J//
TOE OF BANK,
TYPICAL
APPROXIMATE BASE FLOW
WATER SURFACE
SECTION VIEW
`CARRIAGE BOLT
`TIMBER MAT,
TYPICAL
NOTES:
1. TIMBER MATS SHALL BE USED FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
ACCESS TO TRAVERSE WET ANDIOR MUDDY ARIES ADJACENT TO THE
STREAM AND TO CROSS THE STREAM AND OTHER CONCENTRATED
FLOW AREAS.
2. THE STREAM CROSSING SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
THERE SHALL BE MINIMAL TO NO DISTURBANCE OF THE CHANNEL BED
AND BANKS AS A RESULT OF INSTALLING THE APPROACHES OR
CROSSING.
3. THE LENGTH OF TIMBER MAT REQUIRED TO CROSS THE STREAM OR
CONCENTRATED FLOW AREAS SHALL BE SUCH THAT THE TIMBER MAT
EMENDS PAST THE TOP OF BANK ON EACH SIDE OF THE CROSSING A
SUFFICIENT DISTANCE TO SUPPORT THE MAXIMUM EQUIPMENT SIZE
USING THE CROSSING.
4. STREAM CROSSINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE TIMBER MAT
LENGTHS ORIENTED PERPENDICULAR TO THE TOPS OF THE STREAM
BANKS. TIMBER MAT STREAM APPROACHES SHALL BE INSTALLED
WITH THE TIMBER MAT LENGTHS ORIENTED PARALLEL TO THE TOPS
OF THE STREAM BANKS.
5. STREAM CROSSING APPROACHES FROM DRY
AREAS SHALL BE
CONSTRUCTED USING CLASS B RIP RAP PLACED OVER FILTER FABRIC.
6. ALL TIMBER MATS, FILTER FABRIC, AND RIP RAP SHALL BE
COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE WHEN THE CROSSING IS
REMOVED.
TIMBER MAT TEMPORARY CROSSING
NTS
�D
CKSON
community inirastmcture consultants
Transportation +Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, INC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(f) 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
� rvc. ucervse rvo. wa74
CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VAUD, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME:
.
F N_
O°
r N
O a
OIL
Cc
2.
Z
O
U
H-
O)
Z
O
U
¢
o ~
Z
N J
00
6 � � Z
W
ZcD
¢ o
n
U
Q U wz
W Z
S
Dc W � Z C=7
2�Z D'a
Or ILL 0
, a ¢
UZO
Z O () J z g
W
g M
m(arj0 W o�
J Z Z
LL � Z W �
ED ; m
Z
O a
LL1 LLl � U
Z F- N �
F- C7
W Z ¢ N
Ill W
3 Z ¢zm
Q.
O O ¢a0
PHOJ. DATE: MAY 2014
O.C.: FM
O.C. DATE: -
DRAWING NUMBER:
D5
PROJ. NO.:
20140058.00
COPYRIGHT ®, W.K DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN
.RA