20190863 Ver 1_As-built Review MY0_2022

MONITORING YEAR 0 
ANNUAL REPORT 
FINAL 

May 2022 

OAK HILL DAIRY MITIGATION SITE  
Gaston County, NC 
Catawba River basin 
HUC 03050102 

DMS Project No. 100120 
DMS Contract No. 7867 
DMS RFP No. 16‐007704 (Date of Issue: September 6, 
2018) 
USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2019‐00833 
DWR Project No. 2019‐0863 
Data Collection Dates: January 2022 – March 2022 

PREPARED FOR: 

NC Department of Environmental Quality 
Division of Mitigation Services 
1652 Mail Service Center 
Raleigh, NC 27699‐1652 

PREPARED BY: 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 
Charlotte, NC 28203 

Phone: [phone] 
Fax: [phone] 

June 9, 2022

Ms. Kristi Suggs
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 S. Mint St, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203

Subject: Oak Hill Dairy Draft MY0 Report Review
Catawba River Basin – CU# 03050102
Gaston County
DMS Project ID No. 100120
Contract # 7867

Dear Ms . Suggs,

The Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) received the Draft Mitigation Plan for Oak Hill Dairy from
Wildlands Engineering, Inc on May 23, 2022. The Project is expected to provide 4,618.933 SMUs and
7.680 WMUs. The following are the DMS review team’s comments on the draft report.

• Please add “Date of Issue: September 6, 2018” following RFP number on title page.
• Table of Contents: A set of coordinates is accidently shown under 1.3 Project Attributes.
Please revise for final.
• CCPV: Recommend labeling BMP1 and BMP2.
• Photos of BMP1 and BMP2 show a considerable amount of ponded water. Does WEI expect
the BMPs to hold water year-round or dry seasonally?
• 3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern: WEI has identified and treated several of the most
concerning invasive species prior to and during the construction process. Please continue
aggressively treating the kudzu, knotweed, bamboo and marsh dewflower as new
populations are observed on the site. Also, please note on future CCPV maps the locations
of invasives and where treatment occurs.
• Several areas were not planted with bare roots due to depth of standing water. Does WEI
intend to plant these areas at a later date?
• Sheet 1.14: Pools on UT2 profile are shown and noted as being filled with sediment. WEI
expects the pools to adjust as vegetation becomes established. Please provide an update in
MY1 regarding the UT2 stream conditions. Note that UT2 is not a credited reach.

Digital Deliverable Comments
• Draft digital deliverables were reviewed and complete.

At your earliest convenience, please provide a written response letter addressing the DMS
comments provided and one final hard copy of the revised/updated Baseline Monitoring Document
and Record Drawings. The comment response letter should be included in the revised report after
the report cover page. Please include a full final electronic copy with electronic support files on a
CD or USB drive.

Sincerely,

Matthew Reid
Western Project Manager
NCDENR – Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
828-231-7912

June 17, 2022 
Mr. Matthew Reid  
Western Project Manager  
NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services  
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102  
Asheville, NC 28801 

RE: Oak Hill Dairy Draft MY0 Report Review 
 Catawba River Basin – CU# 03050102 – Gaston County 
 DMS Project ID No. 100120 
 Contract # 7867 

Dear Mr. Reid:  
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed Division of Mitigation Services’ (DMS) 
comments from the Draft Monitoring Year 0 (MY0) Report for the Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site. 
The report has been updated to reflect those comments. Wildlands responses to DMS’s 
comments are noted below.  
DMS Comments, Matthew Reid: 
1. Please add “Date of Issue: September 6, 2018” following RFP number on title page.  
Wildlands Response: Title page has been updated to include RFP date of issue.  

2. Table of Contents:  A set of coordinates is accidently shown under 1.3 Project Attributes. 
Please revise for final. 
Wildlands Response: Wildlands has removed the set of coordinates from the table of 
contents. 

3. CCPV:  Recommend labeling BMP1 and BMP2. 
Wildlands Response:  BMP labels are now shown on CCPV maps.    

4. Photos of BMP1 and BMP2 show a considerable amount of ponded water.  Does WEI expect 
the BMPs to hold water year‐round or dry seasonally? 
Wildlands Response: Wildlands expects water levels for BMP1 to drawn down when 
vegetation becomes established and dry‐out during the drier months from late spring to 
early fall.  BMP2 should also draw down when vegetation becomes established and 
during drier months; however, it will likely continue to hold a shallow pond of water 
especially during monitoring years or months experiencing greater than average rainfall.  
Wildlands will continue to monitor, and remedial action will be initiated if it is deemed 
necessary.    

5. 3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern:  WEI has identified and treated several of the most 
concerning invasive species prior to and during the construction process.  Please continue 
aggressively treating the kudzu, knotweed, bamboo and marsh dewflower as new 
populations are observed on the site.  Also, please note on future CCPV maps the locations of 
invasives and where treatment occurs. 
Wildlands Response: Invasive species presence will continue to be monitored, treated, 
and documented in future monitoring reports.  

6. Several areas were not planted with bare roots due to depth of standing water.  Does WEI 
intend to plant these areas at a later date? 
Wildlands Response: Wildlands does not anticipate the installation of bare roots in 
these areas in the future. The areas that were not planted with bare roots due to 
standing water were planted with live stakes of species tolerant to inundation. 
Wildlands did not anticipate that these wetland areas would hold water, so these areas 
were not separated from the remainder of the wetland planting areas during the design 
phase of the project.  However, after construction was complete, it was more evident 
that these areas may remain inundated or be inundated for long periods of time. 
Therefore, to increase survival and establishment of woody vegetation in these areas, 
Wildlands decided to use live stakes rather than bare roots in the inundated areas and 
based this judgement on past project experience on sites with similar site conditions 
and professional experience.   

7. Sheet 1.14:  Pools on UT2 profile are shown and noted as being filled with sediment.  WEI 
expects the pools to adjust as vegetation becomes established.  Please provide an update in 
MY1 regarding the UT2 stream conditions.  Note that UT2 is not a credited reach. 
Wildlands Response: A brief summation of UT2 stream conditions will be included in 
MY1.  
As requested, Wildlands has included one hard copy of the revised/updated Baseline 
Monitoring Document and Record Drawings and has placed the DMS comment letter and our 
response letter after the report’s cover page. A full final electronic copy of the report and 
support files are included on a USB drive.  Please let me know if you have any questions.  
Sincerely,  

Kristi Suggs 
Senior Environmental Scientist 
[e-mail] 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL i 
OAK HILL DAIRY MITIGATION SITE 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ 1‐1 
1.1 Project Quantities and Credits ................................................................................................... 1‐1 
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 1‐4 
1.3 Project Attributes ....................................................................................................................... 1‐6 
Section 2: As‐Built Condition (Baseline) ........................................................................................... 2‐8 
2.1 As‐Built/Record Drawings .......................................................................................................... 2‐8 
2.1.1 Oak Hill Creek Reach 1 ....................................................................................................... 2‐8 
2.1.2 Oak Hill Creek Reach 2 ....................................................................................................... 2‐8 
2.1.3 Oak Hill Creek Reach 3 ....................................................................................................... 2‐9 
2.1.4 Oak Hill Creek Reach 4 ....................................................................................................... 2‐9 
2.1.5 UT1 Reach 1 ....................................................................................................................... 2‐9 
2.1.6 UT1 Reach 2 ....................................................................................................................... 2‐9 
2.1.7 UT1A ................................................................................................................................. 2‐10 
2.1.8 UT1B ................................................................................................................................. 2‐10 
2.1.9 UT2 ................................................................................................................................... 2‐10 
2.1.10 UT3 ................................................................................................................................... 2‐10 
2.1.11 Wetland Grading #4, Cross‐section #6 ............................................................................. 2‐10 
2.1.12 Wetland Grading #3, Cross‐section #7 ............................................................................. 2‐10 
2.1.13 Vegetation Planting List & Plan ........................................................................................ 2‐11 
2.1.14 Fencing Plan ..................................................................................................................... 2‐11 
2.1.15 Monitoring Components .................................................................................................. 2‐11 
Section 3: Monitoring Year 0 Data Assessment .............................................................................. 3‐12 
3.1 Vegetative Assessment ............................................................................................................ 3‐12 
3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern ................................................................................................... 3‐12 
3.3 Stream Assessment .................................................................................................................. 3‐12 
3.4 Stream Areas of Concern ......................................................................................................... 3‐13 
3.5 Hydrology Assessment ............................................................................................................. 3‐13 
3.6 Wetland Assessment ................................................................................................................ 3‐13 
3.7 Adaptive Management Plan..................................................................................................... 3‐13 
3.8 Monitoring Year 0 Summary .................................................................................................... 3‐13 
Section 4: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 4‐1 
Section 5: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 5‐1 

TABLES 
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ..................................................................................................... 1‐1 
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Improvements ........................................................................ 1‐4 
Table 3: Project Attributes ......................................................................................................................... 1‐6 

FIGURES 
Figure 1a‐c  Current Condition Plan View 

APPENDICES 
Appendix A Visual Assessment Data 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL ii 
Table 4a‐c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table 
Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table 
 Stream Photographs 
Vegetation Plot Photographs 
 Groundwater Well Photographs 
 Groundwater Well Installation Data Sheets 

Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data 
Table 6 Vegetation Plot Data 
Table 7 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table 
Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data 
 Cross‐Section Plots 
 Longitudinal Profile 
 Reach wide and Cross Section Pebble Counts 
Table 8a‐d Baseline Stream Data Summary 
Table 9 Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary 

Appendix D Project Timeline and Contact Information 
Table 10 Project Activity and Reporting History 
Table 11 Project Contact Table  

Appendix E Record Drawings and Sealed As‐built Survey 

Appendix F Correspondence  
 DMS Technical Workgroup Memo (10/19/2021) 
 Pebble Count Data Requirements – M. Reid (10/27/2021 email) 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐1 
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW 
The Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site (Site) is in Gaston County, approximately 2 miles northeast of 
Cherryville and 7 miles southwest of Lincolnton. Watersheds UT1, UT1A, UT1B, and Oak Hill Creek drain 
into Indian Creek, which drains to the Catawba River. Both Indian Creek and Catawba River are listed as 
high restoration priorities in the 2013 Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) and the 2008‐
2010 Indian Creek and Howards Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP). Table 3 presents information related 
to the project attributes. 
1.1 Project Quantities and Credits 
Mitigation work within the Site included restoration, enhancement I, and enhancement II of perennial 
and intermittent stream channels, and the creation, re‐establishment, and rehabilitation of wetland 
areas. Table 1 below shows stream credits by reach and the total amount of stream credits expected at 
closeout. 
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits  
PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES 
Project 
Segment 
Mitigation 
Plan 
Footage1,2 
As‐Built 
Footage 
Mitigation 
Category 
Restoration 
Level 
Mitigation 
Ratio 
(X:1) 
Credits Comments 
Stream 
Oak Hill Creek 
R1 488.527 489.000 Warm EI 1.5 325.685 
Restored dimension and 
profile, created a floodplain 
bench, planted buffers, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock, and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
Oak Hill Creek 
R2 470.085 470.000 Warm R 1.0 470.085 
Restored dimension, profile 
pattern, and floodplain 
access, planted buffers, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock, and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
Oak Hill Creek 
R3 877.051 877.000 Warm R 1.0 877.051 
Restored dimension, profile 
pattern, and floodplain 
access, planted buffers, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock, 
provided stormwater 
treatment, and protected 
with a conservation 
easement. 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐2 
PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES 
Project 
Segment 
Mitigation 
Plan 
Footage1,2 
As‐Built 
Footage 
Mitigation 
Category 
Restoration 
Level 
Mitigation 
Ratio 
(X:1) 
Credits Comments 
Oak Hill Creek 
R4 388.273 388.900 Warm R 1.0 388.273 
Restored dimension, profile 
pattern, and floodplain 
access, planted buffers, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock, and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
UT1 R1 217.749 218.000 Warm R 1.0 217.749 
Restored dimension, profile 
pattern, and floodplain 
access, planted buffers, 
fenced out livestock, and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
UT1 R2 1,834.520 1,834.100 Warm R 1.0 1,834.520 
Restored dimension, profile 
pattern, and floodplain 
access, planted buffers, 
fenced out livestock, 
provided stormwater 
treatment, and protected 
with a conservation 
easement. 
UT1A 469.110 469.600 Warm R 1.0 469.110 
Restored dimension, profile, 
and pattern, planted buffers, 
fenced out livestock, and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
UT1B 291.680 292.100 Warm EII 8.0 36.460 
Planted buffers, treated 
invasive species, fenced out 
livestock, and protected with 
a conservation easement. 
Wetland 
Project 
Segment 
Mitigation 
Plan 
Acreage 
As‐Built 
Acreage 
Mitigation 
Category 
Restoration 
Level 
Mitigation 
Ratio 
(X:1) 
Credits Comments 
Wetland Re‐
establishment 4.859 4.863 RR RE 1.0 4.859 
Raised stream bed 
elevation, plugged/filled 
drainage features, 
removed 
berm material, planted 
native wetland 
vegetation community, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐3 
PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES 
Project 
Segment 
Mitigation 
Plan 
Footage1,2 
As‐Built 
Footage 
Mitigation 
Category 
Restoration 
Level 
Mitigation 
Ratio 
(X:1) 
Credits Comments 
Wetland 
Rehabilitation 1.805 1.805 RR RH 1.0 1.805 
Raised stream bed 
elevation, plugged/filled 
drainage features, 
removed cultivation and 
vegetation 
management impacts, 
removed 
berm material, planted 
native wetland 
vegetation community, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock, 
provided stormwater 
treatment, and protected 
with a conservation 
easement. 
Wetland 
Rehabilitation 0.284 0.284 RR RH 1.5 0.189 
Raised stream bed 
elevation, plugged/filled 
drainage features, removed 
berm material, planted and 
supplementally planted 
native wetland 
vegetation community, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
Wetland 
Creation 2.481 2.480 RR C 3.0 0.827 
Raised stream bed 
elevation, plugged/filled 
drainage features, 
removed 
berm material, planted 
native wetland 
vegetation community, 
treated invasive species, 
fenced out livestock and 
protected with a 
conservation easement. 
Total Stream Credits: 4,618.933   
Total Wetland Credits: 7.680  
1.  Crossing lengths have been removed from restoration footage.  
2.  No direct credit for BMPs on site.  

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐4 

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives 
The project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits. Table 2 below describes expected 
outcomes to water quality and ecological processes and provides project goals and objectives.  
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements 
Goal Objective/ 
Treatment 
Likely Functional 
Uplift 
Performance 
Criteria Measurement 
Cumulative 
Monitoring 
Results 
Treat 
concentrated 
agricultural 
runoff. 
Install stormwater 
BMPs to treat 
runoff areas of 
concentrated 
agricultural runoff 
before it enters the 
stream channel. 
Reduce agricultural 
and 
sediment inputs to 
the project, 
which will reduce 
likelihood of 
accumulated fines 
and excessive 
algal blooms from 
nutrients. 
There is no required 
performance 
standard for this 
metric. 
Visually inspect 
BMPs and 
document with 
photos. 
N/A 
Exclude 
livestock 
from stream 
channels and 
riparian 
wetlands.  
Install livestock 
fencing as needed 
to exclude 
livestock from 
stream channels, 
wetlands, and 
riparian areas, or 
remove livestock 
from adjacent 
fields.  
Reduce agricultural 
and sediment 
inputs to the 
project. Reduce 
sediment inputs 
from bank erosion 
and degradation. 
Provide riparian and 
wetland habitat. 
Support all stream 
and wetland 
functions. 
Prevent easement 
encroachments.  
Visually inspect 
the perimeter of 
the Site to ensure 
no easement 
encroachment is 
occurring. 
No easement 
encroachments.  
Restoration Level Stream Riparian Wetland Non‐Rip 
Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non‐Riverine Wetland 
Restoration 4,256.788      
Re‐establishment    4.859   
Rehabilitation (1:1 & 1.5:1)    1.994   
Enhancement        
Enhancement I 325.685      
Enhancement II 36.460      
Creation     0.827   
Preservation       
Totals 4,618.933   7.680   

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐5 
Goal Objective/ 
Treatment 
Likely Functional 
Uplift 
Performance 
Criteria Measurement 
Cumulative 
Monitoring 
Results 
Improve the 
stability of 
stream 
channels. 
Construct stream 
channels that will 
maintain stable 
cross‐sections, 
patterns, and 
profiles over time. 
Add bank 
revetments and 
instream structures 
to protect 
restored/ 
enhanced 
streams. 
Reduce sediment 
inputs from bank 
erosion. Reduce 
shear stress on 
channel boundary. 
ER ≥ 2.2 and BHR ≤ 
1.2 with visual 
assessments 
showing progression 
towards stability. 
14 Cross‐section 
monitoring will be 
assessed during 
MY1, MY2, MY3, 
MY5, and MY7 and 
visual inspections 
will be assessed 
annually. 
Cross‐sections 
show streams 
are stable and 
functioning as 
designed. ERs 
are over 2.2 
and BHRs are 
below 1.2. 
Improve 
instream 
habitat. 
Install habitat 
features such as 
constructed steps, 
cover logs, and 
brush toes on 
restored/enhanced 
streams. Add 
woody materials to 
channel beds. 
Construct pools of 
varying depth. 
Increase and 
diversify available 
habitats for 
macroinvertebrates, 
fish, and 
amphibians leading 
to colonization and 
increase in 
biodiversity over 
time. 
There is no required 
performance 
standard for this 
metric. 
N/A N/A 
Reconnect 
channels 
with 
floodplains 
and riparian 
wetlands. 
Reconstruct stream 
channels with 
designed bankfull 
dimensions and 
depth based on 
reference reach 
data. 
Reduce shear stress 
on channel; Hydrate 
adjacent wetland 
areas; Filter 
pollutants out of 
overbank flows. 
Four bankfull events 
in separate years 
within the 7‐year 
monitoring period. 

Three automated 
pressure 
transducers were 
installed on 
restoration 
reaches and will 
record flow 
elevations and 
durations. 
Reported in 
MY1. 
Restore 
wetland 
hydrology, 
soils, and 
plant 
communities. 
Restore and 
enhance riparian 
wetlands by raising 
stream bends, 
filling existing ditch 
network, removing 
berm material over 
relic hydric soils, 
and planting native 
wetland species. 
Increase water 
storage, increase 
groundwater 
recharge, water 
quality treatment 
through retention, 
and increase habitat 
for aquatic and 
terrestrial species. 
Free groundwater 
within 12 inches of 
soil surface for a 
minimum of 12% (28 
consecutive days) of 
the growing season 
Eleven (11) 
groundwater 
gages were 
installed in 
wetland re‐
establishment, 
creation, and 
rehabilitation 
areas and 
monitored 
annually. 
Reported in 
MY1. 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐6 
Goal Objective/ 
Treatment 
Likely Functional 
Uplift 
Performance 
Criteria Measurement 
Cumulative 
Monitoring 
Results 
Restore and 
enhance 
native 
floodplain 
and 
streambank 
vegetation. 
Plant native tree 
and understory 
species in riparian 
zones and plant 
native shrub and 
herbaceous species 
on streambanks. 
Reduce sediment 
inputs from bank 
erosion and runoff. 
Increase nutrient 
cycling and storage 
in floodplain. 
Provide riparian 
habitat. Add a 
source of LWD and 
organic material to 
stream. 
Survival rate of 320 
stems per acre at 
MY3, 260 planted 
stems per acre at 
MY5 and a height of 
8 ft., and 210 stems 
per acre at MY7 with 
a height of 10 ft. 
Thirteen (13) 
permanent and 6 
mobile one 
hundred square 
meter vegetation 
plots are placed on 
2% of the planted 
area of the Site 
and monitored 
during MY1, MY2, 
MY3, MY5, and 
MY7. 
All 19 
vegetation plots 
have a planted 
stem density 
greater than 
320 stems per 
acre. 
Permanently 
protect the 
project Site 
from harmful 
uses. 
Establish 
conservation 
easements on the 
Site. Crop field 
removal and 
exclusion of 
livestock. 
Protect Site from 
encroachment on 
the riparian corridor 
and direct impact to 
streams and 
wetlands. 
Prevent easement 
encroachment. 
Visually inspect 
the perimeter of 
the Site to ensure 
no easement 
encroachment is 
occurring. 
No easement 
encroachments. 
1.3 Project Attributes 
The project is bordered by residential properties and an active dairy farm comprised of cattle pastures, 
an outdoor feeding area, and row crops. Based on historic aerials from 1950 to 2016, the streams 
existed in their same location for over 60 years. Agricultural use of the land was consistent during this 
period as well. Several alterations to the Site visible from historical aerial photography were the addition 
of the large pond in northeast corner of the Site between 1964 and 1973, and the addition of the no‐
discharge waste lagoon south of the large pond between 2006 and 2009. Additionally, most structures 
were built between 1964 and 1976 with the two large feed barns being built within the last 15 years. 
The Site, based on aerial photography, has a history of ditching, field grading, and stream channelization 
which increased drainage effects and impaired wetland hydrology. Table 3 below and Table 9 in 
Appendix C present additional information on pre‐restoration conditions. 
Table 3: Project Attributes 
PROJECT INFORMATION 
Project Name Oak Hill Dairy 
Mitigation Site  County Gaston County 
Project Area (acres)  20.4 Project Coordinates  35.403339, ‐81.351724 
PROJECT WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION 
Physiographic 
Province Piedmont  River Basin                    Catawba River 
USGS HUC 8‐digit 03050102  USGS HUC 14‐digit 03050102050010 
DWR Sub‐basin 03‐08‐35  Land Use Classification 24% agriculture, 40% 
forested, 36% developed 
Project Drainage Area 
(acres) 
1,070 (Oak Hill 
Creek)  Percentage of Impervious Area 11.6%  

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 1‐7 
RESTORATION TRIBUTARY SUMMARY INFORMATION 
Parameters Oak Hill Creek UT1 UT1A UT1B 
Pre‐project length (feet) 2,417 1,958 482 292 
Post‐project (feet) 2,225 2,052 470 292 
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately 
confined, unconfined) 
Moderately 
Confined to 
Unconfined 
Unconfined Confined Moderately Confined 
Drainage area (acres) 1070 333 12 4 
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial Intermittent/Perennial 
DWR Water Quality Classification C 
Dominant Stream Classification (existing) B4c/G4c/C4/E5 F4/G4 F6b Cb 
Dominant Stream Classification (proposed) C4 C4 E4b Cb 
Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if 
applicable Stage IV/V Stage IV/V Stage IV Stage I 
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 
Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation 
Water of the United States ‐ Section 404 Yes Yes SAW‐2019‐00833 
Water of the United States ‐ Section 401 Yes Yes DWR# 2019‐0863 
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion in Mitigation 
Plan (Wildlands, 2021)  Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes 
FEMA Floodplain Compliance  Yes Yes Conditional Letter of Map 
Revision (CLOMR) 
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A 
Coastal Zone Management Act No N/A N/A 
Wetland Summary Information              
Parameters Wetland A Wetland B Wetland C Wetland D 
Pre‐project 
area (acres) 2.203 0.138 0.021 0.028 
Wetland 
Type  
Bottom Hardwood 
Forest Headwater Forest Headwater Forest Headwater Forest 
Mapped Soil 
Series 
Chewacla loam, 
Wedowee sandy loam, 
Worsham loam 
Chewacla loam, 
Pacolet sandy clay 
loam, Pacolet 
sandy loam 
Chewacla loam, 
Pacolet sandy loam Pacolet sandy loam 
Drainage 
Class 
Somewhat poorly 
drained, Well‐drained, 
Poorly drained 
Somewhat poorly 
drained, Well‐
drained, Well‐
drained 
Somewhat poorly 
drained, Well‐
drained 
Well drained 
Soil Hydric 
Status No, No, Yes No, No, No No, No No 
Source of 
Hydrology Groundwater/Overbank Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater 
Restoration 
or 
enhancement 
method 
Enhancement Enhancement Enhancement Enhancement 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 2‐8 
Parameters Wetland F Wetland J Wetland K1  
Pre‐project 
area (acres) 0.131 0.047 <0.000 

Wetland 
Type (non‐
riparian, 
riparian) 
Headwater Forest Headwater Forest Bottomland Hardwood 
Forest 

Mapped Soil 
Series Chewacla loam Helena sandy loam Chewacala loam             

Drainage 
Class 
Somewhat poorly 
drained Moderately well drained Somewhat poorly drained 

Soil Hydric 
Status No No No 

Source of 
Hydrology Groundwater Groundwater/Overbank Groundwater 

Restoration 
or 
enhancement 
method 
Enhancement Enhancement None 

1No wetland credit is being sought for Wetland K. 
Section 2: As‐Built Condition (Baseline) 
The Site construction was completed on January 21, 2022, and as‐built surveys were completed in 
March 2022. The survey included developing an as‐built topographic surface; as well as, surveying the 
as‐built channel centerlines, top of banks, structures, and monitoring components. The Site’s 
construction planting was completed on 02/21/22.  Monitoring device installation and vegetative and 
substrate data collection were completed by 02/21/2022. 
2.1 As‐Built/Record Drawings 
A sealed half‐size set of the record drawing and as‐built survey are in Appendix E which includes the 
post‐construction survey, alignments, structures, and monitoring features. Field adjustments made 
during construction that differ from the design plans are shown as red lines on the record drawing. 
These adjustments were made during construction, where needed, based on field evaluations and are 
listed below.  
2.1.1 Oak Hill Creek Reach 1 
 STA: 100+31 – INCREASED BANK GRADING TO STABILIZE BEGINNING OF STREAM 
ENHANCEMENT 
 STA: 102+17 – BANK ROUGH ADDED TO INCREASE FLOODPLAIN ROUGHNESS 
 STA: 102+21 – LOG SILL ADDED IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL DUE TO EXCESS LOGS 
 STA: 102+98 – LOG SILL ADDED FOR EXTRA GRADE CONTROL 
 STA: 104+58 – LOG VANE REPLACED BY LOG J‐HOOK FOR ADDITIONAL GRADE CONTROL 
 STA: 104+91 – LOG VANE NOT BUILT TO AVOID DISTURBANCE TO STABLE BANK AND TOE 
 STA: 105+39 – RIFFLE EXTENDED ACROSS FORD CROSSING FOR ADDITIONAL STABILITY 
2.1.2 Oak Hill Creek Reach 2 
 STA: 107+30 – LOG SILL NOT BUILT DUE TO SUFFICIENT GRADE CONTROL PROVIDED BY RIFFLE 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 2‐9 
 STA: 110+23 – BRUSH TOE ADDED TO PROTECT BANK AT CONFLUENCE 
2.1.3 Oak Hill Creek Reach 3 
 STA: 110+69 – LOG J‐HOOK ADDED IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL FOR EXTRA STABILITY 
 STA: 112+63 – GEOLIFT NOT BUILT DUE TO SUFFICIENT BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 112+66 – GEOLIFT NOT BUILT DUE TO SUFFICIENT BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 115+29 – LOG J‐HOOK ADDED IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL FOR ADDED POOL STABILITY 
 STA: 116+56 – LOG SILL ADDED IN PLACE OF LOG J‐HOOK; BEND SUFFICIENTLY PROTECTED BY 
BRUSH TOE 
 STA: 117+84 – LOG J‐HOOK ADDED IN PLACE OF LOG SILL FOR ADDED STABILITY 
 STA: 118+18 – BANK ROUGHENING EXTENDED TO IMPROVE CONFLUENCE STABILITY 
2.1.4 Oak Hill Creek Reach 4 
 STA: 120+34 – LOG SILL ADDED IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL DUE TO PREFERENCE FOR USE OF ONSITE 
MATERIAL 
 STA: 120+86 – BANK ROUGHENING ADDED FOR STABILITY 
 STA: 122+57 – STABILIZED OUTLET CHANNEL; ADDED FOR ROADSIDE CULVERT 
 STA: 122+71 – LOG J‐HOOK NOT BUILT DUE TO EXTENSION OF GEOLIFT 
2.1.5 UT1 Reach 1 
 STA: 200+21 – RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE BANK 
 STA: 200+37 – ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY  
 STA: 200+88 – LOG SILL NOT BUILT DUE TO TREE SAVES ON RIGHT BANK AND ADEQUATE GRADE 
CONTROL FROM RIFFLE 
 STA: 201+63 – BANK ROUGHENING ADDED TO ROUGHEN FLOODPLAIN 
2.1.6 UT1 Reach 2 
 STA: 202+26 – LOG J‐HOOK BUILT IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL TO INCREASE CONFLUENCE STABILITY 
 RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE INLET OF BMP 1 
 STA: 205+04 – BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 205+93 – BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 206+80 – BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 207+42 – LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE GRADE CONTROL 
 STA: 208+49 – LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL DUE TO PREFERENCE FOR USE OF ONSITE 
MATERIAL 
 STA: 209+43 – VEGETATED GEOLIFT NOT BUILT DUE TO ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY 
 STA: 210+63 – LOG SILL BUILT AT TAIL OF RIFFLE IN LOG STEP RIFFLE SEQUENCE 
 STA: 212+51 – ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE GRADE CONTROL 
 STA: 214+38 – ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY 
 STA: 217+03 – BRIDGE REPLACED CULVERT CROSSING FOR LANDOWNER ACCESS 
 STA: 219+02 – LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD OF ROCK SILL AS CONTINUATION OF LOG DROP 
RIFFLE 
 STA: 219+99 – LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE GRADE CONTROL 
 STA: 220+78 – ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY 

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 2‐10 
2.1.7 UT1A  
 STA: 300+63 – LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY 
 STA: 300+96 – LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD OF ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY 
 STA: 301+00 – 302+20 – PROFILE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE STRUCTURE DESIGN CHANGES 
FOR STREAM STABILITY 
 STA: 301+06 – RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT BUILT FOR POOL EXPANSION 
 STA: 301+32 – RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT BUILT FOR POOL EXPANSION 
 STA: 301+45 – LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD OF ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY 
 STA: 301+52 – RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE BANK 
 STA: 302+05 – INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE WITH (1) LOG SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES WITH (1) 
LOG SILL AND (1) ROCK SILL FOR ADDED STREAM STABILTY 
 STA: 302+60 – 304+90 – PROFILE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE STRUCTURE DESIGN CHANGES 
FOR STREAM STABILITY 
 STA: 302+79 – INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) LOG SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES AND (2) 
LOG SILLS FOR STREAM STABILITY 
 STA: 303+16 – INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) LOG SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES AND (2) 
ROCK SILLS FOR ADDED STREAM STABILITY 
 STA:303+54 – INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) LOG SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES, (1) LOG 
SILL, AND (1) ROCK SILL FOR STREAM STABILITY 
 STA: 303+83 – INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) ROCK SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES, (1) ROCK 
SILL, AND (1) LOG SILL FOR STREAM STABILITY 
 STA: 304+19 – RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT BUILT FOR POOL EXPANSION 
 STA: 304+59 – LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL FOR ADDED DIVERSITY 
2.1.8 UT1B 
 NO CHANGES 
2.1.9 UT2 
 STA: 2+33 – RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE DRAINAGE PIPE 
 STA: 2+79 – BOULDER TOE INSTALLED INSTEAD OF BRUSH TOE FOR ADDITIONAL BANK 
STABILITY 
 STA: 3+25 – BRUSH TOE NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY 
2.1.10 UT3 
 STA: 300+50 – RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE CULVERT INLET 
 STA: 300+83 – RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE CUVLERT OUTLET 
 STA: 302+18 – BRUSH TOE NOT INSTALLED DUE TO ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY 
2.1.11 Wetland Grading #4, Cross‐section #6 
 STA: 0+19 – 0+64 – WETLAND GRADING ADJUSTED TO REDUCE FLOODPLAIN SLOPE 
2.1.12 Wetland Grading #3, Cross‐section #7 
 STA: 1+23 – 1+57 – WETLAND GRADING EXTENDED TO TIE SLOPE INTO EXISTING GROUND 
 STA: 2+58 – 2+70 – FLOODPLAIN GRADING ADJUSTED TO SOFTEN SLOPE GRADE AT FLOODPLAIN 
TIE‐IN  

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 2‐11 
2.1.13 Vegetation Planting List & Plan 
As‐built changes in species planted and densities were minimal when compared to design. Species 
replacements and planting density adjustments were made due to availability of the species at the time 
of planting.  All species replacements were approved species or alternate species within the Final 
Mitigation Plan’s planting list (Wildlands, 2021), so no approval for the inclusion of the species is 
needed. 
Open Buffer Planting Zone  
 Tag alder (Alnus serrulata) was replaced by elderberry (Sambucus canadensis).  
 Northern red oak (Quercus rubra), slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), and sweetshrub (Calycanthus 
floridus) were added at densities of 5%, 1% and 1%, respectively.  
 The stem density of persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) bare roots was increased from 5% to 6%.  
Wetland Planting Zone 
 Tag alder was reduced from 5% to 1%. 
 Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) was added at a density of 1%.  
 Silky willow (Salix sericea) was added at a density of 2%.  
 Live stakes of black willow (Salix nigra) were added at a density of 1%.  
Partially Vegetated Buffer Zone  
 Stem densities for American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), strawberry bush (Euonymus 
americana), pawpaw (Asima triloba), and American beech (Fagus grandifolia) were increased 
from 10% to 14%.  
 Densities for slippery elm, witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), , sweetshrub, and flowering 
dogwood (Cornus florida) were decreased from 10% to 7%.  
 Densities for spicebush (Lindera benzoin) and northern red oak were reduced from 10% to 8%.  
Planting Plan 
 Sheets 3.3– 3.5 – No bare roots were planted due to the depth of standing water.  
2.1.14 Fencing Plan 
 UT1 REACH 2 – FENCE LINE ADJUSTED TO RUN CLOSER TO TOE OF SLOPE 
 OAK HILL CREEK REACH 1 & 2 – FENCE LINE MOVED TO TOP OF SLOPE 
2.1.15 Monitoring Components 
Installed monitoring devices and plot locations closely mimic the locations of those proposed in the 
Site’s Mitigation Plan. Minor deviations from these locations were made when professional judgement 
deemed them necessary to better represent as‐built field conditions or when installation of the device in 
the proposed location was not physically feasible.   
Vegetation Monitoring Plots 
 Permanent Vegetation Plot (VP1) was moved from the right side of UT1A to the left side of 
UT1A.  
 VP2 was moved the left side on UT1 Reach 1 to the right side of UT1 Reach 1. 
 Mobile Vegetation Plot 5 (MVP5) was moved from the left side of Oak Hill Creek Reach 3 to the 
left floodplain of UT1 Reach 2 near the confluence of Oak Hill Creek Reach 3. The previous 
location for this mobile vegetation plot was inadvertently located within the extents of BMP2.     

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 3‐12 
Cross‐sections 
 Cross‐section 3 (XS3) was moved upstream on UT1 Reach 1 due to a large diameter tree within 
the floodplain. 

Section 3: Monitoring Year 0 Data Assessment 
Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted during MY0 to assess the condition of the project. The 
vegetation and stream success criteria for the Site follow the approved success criteria presented in the 
Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). Performance criteria for vegetation, stream, and hydrologic 
assessment are located in Section 1.2 Table 3: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional 
Improvements.  The first annual monitoring assessment (MY1) will be completed in the fall of 2022, at 
least 6 months after the MY0 assessment. The Site will be monitored for a total of seven years, with the 
final monitoring activities scheduled for 2028. 
3.1 Vegetative Assessment 
The MY0 vegetative survey was completed in February 2022. Vegetation monitoring resulted in a stem 
density range of 445 to 688 planted stems per acre which is well above the interim requirement of 320 
stems per acre required at MY3. Average stem density was 603 planted stems per acre. All 13 
permanent and 6 mobile vegetation plots met the interim success criteria and are on track to meet the 
final success criteria required for MY7. Herbaceous vegetation is establishing itself across the site. Refer 
to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table and 
Appendix B for Vegetation Plot Data.  
3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern 
Vegetation management and herbicide applications were implemented prior and during construction to 
prevent the spread of invasive species that could compete with planted native species. A dense stand of 
bamboo (Phyllostachys aurea) was mechanically removed along UT1A during construction. Kudzu 
(Pueraria montana) was removed along UT1B. Other areas of Chinese privet (Lingustrum sinese), 
Japanese privet (Lonicera japonica), Japanese knotweed (Polgonum cuspidatum), English Ivy (Hendra 
helix), marsh dewflower (Murdannia keisak), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), were treated on the 
Site during construction. Invasive species will continue to be monitored, mapped, and controlled as 
necessary throughout the monitoring period.  
3.3 Stream Assessment 
Morphological surveys for MY0 were conducted from February 2022 to March 2022. All streams within 
the Site are stable and functioning as designed. All 14 cross sections at the Site show little to no change 
from design in the bankfull area and width‐to‐depth ratio, and bank height ratios are less than 1.2. 
Reachwide and riffle 100‐count substrate sampling were conducted during baseline condition 
assessment to classify the reach and characterize the riffle pavement.  Riffles along most reaches have a 
median particle size classification of medium gravel to small cobble.  Based on a DMS Technical 
Workgroup memo from 10/19/21 and concurrence received on 10/27/2021 from the DMS project 
manager for the Site, pebble counts will not be conducted during the remaining monitoring years unless 
requested by the IRT or deemed necessary by best professional judgement. Refer to Appendix A for the 
Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table and Stream Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for 
Stream Geomorphology Data.  

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 3‐13 
3.4  Stream Areas of Concern 
Inspection of stream structures and banks did not identify any stream areas of concern, indicating that 
the stream is preforming as designed. The Site will continue to be monitored and any issues will be 
mapped and reported throughout the monitoring period.   
3.5 Hydrology Assessment 
Crest Gages (CG) were installed on Oak Hill Creek, UT1, and UT1A to monitor bankfull events.  
Hydrologic data will be collected and reported during MY1.  
3.6 Wetland Assessment 
Eleven groundwater gages were installed before the start of the growing season in wetland creation, 
rehabilitation, and re‐establishment areas to determine wetland hydrology success across different 
restoration levels. Soil profile descriptions and groundwater gage photographs were taken during 
installation and are located in Appendix A.  Groundwater gage data will be collected and reported during 
MY1.   
3.7 Adaptive Management Plan 
Site maintenance and adaptive measurement implementation will follow those outlined in the project’s 
Final Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021).  No adaptive management plans are needed at this time.  
3.8 Monitoring Year 0 Summary 
Overall, the Site looks good, is performing as intended, and is on track to meet success criteria. All 
vegetation plots are exceeding the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems per acre, and all 
streams within the Site are stable and meeting project goals. Herbaceous vegetation is 
establishing itself across the site.  Invasive species were treated and/or physically removed across the 
Site prior to and during construction and will continued to be assessed throughout the monitoring years.  
Summary information and data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements 
can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. All raw data supporting the tables and 
figures in the appendices are available from DMS upon request.

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 4‐1 
Section 4: METHODOLOGY 
Annual monitoring will consist of collecting morphologic, vegetative, and hydrologic data to assess 
project success based on the goals outlined in the Site’s Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2021). Monitoring 
requirements will follow guidelines outlined in the NC IRT Stream and Wetland Mitigation Guidance 
Update (2016). Installed monitoring devices and plot locations closely mimic the locations of those 
proposed in the Site’s Mitigation Plan. Deviations from these locations were made when professional 
judgement deemed them necessary to better represent as‐built field conditions or when installation of 
the device in the proposed location was not physically feasible.  
Geomorphic data was collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site:  
An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in Stream Restoration: A Natural 
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All Integrated Current Condition Mapping was collected by 
either a professional licensed surveyor or an Arrow 100® Submeter GNSS Receiver and processed using 
ArcPro.  Crest gages, using automated pressure transducers, were installed in riffle cross‐sections to 
monitor stream hydrology throughout the year. Groundwater gages were installed using guidance from 
the USACE’s Technical Standard for Water‐Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites (2005).   Stream 
hydrology and vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland 
Compensatory Mitigation Update (NCIRT, 2016). Vegetation installation data collection follow the 
Carolina Vegetation Survey‐EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008); however, vegetation data processing 
follows the NC DMS Vegetation Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table (NCDMS, 2020).

Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 Annual Report ‐ FINAL 5‐1 
Section 5:  REFERENCES 
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream 
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook. 
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS‐EEP Protocol for Recording 
Vegetation Version 4.2. Retrieved: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs‐eep‐protocol‐v4.2‐lev1‐ 
5.pdf.   
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NC DMS). 2007. Catawba River Basin Restoration 
Priorities (RBRP). Raleigh, NC. 
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2020. Vegetation Data Entry Tool and 
Vegetation Plot Data Table. Raleigh, NC. https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool/ 
NC DMS and Interagency Review Team (IRT) Technical Workgroup. 2018. Standard Measurement of the 
BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC. 
NC DMS and IRT Technical Workgroup. 2021. Pebble Count Data Requirements. Raleigh, NC. October 19, 
 2021. 
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2011. Surface Water Classifications. 
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water‐resources/planning/classification‐standards/classifications  
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS). 2017. NCGS Publications. 
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy‐mineral‐land‐resources/north‐carolina‐geological‐
survey/interactive‐geologic‐maps  
NCGS. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina: Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Natural Resources 
and Community Development, Geological Survey Section, scale 1:500,00, in color. 
North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland 
Compensatory Mitigation Update. Accessed at: https://saw‐
reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington‐District‐Mitigation‐Update.pdf 
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey of Gaston County. 
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm  
Reid, M. 2021. Email Correspondence, Pebble Count Data Requirements. October 27, 2021.  
Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169‐199. 
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books  
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. 
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina. 
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and 
Landforms 14(1):11‐26. 
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2005. Technical Standard for Water‐Table Monitoring of Potential 
Wetland Sites. ERDC TN‐WRAP‐05‐2. 
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands). 2021. Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Project Mitigation Plan. DMS, 
Asheville, NC. 

Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View Key
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Gaston County, NC
2020 Aerial Photography
RoyEakerRd
B
u
c
k
F
r
a
l
e
y
R
d
Robert Rd
Robert Rd
Robert Rd
D o r e e L n
B
u
d
B
l
a
c
k
R
d
M el L n
Doree Ln
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF GF
GF GF
GF
GF
GF GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
1
0
0
+
0
0
101+00
10
2
+
0
0
10
3
+
0
0
104
+
0
0
105+00
106
+
0
0
107+00
108
+
0
0
109+0
0
11
1
+
0
0
1
1
2
+
0
0
11
3
+
0
0
114+00
1
1
5
+
0
0
116+00
11
7
+
0
0
1
1
8
+
0
0
119+
0
0
121
+
0
0
122+
0
0
1
2
3
+
0
0
12
4
+
0
0
2
0
0
+
0
0
203
+
0
0
204
+
0
0
205
+
0
0
20
6
+
0
0
20
7
+
0
0
20
8
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
21
0
+
0
0
211
+
0
0
21
2
+
0
0
213
+
0
0
21
5
+
0
0
2
1
6
+
0
0
218+
0
0
21
9
+
0
0
22
0
+
0
0
304+91
300+
0
0
301+
0
0
302+00
303+0
0
304+00
21
4
+
0
0
22
1
+
0
0
110+0
0
12
0
+
0
0
2
0
1
+
0
0
2
0
2
+
0
0
UT3
UT2
Oak

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
UT1
U
T
1
A
UT1B
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
UT1
BMP 1
BMP 2
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Sheet Boundary
Internal_Crossings
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Creation (@3:1
ratio)
Wetland Re-establishment
(@1:1 ratio)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1.5:1)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1:1 ratio)
BMP
Structures
Vegetation Plot Conditions (MY0)
Criteria Met (Permanent)
Criteria Met (Mobile)
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Restoration
No credit
Non-Project Streams
TOB
Cross Section
[Fencing
Topographic Contour (5ft)
GF Photo Point
!A Barotroll
!A Crest Gage
!A Groundwater Gage
Reach Breaks
ParkingAccess
0 150 30075 Feet ¹
Figure 1b.
Figure 1a.
Figure 1c.
2019 Aerial Photography
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 4
Reach 3
Figure 1a. Current Condition Plan View
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Gaston County, NC
2020 Aerial Photography
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
XS9
XS
8
XS10
XS1
1
XS13
XS1
2
GWG7
GWG6
GWG8
GWG9
GWG4
GWG5
13
21
23
14
19
22
20
15
16
17
18
2.1
VP10
VP11
VP7
MP5
MP4
VP8
VP9
MP3
1
0
0
+
0
0
101+00
10
2
+
0
0
10
3
+
0
0
10
4
+
0
0
105+00
106
+
0
0
107+00
108
+
0
0
109+0
0
1
1
1
+
0
0
1
1
2
+
0
0
11
3
+
0
0
114+00
1
1
5
+
0
0
116+00
218
+
0
0
21
9
+
0
0
22
0
+
0
0
22
1
+
0
0
110+0
0
UT2
Oak

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
UT1
BMP 2
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Sheet Boundary
Internal_Crossings
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Creation (@3:1
ratio)
Wetland Re-establishment
(@1:1 ratio)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1.5:1)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1:1 ratio)
BMP
Structures
Vegetation Plot Conditions
(MY0)
Criteria Met (Permanent)
Criteria Met (Mobile)
Enhancement I
Restoration
No credit
Non-Project Streams
TOB
Cross Section
[Fencing
Topographic Contour (5ft)
!A Groundwater Gage
GF Photo Point
Reach Breaks
0 75 15037.5 Feet ¹
2019 Aerial Photography
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3Reach 2
Figure 1b. Current Condition Plan View
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Gaston County, NC
2020 Aerial Photography
Robert Rd
Robert Rd
RobertRd
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
!A
!A
!A
!A
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
X
S
1
4
CG3
GWG10
GWG11
2.2
24
25
27
26
VP12
VP13
MP6
11
7
+
0
0
1
1
8
+
0
0
119+
0
0
12
1
+
0
0
122+
0
0
1
2
3
+
0
0
1
2
4
+
0
0
12
0
+
0
0
UT3
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
BMP 2
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Sheet Boundary
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Creation (@3:1
ratio)
Wetland Re-establishment
(@1:1 ratio)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1:1 ratio)
Vegetation Plot Conditions
(MY0)
Criteria Met (Permanent)
Criteria Met (Mobile)
BMP
Structures
Restoration
No credit
Non-Project Streams
TOB
Cross Section
[Fencing
Topographic Contour (5ft)
GF Photo Point
!A Crest Gage
!A Groundwater Gage
Reach Breaks
0 75 15037.5 Feet ¹
2019 Aerial Photography
Reach 4
Reach 3
Figure 1c. Current Condition Plan View
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Gaston County, NC
R
o
y
E
a
k
e
r
R
d
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[[[[
[
[
[
[[[[
[
[[
[
[[[[[[[[
[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
XS1
XS2
X
S
3
XS7
XS
6
X
S
4
XS
5
CG2
GWG2
CG1
GWG3
Baro
GWG1
13
1.21.1
2
5
4
3
1
7
10 11
6
8
129
VP2
VP3
VP1
VP4
VP6
VP5
MP2
MP1
2
0
0
+
0
0
203
+
0
0
20
4
+
0
0
20
5
+
0
0
20
6
+
0
0
20
7
+
0
0
20
8
+
0
0
20
9
+
0
0
21
0
+
0
0
211
+
0
0
2
1
2
+
0
0
213
+
0
0
21
5
+
0
0
2
1
6
+
0
0
218
+
0
0
304+91
300+
0
0
301+
0
0
302+00
303+0
0
304+00
21
4
+
0
0
2
0
1
+
0
0
2
0
2
+
0
0
UT1
U
T
1
A
UT1B
BMP 1
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Sheet Boundary
Internal_Crossings
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Creation (@3:1
ratio)
Wetland Re-establishment
(@1:1 ratio)
Wetland Rehabilitation
(@1.5:1)
BMP
Structures
Vegetation Plot Conditions
(MY0)
Criteria Met (Permanent)
Criteria Met (Mobile)
Enhancement II
Restoration
No credit
Non-Project Streams
TOB
Cross Section
[Fencing
Topographic Contour (5ft)
!A Barotroll
!A Crest Gage
!A Groundwater Gage
GF Photo Point
Reach Breaks
ParkingAccess
0 75 15037.5 Feet ¹
2019 Aerial Photography
Reach 1
Reach 2

Appendix A
Visual Assessment Data
Table 4.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Assessment Date: 4/18/2022
UT1A
470
940
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 17 17 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 5 5 100%
UT1B
292
584
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 0 0 N/A
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 0 0 N/A
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 4.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Assessment Date: 4/18/2022
UT1 Reach 1
218
436
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 0 0 N/A
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100%
UT1 Reach 2
1,834
3,668
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 11 11 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 13 13 100%
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Totals:
Bank 
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 4.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Assessment Date: 4/18/2022
Oak Hill Creek Reach 1
489
978
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 3 3 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100%
Oak Hill Creek Reach 2
470
940
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 3 3 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100%
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 4.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Assessment Date: 4/18/2022
Oak Hill Creek Reach 3
877
1,754
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 6 6 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 7 7 100%
Oak Hill Creek Reach 4
389
778
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 3 3 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100%
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐Built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Assessment Date: 2/21/22
Planted Acreage 19.1
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold 
(ac)
Combined 
Acreage
% of Planted 
Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 0 0%
Low Stem Density 
Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count 
criteria.0.10 0 0%
00%
Areas of Poor Growth 
Rates
Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance 
Standard.0.10 0 0%
0.0 0%
Easement Acreage 19.9
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold 
(ac)
Combined 
Acreage
% of 
Easement 
Acreage
Invasive Areas of 
Concern
Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will 
therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the 
potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short‐term or 
community structure for existing communities.  Invasive species included in 
summation above should be identified in report summary.  
0.10 0 0%
Easement 
Encroachment Areas
Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists
of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common
encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no
threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. 
none
Table 5.  Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Total
Cumulative Total
0 Encroachments Noted
 / 0 ac

Stream Photographs 

PP1 – UT1A looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP1 – UT1A looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP2 – UT1A looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP2 – UT1 R1 looking upstream (02/24/2022) 
PP2 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP3 – UT1 R1 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP3 – UT1 R1 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP4 – UT1B looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP4 – UT1B looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP5 – UT1B looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP5 – UT1B looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP6 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP6 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP7 – UT1B looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP7 – UT1B – UT1 R2 Confluence (02/24/2022) 
PP8 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP8 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP9 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP9 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP10 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP10 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP11 –UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP11 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP12 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP12 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP13 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP13 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP14 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP14 – UT1 R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP15 – Oak Hill R1 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP15 – Oak Hill R1 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP16 – Oak Hill R1 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP16 – Oak Hill R1 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP17 – Oak Hill R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP17 – Oak Hill R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP18 – Oak Hill R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP18 – Oak Hill R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP19 – Oak Hill R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP19 – Oak Hill R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP20 – UT1 R2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP20 – Oak Hill R2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP20 –Oak Hill R2 upstream (02/24/2022) 
PP21 – Oak Hill R3 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP21 – Oak Hill R3 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP22 – UT2 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP22 – UT2 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP23 – Oak Hill R3 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP23 – Oak Hill R3 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP24 – UT3 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP24 – UT3 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP25 – Oak Hill R4 looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP25 – Oak Hill R4 looking downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP25 –UT3 looking upsteam (02/24/2022) 
PP26 – Right floodplain ditch looking upstream (02/24/2022) PP26 – Right floodplain ditch looking downstream (02/24/2022) 
PP27 – Oak Hill R4 upstream (02/24/2022) PP27 – Oak Hill R4 downstream (02/24/2022) 

PP27 – Left floodplain ditch looking upstream (02/24/2022) 
PP1.1 – BMP 1 looking north (02/24/2022) PP1.1 – BMP 1 looking northwest (02/24/2022) 

PP1.2 – BMP 1 looking west (02/24/2022) 
PP2.1 – BMP 2 looking northwest (02/24/2022) PP2.1 – BMP 2 looking northeast (02/24/2022) 
PP2.2 – BMP 2 looking northwest (02/24/2022) PP2.2 – BMP 2 looking west (02/24/2022) 

Vegetation Plot Photographs

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 1 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 2 (02/21/2022)
PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 3 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 4 (02/21/2022)
PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 5 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 6 (02/21/2022)
PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 7 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 8 (02/21/2022)
PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 9 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 10 (02/21/2022)
PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 11 (02/21/2022) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 12 (02/21/2022)

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 13 (02/21/2022)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 1 (02/21/2022) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 2 (02/21/2022)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 3 (02/21/2022) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 4 (02/21/2022)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 5 (02/21/2022) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 6 (02/21/2022)

Groundwater Gage Photographs

Groundwater Gage 1 - (01/28/2022) Groundwater Gage 2 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 3 - (01/28/2022) Groundwater Gage 4 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 5 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 6 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 7 - (01/28/2022) Groundwater Gage 8 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 9 - (01/28/2022) Groundwater Gage 10 - (01/28/2022)

Groundwater Gage 11 - (01/28/2022)

Appendix B
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6.  Vegetation Plot Data
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
19.1
2022‐02‐21
NA 
2022‐02‐21 
2022‐02‐21
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC
Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL
Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry Tree FAC 2 2
Betula nigra river birchTreeFACW112233
Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub Shrub FACU 2 2
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU 2 2
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree FACW 1 1
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub OBL
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 1
Cornus florida flowering dogwood Tree FACU 2 2
Diospyros virginiana common persimmonTreeFAC1111
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptreeTreeFACU1111
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 5 5
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL 1 1
Platanus occidentalis American sycamoreTreeFACW333333
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood Tree FAC 1 1
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 1 1
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 1
Salix sericea silky willow Shrub OBL
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry Tree 1 1 1 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 2 2
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 2 2
Sum Performance Standard 15 15 13 13 17 17
15 13 17
607 526 688
10 8 8
20 23 29
222
000
15 13 17
607 526 688
10 8 8
20 23 29
222
000
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Sh
rub
Indicator 
Status
Veg Plot 1 FVeg Plot 2 FVeg Plot 3 F
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
% Invasives
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a
mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan
approved, and proposed stems.
Table 6.  Vegetation Plot Data
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
19.1
2022‐02‐21
NA 
2022‐02‐21 
2022‐02‐21
0.0247
Acer negundo boxelder
Alnus serrulata hazel alder
Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry
Betula nigra river birch
Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory
Celtis laevigata sugarberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush
Cornus amomum silky dogwood
Cornus florida flowering dogwood
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood
Quercus alba white oak
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak
Quercus nigra water oak
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak
Quercus phellos willow oak
Quercus rubra northern red oak
Salix sericea silky willow
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry
Ulmus americana American elm
Ulmus rubra slippery elm
Sum Performance Standard
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
% Invasives
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
11 1122
11
55332211
111111
2211
11
22
1111
11112233
11
22 11
114411
2211 22
11
221111
22441111
16 16 17 17 15 15 14 14
16 17 15 14
648 688 607 567
910910
31 24 27 21
2222
0000
16 17 15 14
648 688 607 567
910910
31 24 27 21
2222
0000
Veg Plot 5 FVeg Plot 6 FVeg Plot 7 FVeg Plot 4 F
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a
mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan
approved, and proposed stems.
Table 6.  Vegetation Plot Data
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
19.1
2022‐02‐21
NA 
2022‐02‐21 
2022‐02‐21
0.0247
Acer negundo boxelder
Alnus serrulata hazel alder
Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry
Betula nigra river birch
Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory
Celtis laevigata sugarberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush
Cornus amomum silky dogwood
Cornus florida flowering dogwood
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood
Quercus alba white oak
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak
Quercus nigra water oak
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak
Quercus phellos willow oak
Quercus rubra northern red oak
Salix sericea silky willow
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry
Ulmus americana American elm
Ulmus rubra slippery elm
Sum Performance Standard
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
% Invasives
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
111111
11
444411
11
11
11
11
11
111122
11
552211
22
11
11 11
33
11
11
11
22 11
11
11
16 16 16 16 15 15
16 16 15
648 648 607
81112
31 25 20
323
000
16 16 15
648 648 607
81112
31 25 20
323
000
Veg Plot 10 FVeg Plot 8 FVeg Plot 9 F
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a
mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan
approved, and proposed stems.
Table 6.  Vegetation Plot Data
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
19.1
2022‐02‐21
NA 
2022‐02‐21 
2022‐02‐21
0.0247
Acer negundo boxelder
Alnus serrulata hazel alder
Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry
Betula nigra river birch
Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory
Celtis laevigata sugarberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush
Cornus amomum silky dogwood
Cornus florida flowering dogwood
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood
Quercus alba white oak
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak
Quercus nigra water oak
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak
Quercus phellos willow oak
Quercus rubra northern red oak
Salix sericea silky willow
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry
Ulmus americana American elm
Ulmus rubra slippery elm
Sum Performance Standard
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
% Invasives
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
11
11
441155
11
1111
11
221111
2211
11
2211
33
22
1111
22
3322
11
22
14 14 14 14 16 16
14 14 16
567 567 648
7910
29 21 31
322
000
14 14 16
567 567 648
7910
29 21 31
322
000
Veg Plot 11 FVeg Plot 12 FVeg Plot 13 F
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a
mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan
approved, and proposed stems.
Table 6.  Vegetation Plot Data
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
19.1
2022‐02‐21
NA 
2022‐02‐21 
2022‐02‐21
0.0247
Acer negundo boxelder
Alnus serrulata hazel alder
Amelanchier arborea common serviceberry
Betula nigra river birch
Calycanthus floridus eastern sweetshrub
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory
Celtis laevigata sugarberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush
Cornus amomum silky dogwood
Cornus florida flowering dogwood
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore
Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood
Quercus alba white oak
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak
Quercus nigra water oak
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak
Quercus phellos willow oak
Quercus rubra northern red oak
Salix sericea silky willow
Sambucus canadensis American black elderberry
Ulmus americana American elm
Ulmus rubra slippery elm
Sum Performance Standard
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
% Invasives
Veg Plot 1 RVeg Plot 2 RVeg Plot 3 RVeg Plot 4 RVeg Plot 5 RVeg Plot 6 R
Total Total Total Total Total Total
1
11
211114
2
131
121
11
11 1
1 2
231513
11
231
11
21
12211
21
2 312
11
21
2
15 11 15 14 16 14
15 11 15 14 16 14
607 445 607 567 648 567
10 7 10 9 10 8
13 27 20 36 19 29
222222
000000
15 11 15 14 16 14
607 445 607 567 648 567
10 7 10 9 10 8
13 27 20 36 19 29
222222
000000
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a
mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan
approved, and proposed stems.
Table 7.  Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
607 2 10 0 526 2 8 0 688 2 8 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
648 2 9 0 688 2 10 0 607 2 9 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
567 2 10 0 648 3 8 0 648 2 11 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
607 3 12 0 567 3 7 0 567 2 9 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
648 2 10 0 607 2 10 0 445 2 7 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
607 2 10 0 567 2 9 0 648 2 10 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
567 2 8 0
*Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. 
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 1 F
Veg Plot 4 F
Veg Plot 7 F
Veg Plot 10 F
Veg Plot Group 3 R
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot Group 4 R Veg Plot Group 5 R
Veg Plot Group 6 R
Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F
Veg Plot 13 F Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R

Appendix C
Stream Geomorphology Data
Bankfull Dimensions
4.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
6.4 width (ft)
0.6 mean depth (ft)
1.4 max depth (ft) 
7.1 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6 hydraulic radius (ft)
10.1 width‐depth ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section Plots
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Cross‐Section 1‐UT1A
809
811
813
815
0 102030
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
303+62 Pool
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
1.2 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
4.3 width (ft)
0.3 mean depth (ft)
0.5 max depth (ft) 
4.4 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.3 hydraulic radius (ft)
15.0 width‐depth ratio
9.3 W flood prone area (ft)
2.2 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section Plots
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Cross‐Section 2‐UT1A
809
811
813
815
0 10203040
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
303+78 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
22.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
18.7 width (ft)
1.2 mean depth (ft)
1.8 max depth (ft) 
19.3 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.1 hydraulic radius (ft)
15.9 width‐depth ratio
54.8 W flood prone area (ft)
2.9 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 3‐UT1 Reach 1
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
806
808
810
812
814
816
0 102030405060
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
200+79 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
12.8 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
16.4 width (ft)
0.8 mean depth (ft)
1.6 max depth (ft) 
16.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8 hydraulic radius (ft)
21.0 width‐depth ratio
100.0 W flood prone area (ft)
6.1 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
Cross‐Section 4‐UT1 Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
View Downstream
805
807
809
811
0 102030405060708090
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
204+51 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
26.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
20.5 width (ft)
1.3 mean depth (ft)
3.0 max depth (ft) 
21.7 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.1 width‐depth ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 5‐UT1 Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
803
805
807
809
811
0 10203040506070
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
204+95 Pool
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
43.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
24.2 width (ft)
1.8 mean depth (ft)
3.5 max depth (ft) 
25.4 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.7 hydraulic radius (ft)
13.6 width‐depth ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 6‐UT1 Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
798
800
802
804
0 1020304050607080
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
212+84 Pool
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
15.2 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
14.8 width (ft)
1.0 mean depth (ft)
1.8 max depth (ft) 
15.3 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.0 hydraulic radius (ft)
14.3 width‐depth ratio
89.6 W flood prone area (ft)
6.1 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 7‐UT1 Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
800
802
804
806
0 1020304050607080
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
213+34 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
12.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
15.4 width (ft)
0.8 mean depth (ft)
1.5 max depth (ft) 
15.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8 hydraulic radius (ft)
19.8 width‐depth ratio
72.6 W flood prone area (ft)
4.7 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 8‐UT1 Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
795
797
799
0 102030405060
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
218+86 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
25.3 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
21.5 width (ft)
1.2 mean depth (ft)
2.2 max depth (ft) 
22.1 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.1 hydraulic radius (ft)
18.2 width‐depth ratio
72.4 W flood prone area (ft)
3.4 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 9‐Oak Hill Reach 1
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
796
798
800
802
804
0 10203040506070
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
103+34 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
25.5 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
21.2 width (ft)
1.2 mean depth (ft)
2.1 max depth (ft) 
21.9 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2 hydraulic radius (ft)
17.7 width‐depth ratio
83.8 W flood prone area (ft)
4.0 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 10‐Oak Hill Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
795
797
799
801
0 10203040506070
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
107+14 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
64.9 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
29.7 width (ft)
2.2 mean depth (ft)
4.4 max depth (ft) 
31.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
2.0 hydraulic radius (ft)
13.6 width‐depth ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 11‐Oak Hill Reach 2
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
793
795
797
799
0 102030405060708090
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
107+57 Pool
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
73.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
33.3 width (ft)
2.2 mean depth (ft)
4.2 max depth (ft) 
34.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
2.1 hydraulic radius (ft)
15.2 width‐depth ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 12‐Oak Hill Reach 3
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
789
791
793
795
797
0 102030405060708090100110
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
113+43 Pool
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
31.5 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
22.3 width (ft)
1.4 mean depth (ft)
2.6 max depth (ft) 
23.1 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.4 hydraulic radius (ft)
15.8 width‐depth ratio
102.5 W flood prone area (ft)
4.6 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 13‐Oak Hill Reach 3
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
791
793
795
797
799
0 102030405060708090
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
113+90 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
36.1 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
26.0 width (ft)
1.4 mean depth (ft)
2.7 max depth (ft) 
26.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.3 hydraulic radius (ft)
18.8 width‐depth ratio
94.3 W flood prone area (ft)
3.6 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 3/2022
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 14‐Oak Hill Reach 4
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100120
Cross‐Section Plots
787
789
791
793
795
0 10203040506070
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
120+18 Riffle
MY0 (3/2022)Bankfull Floodprone Area
DMS Project No. 100120
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
UT1A (STA 300+13 to 304+91)
UT1A (STA 300+13 to 304+91)
810
815
820
825
30000 30050 30100 30150 30200 30250
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
St
a
r
t
 Re
a
c
h

805
810
815
820
30250 30300 30350 30400 30450 30500
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
XS
 1
XS
2
En
d
 Re
a
c
h

DMS Project No. 100120
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
UT1 (STA 200+05 to 221+11)
UT1 (STA 200+05 to 221+11)
800
805
810
815
20000 20050 20100 20150 20200 20250 20300 20350 20400 20450 20500
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
St
a
r
t
 Re
a
c
h
 1
XS
 3
XS
 4
XS
 5
St
a
r
t
 Re
a
c
h
 2
795
800
805
810
20500 20550 20600 20650 20700 20750 20800 20850 20900 20950 21000
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
DMS Project No. 100120
UT1 (STA 200+05 to 221+11)
UT1 (STA 200+05 to 221+11)
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
795
800
805
810
21000 21050 21100 21150 21200 21250 21300 21350 21400 21450 21500
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
XS
 6 
XS
 7
790
795
800
805
21500 21550 21600 21650 21700 21750 21800 21850 21900 21950 22000 22050 22100
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)Start Internal CE crossing End Internal Crossing
En
d
 Re
a
c
h
 2
XS
 8 
Internal CE 
Crossing
DMS Project No. 100120
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Oak Hill Creek (STA 100+10 to 123+73)
Oak Hill Creek (STA 100+10 to 123+73)
792
797
802
10000 10050 10100 10150 10200 10250 10300 10350 10400 10450
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
XS
 9
St
a
r
t

R
e
a
c
h
 1
790
795
800
10450 10500 10550 10600 10650 10700 10750 10800 10850 10900 10950 11000
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)End internal crossing
St
a
r
t

Re
a
c
h
 2
Internal
CE Crossing
XS
 10
XS
 11
DMS Project No. 100120
Oak Hill Creek (STA 100+10 to 123+73)
Oak Hill Creek (STA 100+10 to 123+73)
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
785
790
795
800
11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300 11350 11400 11450 11500
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
XS
 12
XS
 13
St
a
r
t

R
e
a
c
h
 3
780
785
790
795
800
11500 11550 11600 11650 11700 11750 11800 11850 11900 11950 12000
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
St
a
r
t
 Re
a
c
h
 4
DMS Project No. 100120
Oak Hill Creek (STA 100+10 to 123+73)
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Oak Hill Creek Mitigation Site 
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
780
785
790
795
12000 12050 12100 12150 12200 12250 12300 12350 12400
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
TW (MY0‐3/2022)WSF (MY0‐3/2022)LBKF/LTOB (MY0‐3/2022)RBKF/RTOB (MY0‐3/2022)STRUCTURE (MY0‐3/2022)
XS
 14
En
d
 Re
a
c
h
 4
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 18 18 18 18
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1A, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 3 3 3 21
Fine 0.125 0.250 2 7 9 9 30
Medium 0.25 0.50 4 4 4 34
Coarse 0.5 1.0 1 1 1 35
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 4 4 39
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 39
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1 1 40
Fine 4.0 5.6 40
Fine 5.6 8.0 2 2 2 42
Medium 8.0 11.0 1 1 2 2 44
Medium 11.0 16.0 4 4 4 48
Coarse 16.0 22.6 8 1 9 9 57
Coarse 22.6 32 11 2 13 13 70
Very Coarse 32 45 6 5 11 11 81
Very Coarse 45 64 6 1 7 7 88
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 5 2 7 7 95
Small 90 128 5 5 5 100
Large 128 180 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
128.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
1.0
17.3
52.3
90.0
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1A, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 8 8 8
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1A, Cross-Section 2
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 8
Fine 0.125 0.250 8
Medium 0.25 0.50 8
Coarse 0.5 1.0 8
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 6 6 14
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 14
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 2 2 16
Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 17
Fine 5.6 8.0 7 7 24
Medium 8.0 11.0 3 3 27
Medium 11.0 16.0 17 17 44
Coarse 16.0 22.6 23 23 67
Coarse 22.6 32 8 8 75
Very Coarse 32 45 13 13 88
Very Coarse 45 64 5 5 93
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 5 5 98
Small 90 128 2 2 100
Large 128 180 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 2
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
128.0
Channel materials (mm)
4.0
13.1
17.5
40.5
73.4
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1A, Cross-Section 2
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 20 20 20 20
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R1, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 15 15 15 35
Fine 0.125 0.250 7 7 7 42
Medium 0.25 0.50 1 1 1 43
Coarse 0.5 1.0 43
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 1 44
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 44
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1 1 45
Fine 4.0 5.6 45
Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 1 46
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2 48
Medium 11.0 16.0 1 2 3 3 51
Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 3 8 8 59
Coarse 22.6 32 10 10 10 69
Very Coarse 32 45 9 1 10 10 79
Very Coarse 45 64 6 6 6 85
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 4 4 4 89
Small 90 128 9 9 9 98
Large 128 180 2 2 2 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
180.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.1
14.1
60.4
113.8
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R1, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 4 4 4
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R1, Cross-Section 3
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 4
Fine 0.125 0.250 4
Medium 0.25 0.50 4
Coarse 0.5 1.0 2 2 6
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 8 8 14
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 14
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 14
Fine 4.0 5.6 14
Fine 5.6 8.0 2 2 16
Medium 8.0 11.0 6 6 22
Medium 11.0 16.0 10 10 32
Coarse 16.0 22.6 6 6 38
Coarse 22.6 32 8 8 46
Very Coarse 32 45 6 6 52
Very Coarse 45 64 14 14 66
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 10 10 76
Small 90 128 18 18 94
Large 128 180 6 6 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 3
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
180.0
Channel materials (mm)
8.0
19.0
40.2
105.3
135.5
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R1, Cross-Section 3
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 22 22 22 22
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R2, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 10 10 10 32
Fine 0.125 0.250 16 16 16 48
Medium 0.25 0.50 48
Coarse 0.5 1.0 48
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 48
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 48
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 48
Fine 4.0 5.6 48
Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 1 49
Medium 8.0 11.0 49
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 2 51
Coarse 16.0 22.6 1 1 1 52
Coarse 22.6 32 5 1 6 6 58
Very Coarse 32 45 11 11 11 69
Very Coarse 45 64 15 15 15 84
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 5 5 5 89
Small 90 128 11 11 11 100
Large 128 180 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
128.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.1
13.3
64.0
109.1
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R2, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 4
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 2 2 2
Fine 5.6 8.0 2
Medium 8.0 11.0 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 4 4 6
Coarse 16.0 22.6 12 12 18
Coarse 22.6 32 24 24 42
Very Coarse 32 45 12 12 54
Very Coarse 45 64 16 16 70
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 8 8 78
Small 90 128 18 18 96
Large 128 180 2 2 98
Large 180 256 98
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 2 2 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 4
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
362.0
Channel materials (mm)
21.3
28.9
40.2
101.2
125.5
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 4
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 7
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 6 6 8
Coarse 16.0 22.6 8 8 16
Coarse 22.6 32 12 12 28
Very Coarse 32 45 20 20 48
Very Coarse 45 64 22 22 70
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 8 8 78
Small 90 128 16 16 94
Large 128 180 6 6 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 7
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
180.0
Channel materials (mm)
22.6
36.1
46.5
102.7
135.5
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 7
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 8
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 2
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 2
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 2
Fine 4.0 5.6 2
Fine 5.6 8.0 2
Medium 8.0 11.0 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 4
Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 2 6
Coarse 22.6 32 4 4 10
Very Coarse 32 45 20 20 30
Very Coarse 45 64 30 30 60
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 24 24 84
Small 90 128 8 8 92
Large 128 180 8 8 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 8
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
180.0
Channel materials (mm)
35.4
47.7
56.9
90.0
145.5
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
UT1R2, Cross-Section 8
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 2 2 2 2
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Oak Hill Reach 1, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 2 2 2 4
Fine 0.125 0.250 15 15 15 19
Medium 0.25 0.50 5 5 5 24
Coarse 0.5 1.0 6 6 6 30
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 2 32
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 32
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 3 3 3 35
Fine 4.0 5.6 2 2 2 37
Fine 5.6 8.0 2 2 2 39
Medium 8.0 11.0 4 4 4 43
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 4 4 47
Coarse 16.0 22.6 3 3 3 50
Coarse 22.6 32 2 2 4 4 54
Very Coarse 32 45 8 3 11 11 65
Very Coarse 45 64 21 21 21 86
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 7 7 7 93
Small 90 128 3 3 3 96
Large 128 180 4 4 4 100
Large 180 256 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
180.0
Channel materials (mm)
0.2
4.0
22.6
61.9
113.8
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 1, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
Oak Hill Reach 1, Cross-Section 9
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 5 5 5
Medium 11.0 16.0 7 7 11
Coarse 16.0 22.6 4 4 15
Coarse 22.6 32 17 16 31
Very Coarse 32 45 15 14 46
Very Coarse 45 64 28 27 72
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 19 18 90
Small 90 128 8 8 98
Large 128 180 98
Large 180 256 2 2 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
105 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 9
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
256.0
Channel materials (mm)
23.0
34.8
47.6
79.7
110.9
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 1, Cross-Section 9
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 10 10 10 10
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Oak Hill Reach 2, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 11 11 11 21
Fine 0.125 0.250 13 13 13 34
Medium 0.25 0.50 34
Coarse 0.5 1.0 34
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 1 35
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 35
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1 1 36
Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 1 37
Fine 5.6 8.0 5 5 5 42
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2 44
Medium 11.0 16.0 3 2 5 5 49
Coarse 16.0 22.6 3 2 5 5 54
Coarse 22.6 32 3 2 5 5 59
Very Coarse 32 45 4 1 5 5 64
Very Coarse 45 64 8 8 8 72
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 15 15 15 87
Small 90 128 8 8 8 95
Large 128 180 1 1 1 96
Large 180 256 3 3 3 99
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 1 1 1 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
362.0
Channel materials (mm)
0.1
2.0
17.1
84.1
128.0
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 2, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
Oak Hill Reach 2, Cross-Section 10
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 0
Medium 11.0 16.0 0
Coarse 16.0 22.6 6 6 6
Coarse 22.6 32 12 12 18
Very Coarse 32 45 8 8 26
Very Coarse 45 64 32 32 58
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 24 24 82
Small 90 128 14 14 96
Large 128 180 96
Large 180 256 4 4 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 10
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
256.0
Channel materials (mm)
30.2
49.7
58.6
94.6
124.8
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 2, Cross-Section 10
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 32 32 32 32
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Oak Hill Reach 3, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 6 6 6 38
Fine 0.125 0.250 1 1 1 39
Medium 0.25 0.50 2 2 2 41
Coarse 0.5 1.0 1 1 1 42
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 2 44
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 44
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 44
Fine 4.0 5.6 2 2 2 46
Fine 5.6 8.0 2 2 2 48
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2 50
Medium 11.0 16.0 50
Coarse 16.0 22.6 1 1 1 51
Coarse 22.6 32 2 2 2 53
Very Coarse 32 45 7 7 7 60
Very Coarse 45 64 12 12 12 72
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 11 11 11 83
Small 90 128 6 6 6 89
Large 128 180 6 6 6 95
Large 180 256 4 4 4 99
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 99
Small 362 512 99
Medium 512 1024 1 1 1 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
1024.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.1
11.0
95.4
180.0
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 3, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
Oak Hill Reach 3, Cross-Section 13
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 2 2 2
Medium 11.0 16.0 6 6 8
Coarse 16.0 22.6 4 4 12
Coarse 22.6 32 10 10 22
Very Coarse 32 45 10 10 32
Very Coarse 45 64 28 28 60
Small 64 90 20 20 80
Small 90 128 10 10 90
Large 128 180 2 2 92
Large 180 256 4 4 96
Small 256 362 2 2 98
Small 362 512 2 2 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Cross-Section 13
Summary
SA
N
D
GR
A
V
E
L
Riffle 100-
Count
CO
B
B
L
E
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
512.0
Channel materials (mm)
26.0
46.7
56.4
103.6
234.4
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 3, Cross-Section 13
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
Oak Hill Reach 4, Reachwide
min max Riffle Pool Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 19 19 19 19
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Reach SummaryParticle Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 8 8 8 27
Fine 0.125 0.250 7 7 7 34
Medium 0.25 0.50 8 8 8 42
Coarse 0.5 1.0 3 3 3 45
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 2 2 2 47
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 47
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 47
Fine 4.0 5.6 1 1 1 48
Fine 5.6 8.0 1 1 1 49
Medium 8.0 11.0 49
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 2 51
Coarse 16.0 22.6 7 7 7 58
Coarse 22.6 32 3 3 3 61
Very Coarse 32 45 12 1 13 13 74
Very Coarse 45 64 10 10 10 84
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 6 6 6 90
Small 90 128 6 6 6 96
Large 128 180 1 1 1 97
Large 180 256 1 1 1 98
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 1 1 1 99
Small 362 512 1 1 1 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
50 50 100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Reachwide
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
512.0
Channel materials (mm)
Silt/Clay
0.3
13.3
64.0
120.7
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 4, Reachwide
Reachwide and Cross-Section Pebble Count Plots
Oak Hill Reach 4, Cross-Section 14
min max
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY Silt/Clay 0.000 0.062 0
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 - 2022
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)Summary
Riffle 100-
Count
Very fine 0.062 0.125 0
Fine 0.125 0.250 0
Medium 0.25 0.50 0
Coarse 0.5 1.0 0
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 0
SA
N
D
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 0
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 0
Fine 4.0 5.6 0
Fine 5.6 8.0 0
Medium 8.0 11.0 0
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2 2
Coarse 16.0 22.6 2 2 4
Coarse 22.6 32 4 4 8
Very Coarse 32 45 14 14 22
Very Coarse 45 64 24 24 46
GR
A
V
E
L
Small 64 90 28 28 74
Small 90 128 8 8 82
Large 128 180 12 12 94
Large 180 256 6 6 100
CO
B
B
L
E
Small 256 362 100
Small 362 512 100
Medium 512 1024 100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048 100
BEDROCK Bedrock 2048 >2048 100
100 100 100
D16 =
D35 =
D50 =
D84 =
D95 =
D100 =
Cross-Section 14
BO
U
L
D
E
R
Total
256.0
Channel materials (mm)
38.9
54.5
67.2
135.5
190.9
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pe
r
c
e
n
t

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

(
%
)
Particle Class Size (mm)
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
MY0-02/2022
Oak Hill Reach 4, Cross-Section 14
Table 8a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1 8.0 12.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 0.6 0.8 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 1.4 2.2 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1 37.0 85.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 1.3 1.6 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
1.8
22.0
˗˗˗
1.10
2.2
54.8
1.2
17.5
17.0
0.0274
15.0
1.0
0.0320
E4b
51.0
1.2
73
1.07 1.10
˗˗˗
0.0250
12.0
9.9
12.2
0.2
0.4
1.9
1.03 1.20 1.20
0.0064
F4 C4 C4
31 42 ˗˗˗
0.0077 0.0060
3.2 ˗˗˗
23.4
1.5
2.4
15.9
2.9
1.0
16.0
40.2
18.4
1.6
10.7
UT1 Reach 1
15.9
24.5
0.7
18.7
1.1
2.6
0.5
9.3
0.3
0.5
1.2
PRE‐EXISTING 
CONDITIONS
Silt
F6b E4b
9.6
UT1A
4.3
DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE 
(MY0)
5.5
Table 8b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)1 14.8 16.4 3
Floodprone Width (ft)1 37.0 85.0 72.6 100.0 3
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 0.8 1.0 3
Bankfull Max Depth 1 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.8 3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1 12.0 15.2 3
Width/Depth Ratio 1 14.3 21.0 3
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 4.7 6.1 3
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 3
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 40.2 56.9 3
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 44.0 100.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 1.7 2.1 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
3.4
1.0
0.0046
90 ˗˗˗
1.30 1.20 1.20
22.6 ˗˗˗
B4c C4 C4
47.6
14.0
1.4
27.5 28.4 25.3
18.2
72.4
1.2
2.2
0.0070
20.0 21.5
0.0070
C4
52 51 ˗˗˗
1.15 1.20 1.20
1.8
2.4
3.3 ˗˗˗
G4 C4
1.5 1.1
2.2
14.1 18.4
5.9 16.0
2.0
2.4
Oak Hill Reach 1
PRE‐EXISTING 
CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE 
(MY0)
UT1 Reach 2
9.1 17.0
16.2
1.0
0.0070 0.0040
0.0070
98
14.4
1.7
1.4
40.0
19.9
Table 8c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1 51 115 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 1.7 2.3 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1 55 125 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 2.1 2.6 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
83.8
1.2
2.1
25.5
17.7
4.0
0.0060
8.0 ˗˗˗
1.15 1.20 1.20
95
2.6
C4
31.5
15.8
4.6
56.4
43.9
12.9 14.0
149 ˗˗˗
2.6
2.6 1.0
C4 C4
Oak Hill Reach 3
19.3 25.0
22.3
49.8
1.5 1.8
102.5
1.4
2.2
29.1
1.65 1.20 1.20
0.00510.0057 0.0055
G4c C4 C4
94 88 ˗˗˗
5.4
2.0 1.0
2.5 ˗˗˗58.6
1.9 1.5
3
28.1 33.4
7.6 16.0
0.0052 0.0055
PRE‐EXISTING 
CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE 
(MY0)
Oak Hill Reach 2
14.6 23.0
21.2
79
Table 8d. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft) 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1 55 125 1
Bankfull Mean Depth 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth 1 2.1 2.6 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)11
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1 2.2 5.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.0 1.1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
Other
PRE‐EXISTING 
CONDITIONS DESIGN MONITORING BASELINE 
(MY0)
Oak Hill Reach 4
19.8
2.3 2.7
25.0 26.0
90.7
35.1 43.9 36.1
94.3
1.8 1.8
1.4
11.2 14.0
18.8
4.6 3.6
2.3 1.0
1.7 ˗˗˗
E5 C4 C4
122 156 ˗˗˗
67.2
1.16 1.20 1.20
0.00540.0050 0.0070
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100120
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull 1 Area 811.26 810.59 810.05 807.79
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull 1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 809.87 810.08 808.20 806.22
LTOB2 Elevation 811.26 810.59 810.05 807.79
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.4 0.5 1.8 1.6
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)4.0 1.2 22.0 12.8
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull 1 Area 807.22 802.40 802.44 797.65
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull 1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 804.21 798.88 800.62 796.18
LTOB2 Elevation 807.22 802.40 802.44 797.65
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)3.0 3.5 1.8 1.5
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)26.1 43.0 15.2 12.0
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull 1 Area 799.74 798.06 797.76 794.01
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull 1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 797.55 795.97 793.40 789.76
LTOB2 Elevation 799.74 798.06 797.76 794.01
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.2 2.1 4.4 4.2
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)25.3 25.5 64.9 73.1
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull 1 Area 794.36 790.90
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull 1 Area 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation 791.77 788.21
LTOB2 Elevation 794.36 790.90
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.6 2.7
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)31.5 36.1
1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation.  
2LTOB Area and Max depth ‐ These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation).  Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above.  The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will 
be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. 
Cross‐Section 11 (Pool)
Oak Hill Reach 3
Cross‐Section 12 (Pool)
Oak Hill Reach 3 Oak Hill Reach 4
Cross‐Section 13 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 14 (Riffle)
Oak Hill Reach 1
Table 9.  Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
Cross‐Section 1 (Pool)Cross‐Section 2 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 3 (Riffle)
Cross‐Section 7 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 6 (Pool)Cross‐Section 5 (Pool)
UT1A
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
UT1 Reach 2
UT1 Reach 1 UT1 Reach 2
Cross‐Section 8 (Riffle)
Cross‐Section 4 (Riffle)
Cross‐Section 9 (Riffle)Cross‐Section 10 (Riffle)
Oak Hill Reach 2

Appendix D 
Project Timeline and Contact Information 
DMS Project No. 100120
DMS Project No. 100120
Monitoring, POC Kristi Suggs
704.332.7754
Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Construction Contractor 
Wildlands Construction, Inc.
312 W. Millbrook Rd, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Table 11.  Project Contact Table
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2021
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
167‐B Haywood Rd
Asheville, NC 28806
828.774.5547
Designer   
Jake McLean, PE, CFM
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring Stream Survey 2028 December 2028Vegetation Survey 2028
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring Stream Survey 2026 December 2026Vegetation Survey 2026
Year 3 Monitoring Stream Survey 2024 December 2024Vegetation Survey 2024
Year 2 Monitoring Stream Survey 2023 December 2023Vegetation Survey 2023
Year 1 Monitoring Stream Survey 2022 December 2022Vegetation Survey 2022
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)Stream Survey February ‐ March 2022 May 2022Vegetation Survey February 2022
As‐Built Survey Completed January ‐ March 2022 April 2022
Construction (Grading) Completed September 2021‐January 2022 January 2022
Planting Completed February 2022 February 2022
Project Instituted N/A April 2019
Mitigation Plan Approved July 2019 ‐ March 2021 March 2021
Table 10.  Project Activity and Reporting History
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 0 ‐ 2022
Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Complete Task Completion or Deliverable 
Submission

Appendix E 
Record Drawings and Sealed As‐Built Survey 
Oak Hill Dairy Mitigation Site Record Drawing
Gaston County, North Carolina
for
NCDEQ
Division of Mitigation Services
Title Sheet 0.1
Project Overview 0.2
General Notes and Symbols 0.3
Stream Plan and Profile
Oak Hill Creek 1.1-1.6
UT1 1.7-1.11
UT1A 1.12
UT1B 1.13
UT2 1.14
UT3 1.15
Wetland Grading 2.1-2.4
Planting Sheets 3.1-3.5
Fencing and Gate Plan 4.1
Vicinity Map
Not to Scale
Sheet Index
Project Directory
Owner:
NCDEQ - NC DMS
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Mathew Reid
828-231-7912
NCDEQ Contract No. 7867
DMS ID No. 100120
NC DWR#20190863
Catawba River Basin 03050102
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
PRELIMINARY PLANS
ISSUED May 12, 2022
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2

-

C
o
v
e
r

N
o
t
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
0.
1
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Ti
t
l
e

S
h
e
e
t
Engineering:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
License No. F-0831
167-B Haywood Rd
Asheville, NC 28806
828-774-5547
Surveying:
Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA
88 Central Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801
Phillip B. Kee, PLS
828-645-8275
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
ROB
E
R
T

R
D
B
U
D

B
L
A
C
K

R
D
ROY

E
A
K
E
R

R
D
B
U
C
K
F
R
A
L
E
Y

R
D
T
O
T

D
E
L
L
I
N
G
E
R

R
D
E. CHURCH

S
T
LINC
O
L
N
T
O
N

H
W
Y
A
N
T
H
O
N
Y
G
R
O
V
E

R
D
HEPHZ
I
B
A
H
CHURC
H

R
D
E. MAI
N

S
T
DIC
K

B
E
A
M
RD
Jake Mclean, PE, CFM
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CECE
SITE
STREAM ORIGINS
NAME NORTHING EASTING
OAK HILL CREEK 609299 1299430
UT1 610055 1297694
UT1A 610499 1297711
UT1B 609941 1297705
UT2 610266 1299747
UT3 610616 1299891
STA: 100+10
OAK HILL CREEK
BEGIN REACH 1 - ENHANCEMENT I
STA: 105+53
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 1 - ENHANCEMENT I
BEGIN REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA: 110+23
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 2 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 3 - RESTORATION
STA: 221+11
UT1
END WORK REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA: 119+00
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 3 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 4 - RESTORATION
STA: 302+85
UT3
CONFLUENCE
STA: 123+96
OAK HILL CREEK
END WORK
STA: 123+73
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 4 - RESTORATION
OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
UT1
U
T
1
A
STA: 0+00
UT1B
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT II
STA: 3+10
UT1B
END ENHANCEMENT II
STA: 202+23
UT1
END REACH 1 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA:304+91
UT1A
CONFLUENCE
STA: 2+66
UT2
NO CREDIT
STA: 300+31
UT3
NO CREDIT
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
MICHAE
L

W
.

W
H
I
T
E
S
I
D
E
S

&

W
I
F
E
LAUREN

W
.

W
H
I
T
E
S
I
D
E
S
PIN: 269
0
-
7
9
-
5
8
1
8
DB: 4786

P
G
:

3
6
3
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

J
R
.

&
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
PIN: 269
1
-
9
0
-
0
3
4
0
DB: 4949

P
G
:

1
8
0
3

(
T
R
A
C
T

O
N
E
)
ALSO DB
:

4
9
4
9

P
G
:

1
8
0
3
(TRACT

#
B

O
F

T
R
A
C
T

E
I
G
H
T
)
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
PIN: 269
0
-
8
9
-
1
7
0
6
DB: 3262

P
G
:

4
7
7
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

J
R
.

&
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
PIN: 269
0
-
7
9
-
8
8
9
7
PORTIO
N

O
F

D
B
:

4
9
4
9

P
G
:

1
8
0
3

(
T
R
A
C
T

S
I
X
)
KIPP H.
R
A
Y
F
I
E
L
D

&

W
I
F
E
JEANE R
A
Y
F
I
E
L
D
PIN: 269
1
-
7
0
-
0
0
4
3
DB: 2612

P
G
:

3
7
1
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

J
R
.

&
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
PIN: 269
1
-
7
0
-
3
3
3
8
DB: 4821

P
G
:

1
0
2
3
PB: 71 P
G
:

5
8

(
L
O
T

6
)
CLAREN
C
E

V
.

T
H
O
R
N
B
U
R
G

&

W
I
F
E
MELANIE

P
.

T
H
O
R
N
B
U
R
G
PIN: 269
1
-
7
0
-
4
7
9
2
DB: 2083

P
G
:

5
0
6
PB: 46 P
G
:

1
6

(
T
R
A
C
T

V
I
I
)
STEVE B
.

E
A
K
E
R

&

W
I
F
E
KATHY M
.

E
A
K
E
R
PIN: 269
1
-
7
1
-
4
4
2
3
DB: 2243

P
G
:

7
1
3
PB: 46 P
G
:

1
6
(PORTIO
N

O
F

T
R
A
C
T
S

I

&

I
I
)
STEPHE
N

B
.

E
A
K
E
R

&

W
I
F
E
KATHY M
.

E
A
K
E
R
PIN: 269
1
-
7
1
-
6
5
4
1
PORTIO
N

O
F

D
B
:

4
8
8
7

P
G
:

2
2
0
0
ALLAN M
.

B
L
A
C
K

&

W
I
F
E
REBECC
A

B
.

B
L
A
C
K
PIN: 269
1
-
8
1
-
0
5
3
0
DB: 1116

P
G
:

1
3
6
CITY OF

C
H
E
R
R
Y
V
I
L
L
E
PIN: 269
1
-
9
0
-
9
9
9
5
DB: 2086

P
G
:

7
1
4
HAROLD

R
.

L
I
N
E
B
E
R
G
E
R

&

W
I
F
E
PATSY E
.

L
I
N
E
B
E
R
G
E
R
PIN: 360
1
-
0
0
-
0
4
6
4
DB: 1898

P
G
:

6
5
8
ESTATE

F
I
L
E

1
4
E
/
7
8
0
SALLY E
A
K
E
R

H
A
R
R
I
S
,
PATSY E
A
K
E
R

L
I
N
E
B
E
R
G
E
R
,
FREIDA

E
A
K
E
R

S
C
H
O
D
E
R
B
E
C
K

&
CAMERO
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
DB: 1332

P
G
:

2
8
2
SEE NOT
E

#
1
0
U
T
2
UT1B
STA: 200+05
UT1
BEGIN REACH 1 - RESTORATION
STA: 300+13
UT1A
BEGIN RESTORATION
U
T
3
XS10
XS11
XS12
XS13
X
S
1
4
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
SH
E
E
T

1
.
5
EXI
S
T
I
N
G

F
A
R
M

R
O
A
D
EXISTING POND
EXISTING
STRUCTURES
(TYP)
SH
E
E
T

1
.
6
SH
E
E
T

1
.
4
SH
E
E
T

1
.
3
SHE
E
T

1
.
1
1
SHEET 1
.
1
0
SHEET 1.9
SHEET 1.8
S
H
E
E
T

1
.
1
2
SHEET 1.7
S
H
E
E
T

1
.
1
S
H
E
E
T

1
.
2
SHEE
T

1
.
1
3
S
H
E
E
T

1
.
1
4
S
H
E
E
T

1
.
1
5
EXISTING DAIRY
WASTE LAGOON
RO
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
O
A
D
ROBERT ROAD
10
0
+
0
0
101
+
0
0
10
2
+
0
0
10
3
+
0
0
10
4
+
0
0
105+
0
0
1
0
6
+
0
0
1
0
7
+
0
0
108
+
0
0
1
0
9
+
0
0
11
0
+
0
0
11
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113+
0
0
1
1
4
+
0
0
115+0
0
1
1
6
+
0
0
11
7
+
0
0
118
+
0
0
11
9
+
0
0
120+
0
0
12
1
+
0
0
122
+
0
0
123
+
0
0
12
4
+
0
0
12
4
+
0
2
200+
0
0
201+
0
0
202+
0
0
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
205+00
206+
0
0
207
+
0
0
208+0
0
209+00
210+00
211+00
212+0
0
213+00
214+
0
0
2
1
5
+
0
0
21
6
+
0
0
217+0
0
2
1
8
+
0
0
219+00
22
0
+
0
0
221+0
0
304+91
3
0
0
+
0
0
3
0
1
+
0
0
302
+
0
0
3
0
3
+
0
0
304
+
0
0
4+89
2+00
3
+
0
0
4
+
0
0
300+00
301
+
0
0
3
0
2
+
0
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'100'200'300'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
0.
2
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

Ov
e
r
v
i
e
w
Oak Hill Creek
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2

-

C
o
v
e
r

N
o
t
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
0.
3
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Ge
n
e
r
a
l

N
o
t
e
s

a
n
d

S
y
m
b
o
l
s
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
PROJECT NOTES:
Topographic survey was completed by Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA in July 2019.
Parcel boundary survey completed by Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA in October 2019.
Conservation easement survey completed by Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA in October 2020.
Topographic data supplemented with Lidar data from Feb - April 2017.
Riffle selection varied based on available materials at the Engineers' discretion. Field
coordination will be required.
Asbuilt Various Constructed Riffles
Asbuilt Cascading Riffle/Rock Cascade
Asbuilt Brush Toe
Asbuilt Vegetated Soil Lift
Asbuilt BMP
Asbuilt Gravel Farm Road
Asbuilt Soil Farm Road
Asbuilt Bank Roughening
Asbuilt Boulder Toe
Asbuilt Riprap
Asbuilt Bridge Crossing
Asbuilt Log Sill
Asbuilt Cover Log
Asbuilt Log J-hook
Asbuilt Rock Sill
Asbuilt Rock J-hook with Sill
PP #
VP #
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
Asbuilt Log J-Hook with Sill
Photo Point
Permanent Vegetation Plot
Barotroll
Ground Water Gage
Crest Gage
Monitoring Cross Section
CG #
GWG #
>
XS #
Pre-Construction Features Design Features
Design Structures
Asbuilt StructuresAsbuilt Features
Pre-Construction Property Line
Pre-Construction NCDOT Right-of-Way
Pre-Construction Top of Bank
Pre-Construction Overhead Utility Line
Pre-Construction Overhead Utility Easement
Pre-Construction Fence
Pre-Construction Overhead Utility
Pre-Construction Sanitary Sewer
Pre-Construction Sanitary Sewer Right of Way
Pre-Construction Tree Line
Pre-Construction Storm Pipe
Pre-Construction Wetland
Pre-Construction Road
Pre-Construction Rip Rap
Pre-Construction Building
Pre-Construction Utility Pole
XXX
OUE OUE
OHE OHE
R/W
SSE SSE SSE
Design Alignment
Design Bankfull
Design Major Contour (5' Interval)
Design Minor Contour
Design Permanent Culvert
Design Woven Wire Fence
Design Barbed Wire Fence
Design 8' Double Gate
Design 12' Single Gate
Asbuilt Alignment
Asbuilt Bankfull
Recorded CE
Recorded Internal Crossing
Asbuilt LOD
Asbuilt Major Contour (5' Interval)
Asbuilt Minor Contour
Asbuilt Permanent Culvert
Asbuilt Fence
Asbuilt 8' Double Gate
Asbuilt 12' Single Gate
Asbuilt Permanent Ford Crossing
Asbuilt Stream Crossing - Culvert
100
X X X
CE CE
LOD
CE-IX CE-IX
F
Design Various Constructed Riffles
Design Cascading Riffle/Rock Cascade
Design Brush Toe
Design Vegetated Soil Lift
Design Bank Roughening
Design Floodplain Roughening
Design BMP
Design Log Sill
Design Cover Log
Design Log J-hook
Design Log Vane
Design Rock Sill
Design Boulder J-hook with Sill
Project Notes:
1.DEVIATIONS FROM THE DESIGN WILL BE SHOWN IN RED.
10+00
790
795
800
805
810
790
795
800
805
810
100+00 100+50 101+00 101+50 102+00 102+50 103+00 103+50 104+00
790
795
800
805
810
790
795
800
805
810
100+00 100+50 101+00 101+50 102+00 102+50 103+00 103+50 104+00
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
VP8
VP9
GWG4
XS
9
OAK HILL CREEK
STA: 100+10
OAK HILL CREEK
BEGIN REACH 1 - ENHANCEMENT I
S
F
H
A
SFH
A
SF
H
A
SFHA SFHA
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SSSS SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE
CE
CECECECECECECECECECECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
SFHA
SFHASFHASFHA
SFH
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SFH
A
SFH
A
SFHA
S
F
H
A
SFHA
SFHASFHASFHASFHASFHA
SFHASFHASFHA
S
F
H
A
SFHA
SFH
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
CE-I
X
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
LODLOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LODLOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LODLODLODLOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LOD
LO
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
L
O
D
LOD LOD
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
>
>
>1
0
0
+
0
0
101+
0
0
10
2
+
0
0
103+0
0
104
+
0
0
STA: 102+21
LOG SILL ADDED IN
PLACE OF ROCK SILL
DUE TO EXCESS LOGS
STA: 102+98
LOG SILL ADDED FOR
EXTRA GRADE CONTROLPP15
PP16
800
800
800
80
0
STA: 100+31
INCREASED BANK GRADING
TO STABILIZE BEGINNING
OF STREAM ENHANCEMENT
STA: 102+17
BANK ROUGH ADDED
TO INCREASE
FLOODPLAIN ROUGHNESS
STA: 104+58
LOG VANE REPLACED
BY LOG J-HOOK FOR
ADDITIONAL GRADE CONTROL
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
0
4
+
0
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
790
795
800
805
790
795
800
805
104+00 104+50 105+00 105+50 106+00 106+50 107+00 107+50 108+00 108+50
790
795
800
805
790
795
800
805
104+00 104+50 105+00 105+50 106+00 106+50 107+00 107+50 108+00 108+50
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
VP7
GWG5
XS
1
1
GWG6
OAK
H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SFHA
SFHA SFHA
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SFH
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
SSE
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
SFH
A
SFHASFHA
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SFH
A
S
F
H
A
SFHA
SFHASFHA
SFHASFHASFHASFHASFHA
SFH
A
SFHA
SF
H
A
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
LODLOD
LOD LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
21
9
+
0
0
104+0
0
105
+
0
0
106+0
0
107+00
1
0
8
+
0
0
109+00
STA: 107+30
LOG SILL NOT BUILT
DUE TO SUFFICIENT
GRADE CONTROL
PROVIDED BY RIFFLE
PP17
PP18
PP19
PP16
STA: 104+91
LOG VANE NOT BUILT
TO AVOID DISTURBANCE
TO STABLE BANK AND TOE
800
795
795
79
5
79
5
800
80
0
7
9
5
STA: 105+53
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 1 - ENHANCEMENT I
BEGIN REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA: 105+53
INTERNAL EASEMENT CROSSING
STA: 104+99
INTERNAL EASEMENT CROSSING
X
S
1
0
STA: 105+39
RIFFLE EXTENDED ACROSS
FORD CROSSING FOR
ADDITIONAL STABILITY
STA: 104+58
LOG VANE REPLACED
BY LOG J-HOOK FOR
ADDITIONAL GRADE CONTROL
21
9
+
0
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
0
4
+
0
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
0
8
+
5
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
2
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
785
790
795
800
805
785
790
795
800
805
108+50 109+00 109+50 110+00 110+50 111+00 111+50 112+00 112+50 113+00
785
790
795
800
805
785
790
795
800
805
108+50 109+00 109+50 110+00 110+50 111+00 111+50 112+00 112+50 113+00
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
FILL

A
N
D

R
O
U
G
H
E
N
EXIST
I
N
G

C
H
A
N
N
E
L

(
T
Y
P
.
)
GWG8
X
S
1
3
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
UT1
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SFHA
SFHA
SFHA
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SFH
A
SFHA
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SFH
A
SFHA
CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
2
1
9
+
0
0
220+00
2
2
1
+
0
0
10
8
+
0
0
109+
0
0
110+00
111+00
112+00
1
1
3
+
0
0
LOG SILL NOT BUILT
DUE TO SUFFICIENT
PROVIDED BY RIFFLE
STA: 110+23
BRUSH TOE ADDED
TO PROTECT BANK
AT CONFLUENCE
STA: 110+69
LOG J-HOOK ADDED
IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL
FOR EXTRA STABILITY
PP1
9
PP20
PP14
STA: 110+23
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 2 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 3 - RESTORATION
STA: 221+11
UT1
END REACH 2 - RESTORATION
795
795
795 795
795
79
5
2
1
9
+
0
0
220+00
2
2
1
+
0
0
STA: 112+63
GEOLIFT NOT BUILT
DUE TO SUFFICIENT
BANK STABILITY
XS
1
2
STA: 112+66
GEOLIFT NOT BUILT
DUE TO SUFFICIENT
BANK STABILITY
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
0
8
+
5
0
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
1
3
+
0
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
3
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
780
785
790
795
800
780
785
790
795
800
113+00 113+50 114+00 114+50 115+00 115+50 116+00 116+50 117+00 117+50
780
785
790
795
800
780
785
790
795
800
113+00 113+50 114+00 114+50 115+00 115+50 116+00 116+50 117+00 117+50
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
VP10
X
S
1
3
GWG9
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
UT
2
SFHA
SFHA
SFHA
SFHA
SF
H
A
SFHA SFHA SFHA SFHA
SFH
A
SF
H
A
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
4+0
0
1
1
3
+
0
0
114+
0
0
1
1
5
+
0
0
116+
0
0
117+00
118
+
0
0
STA: 115+29
LOG J-HOOK ADDED
IN PLACE OF ROCK SILL
FOR ADDED POOL STABILITY
STA: 116+56
LOG SILL ADDED IN
PLACE OF LOG J-HOOK
BEND SUFFICIENTLY
PROTECTED BY BRUSH TOE
PP21 PP23
795
795
795
795
790
790
795
795
XS
1
2
STA: 112+66
GEOLIFT NOT BUILT
DUE TO SUFFICIENT
BANK STABILITY
STA: 115+24
OAK HILL CREEK
STA: 4+47
UT2 CONFLUENCE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
1
3
+
0
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
1
7
+
5
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
4
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
780
785
790
795
780
785
790
795
117+50 118+00 118+50 119+00 119+50 120+00 120+50 121+00 121+50 121+80
780
785
790
795
780
785
790
795
117+50 118+00 118+50 119+00 119+50 120+00 120+50 121+00 121+50 121+80
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
VP13
GWG9 GWG10
GWG11
UT3
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
SFHA
SFHA
SFH
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SFHA
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
V
E
GVEG
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CELOD LOD LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
302
+
0
0
117+00
118+
0
0
11
9
+
0
0
1
2
0
+
0
0
121+00
122
+
0
0
STA: 120+34
LOG SILL ADDED IN
PLACE OF ROCK SILL
DUE TO PREFERENCE FOR
USE OF ONSITE MATERIAL
STA: 120+86
BANK ROUGHENING
ADDED FOR STABILITY
STA: 117+84
LOG J-HOOK ADDED
IN PLACE OF LOG SILL
FOR ADDED STABILITY PP25
PP26
PP2.2
790
79
0
795
795
790
79
0
790
STA: 118+18
BANK ROUGHENING
EXTENDED TO IMPROVE
CONFLUENCE STABILITY
OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
STA: 119+00
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 3 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 4 - RESTORATION
STA: 302+85
UT3
CONFLUENCE
VP12
XS14
STA: 122+57
STABILIZED OUTLET
CHANNEL. ADDED
FOR ROADSIDE CULVERT
CG3
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
1
7
+
5
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
2
1
+
8
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
5
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
780
785
790
795
800
780
785
790
795
800
121+80 122+00 122+50 123+00 123+50 124+00
780
785
790
795
800
780
785
790
795
800
121+80 122+00 122+50 123+00 123+50 124+00
EXISTING BOX CULVERT
13' X 8'
INVERT ELEVATION IN: 786.09'
POOL FILLED WITH SEDIMENT
AS VEGETATION STABILIZES FLOODPLAIN
POOL SHOULD CLEAR
STA: 123+73
END OAK
HILL CREEK
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SFHA
SFHA
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
V
E
G
VEG
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
S
F
H
A
SFHA
SFHASF
H
A
SF
H
A
S
F
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SF
H
A
SFHA
SFHA
SFHA
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LODLOD
LOD
L
O
D
LOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
122+00
123+00
STA: 122+71
LOG J-HOOK NOT BUILT DUE
TO EXTENSION OF GEOLIFT
PP26
PP27
STA: 123+73
OAK HILL CREEK
END REACH 4 - RESTORATION
79
0
790
790
STA: 123+96
OAK HILL CREEK
END WORK
STA: 122+57
STABILIZED OUTLET
CHANNEL. ADDED
FOR ROADSIDE CULVERT
R
O
B
E
R
T

R
D
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

1
2
1
+
8
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
6
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

C
r
e
e
k
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.5
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
800
805
810
815
800
805
810
815
200+00 200+50 201+00 201+50 202+00 202+50 203+00 203+50 204+00 204+20
EXISTING ELLIPTICAL PIPE
10.3' X 6.8'
INVERT ELEVATION OUT: 809.05'
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
POOL FILLED WITH SEDIMENT
WITH INCREASED FLOODPLAIN
RELIEF POOL MAY NORMALIZE AT
LEVEL SHALLOWER THAN DESIGN
R
O
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
D
8
1
0
8
1
0
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
CECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LODLODLO
D
LO
D
LOD
LODLOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LODLODLOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LO
D LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
STA: 200+37
ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY
STA: 200+88
LOG SILL NOT BUILT DUE
TO TREE SAVES ON RIGHT
BANK AND ADEQUATE GRADE
CONTROL FROM RIFFLE
STA: 202+26
LOG J-HOOK BUILT IN
PLACE OF ROCK SILL
TO INCREASE
CONFLUENCE STABILITY
X
S
3
X
S
4
STA: 200+21
RIPRAP ADDED TO
STABILIZE BANK PP3
PP2
VP2
200+0
0
201+0
0
202+0
0
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
304+91
PP6
PP7
RIPRAP ADDED
FOR STABILITY
PP1.1
VP3
PP5
STA: 3+10
UT1B
END ENHANCEMENT II
STA: 202+23
UT1
END REACH 1 - RESTORATION
BEGIN REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA:304+91
UT1A
CONFLUENCESTA: 200+05
UT1
BEGIN REACH 1 - RESTORATION
UT1B
810
81
0
810
8
1
0
U
T
1
A
8
1
0
81
0
810
810
810
810
81
0
STA: 201+63
BANK ROUGHENING ADDED
TO ROUGHEN FLOODPLAIN
BMP 1
U
T
1
CECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
0
4
+
2
0
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
7
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
800
805
810
815
800
805
810
815
204+20 204+50 205+00 205+50 206+00 206+50 207+00 207+50 208+00 208+50
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
810
805
805
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
LOD LOD LOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D LOD
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD LOD
LODLOD
LOD
LOD
LODLOD
LODLODLOD
LOD
LODLODLOD
LODLODLOD
LOD
LODLOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LODLODLO
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>STA: 205+04
BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR
ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY
STA: 205+93
BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR
ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY
STA: 206+80
BANK ROUGHENING INSTALLED FOR
ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY
STA: 207+42
LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE
GRADE CONTROL
STA: 208+49
LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE
OF ROCK SILL DUE TO
PREFERENCE FOR USE
OF ONSITE MATERIAL
XS
4
XS
5
204+00
205+00
206+0
0
20
7
+
0
0
208+00
209+00
PP7
RIPRAP ADDED
FOR STABILITY
PP1.1
PP1.2
GWG1
PP8
VP3
STA: 3+10
UT1B
END ENHANCEMENT II
810
81
0
810
810
810
810
805
810
815
80
5
BMP 1 CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
0
8
+
5
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
0
4
+
2
0
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
8
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
795
800
805
810
795
800
805
810
208+50 209+00 209+50 210+00 210+50 211+00 211+50 212+00 212+50 213+00
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
U
T
1
810
805
805
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD LOD
LOD LOD LOD
LO
D
LOD LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LODLODLOD
LOD
LODLOD
LOD
LOD
LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
STA: 208+49
LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE
OF ROCK SILL DUE TO
PREFERENCE FOR USE
OF ONSITE MATERIAL
STA: 210+63
LOG SILL BUILT AS TAIL
OF RIFFLE IN LOG STEP
RIFFLE SEQUENCE
STA: 212+51
ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED DUE
TO ADEQUATE GRADE CONTROL
XS
6
208+00
209+00
210+00
211+
0
0
212+00
213+0
0
STA: 209+43
VEGETATED SOIL LIFT
NOT BUILT DUE TO
ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY
PP9
GWG2
VP4 VP5
810
Barotroll
810
815
805
810
80
5
800
CG2
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
0
8
+
5
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
1
3
+
0
0
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
9
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
790
795
800
805
790
795
800
805
213+00 213+50 214+00 214+50 215+00 215+50 216+00 216+50 217+00 217+50
BRIDGE REPLACED
CULVERT CROSSING
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
800
80
0
800
805
8
0
0
SAF SAF
SAF SAF
CE CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
VEG
V
E
G
V
E
G
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
DLOD
LODLODLODLODLOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
STA: 214+38
ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY
XS
6
XS7
213
+
0
0
214+00
2
1
5
+
0
0
216
+
0
0
217+00
21
8
+
0
0
VP5
VP6
PP11
GWG3
PP13
PP12
VP7
STA: 216+88
INTERNAL EASEMENT CROSSING
STA: 217+18
INTERNAL
EASEMENT
CROSSING
UT1
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
1
7
+
5
0
PP10
800
800
800
80
0
CG2
STA: 217+03
BRIDGE REPLACED
CULVERT CROSSING FOR
LAND OWNER ACCESS
CE CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
1
3
+
0
0
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
0
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
790
795
800
805
790
795
800
805
217+50 218+00 218+50 219+00 219+50 220+00 220+50 221+00 221+20
ASBUILT GRADE DESIGN GRADE
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
CE-
I
X
STA: 221+11
UT1
END REACH 2 - RESTORATION
STA: 110+23
CONFLUENCE WITH OAK HILL CREEK
80
0
800
STA: 217+18
INTERNAL EASEMENT
CROSSING
80
5
80
0
SA
F
SA
F
SA
F
SA
F
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECE
VEG
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
LOD LOD LO
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD LOD LOD
LOD
>
>
>
>
STA: 219+02
LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD
OF ROCK SILL AS CONTINUATION
OF LOG DROP RIFFLE
STA: 219+99
LOG SILL NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE GRADE CONTROL
XS8
109
+
0
0
110+0
0 111+0
0
21
7
+
0
0
218
+
0
0
21
9
+
0
0
220+
0
0
221
+
0
0
PP1
1
PP1
3
PP
1
2
PP14
GWG7
GWG6
VP7
PP20
PP19
STA: 220+78
ROCK SILL NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE STABILITY
UT1
STA: 216+88
INTERNAL EASEMENT CROSSING
800
795
795
795
STA: 217+03
BRIDGE REPLACED
CULVERT CROSSING FOR
LAND OWNER ACCESS
OAK

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECE
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

-

S
T
A

2
1
7
+
5
0
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
1
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
815
810
810
820
815
815
820
820
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
VEG
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
LO
D
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LOD
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LODLOD
LODLODLODLOD
LODLOD
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LODLO
D
L
O
D
LOD LOD
L
O
D
LOD
LO
D
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD LOD
LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD
L
O
D
LOD LOD LOD
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD LOD
>
>
>
>
STA: 300+63
LOG SILL BUILT IN PLACE OF
ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY
STA: 301+45
LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD
OF ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY
STA: 302+05
INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE WITH (1) LOG SILL
INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES WITH (1) LOG SILL
AND (1) ROCK SILL FOR ADDED STREAM STABILITY
STA: 302+79
INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND
(1) LOG SILL INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES AND
(2) LOG SILLS FOR STREAM STABILITY
STA: 303+16
INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) LOG SILL
INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES AND
(2) ROCK SILLS FOR ADDED STREAM STABILITY
STA: 303+54
INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) LOG SILL
INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES, (1) LOG SILL,
AND (1) ROCK SILL FOR STREAM STABILITY
STA: 303+83
INSTALLED (1) LONG RIFFLE AND (1) ROCK SILL
INSTEAD OF (2) RIFFLES, (1) ROCK SILL,
AND (1) LOG SILL FOR STREAM STABILITY
STA: 304+59
LOG SILL BUILT IN
PLACE OF ROCK SILL
FOR ADDED DIVERSITY
STA: 301+32
RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT
BUILT FOR POOL EXPANSION
XS
1
XS2
PP2
20
2
+
0
0
300+00
301+00
302+00
303+0
0
304+00
PP1
STA: 301+52
RIPRAP ADDED TO
STABILIZE BANK
VP1
81
0
810
U
T
1
A
STA: 304+91
UT1A
END RESTORATION
STA:202+23
UT1
CONFLUENCE
825
825
82
0
820 815
815
810
STA: 300+13
UT1A
BEGIN RESTORATION
CG1
UT1A
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
STA: 300+96
LOG SILL INSTALLED INSTEAD
OF A ROCK SILL FOR DIVERSITY
STA: 301+06
RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT BUILT
FOR POOL EXPANSION
STA: 304+19
RIFFLE AND ROCK SILL NOT BUILT
FOR POOL EXPANSION
810
815
820
825
830
810
815
820
825
830
300+00 300+50 301+00 301+50 302+00 302+50
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
PROFILE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE STRUCTURE
DESIGN CHANGES FOR STREAM STABILITY
STA: 302+20STA: 301+00
802
805
810
815
820
802
805
810
815
820
302+50 303+00 303+50 304+00 304+50 305+00
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
PROFILE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE STRUCTURE
DESIGN CHANGES FOR STREAM STABILITY
STA: 302+60 STA: 304+90
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
2
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
A
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
UT1
STA: 00+00
UT1B
BEGIN - ENHANCEMENT II
8
1
0
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
VEG
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
LODLOD
LO
D
L
O
D
LODLODLO
D
LO
D
LODLOD
LOD
LO
D
LOD LOD
LODLOD
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LODLOD
LODLOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
LO
D
LOD L
O
D
LOD LOD
>
>
>
>
>
>
X
S
4
VP2
200+00
201+00
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
0+00
1+00
2+00 3+00
304+91
PP6
PP7
PP1.1
VP3
R
O
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
D
PP5
PP4
UT1B
8
1
0
STA: 3+10
UT1B
END ENHANCEMENT II
8
1
0
810
U
T
1
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE
CE
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
3
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
UT
1
B
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10
1.11
1.14
1.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.13
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
785
790
795
800
785
790
795
800
2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 4+89
POOLS FILLED WITH SEDIMENT.
AS VEGETATION BECOMES ESTABLISHED IN
FLOODPLAIN, POOLS SHOULD ADJUST TO
LONG-TERM STABLE LEVELS
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
6+00
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
VEG
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
L
O
D
LOD
LODLOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
LODL
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LOD
L
O
D
LO
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
PP22 PP23
11
5
+
0
0
116+00
2+0
0
3+00
4+00
4+8
9
OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
UT2
VP10
GWG9
795
7
9
5
790
7
9
5
7
9
5
STA: 2+66
BEGIN UT2 - NO CREDIT
36" DIAMETER HDPE
INVERT IN: 792.63'
INVERT OUT: 792.51'
STA: 4+89
END UT2
STA: 115+24
OAK HILL CREEK
CONFLUENCE
STA: 3+25
BRUSH TOE NOT INSTALLED DUE
TO ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY
STA: 2+79
BOULDER TOE INSTALLED INSTEAD OF
BRUSH TOE FOR ADDITIONAL BANK STABILITY
STA: 2+33
RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE
INITIAL DRAINAGE PIPE
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
-
U
n
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
d
-
T
r
i
b
s
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
1.
1
4
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Un
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
d
-
T
r
i
b
s

-

U
T
2
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oa
k

H
i
l
l
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10
2.11
2.14
2.15
U
T
2
U
T
3
36" HDPE
INVERT IN: 792.63'
2.12 U
T
1
A
UT1B
2.13
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
INVERT OUT: 792.51'
785
790
795
800
785
790
795
800
300+00 300+50 301+00 301+50 302+00 302+50 303+00 303+40
PROPOSED 36" CMP
INVERT IN: 790.97'INVERT OUT: 790.45'
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN GRADE
POOL FILLED WITH SEDIMENT.
AS VEGETATION STABILIZES THE FLOODPLAIN
POOLS SHOULD CLEAR
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
VE
G
VEG
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
LO
D
L
O
D
LOD
LOD
LOD
LO
D
LODL
O
D
LOD
LOD
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
L
O
D
1
1
8
+
0
0
119+00
12
0
+
0
0
1
2
1
+
0
0
300
+
0
0
301+00
302+00
PP24
OAK HILL CREEK
UT3
GWG10
PP25
XS1
4
C
G
3
790
7
9
0
7
9
0
7
9
0
STA: 300+31
BEGIN UT3
NO CREDIT
TIE TO EXISTING GRADE
STA: 302+85
END UT3
STA: 119+00
OAK HILL CREEK
CONFLUENCE
STA: 302+18
BRUSH TOE NOT INSTALLED
DUE TO ADEQUATE BANK STABILITY
STA: 300+50
RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE
CULVERT INLET
STA: 300+83
RIPRAP ADDED TO STABILIZE
CULVERT OUTLET
STA: 300+56
INVERT IN: 790.97'
STA: 300+85
INVERT OUT: 790.45'
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)N
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
Sheet Index
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Un
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
d
-
T
r
i
b
s

-

U
T
3
St
r
e
a
m

P
l
a
n

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
s
UT1
Oak

H
i
l
l
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.1.5 1.1.6
1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4
1.2.5
1.5.1
1.6.1
U
T
2
U
T
3
1.3.1 U
T
1
A
UT1B
1.4.1 00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
1.
1
5
GABRIEL L. LAIL
PIN: 2690-79-6528
DB: 4601 PG: 1438
MICHAEL W. WHITESIDES & WIFE
LAUREN W. WHITESIDES
PIN: 2690-79-5818
DB: 4786 PG: 363
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, JR. &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2691-90-0340
DB: 4949 PG: 1803 (TRACT ONE)
ALSO DB: 4949 PG: 1803
(TRACT #B OF TRACT EIGHT)
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2690-89-1706
DB: 3262 PG: 477
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, JR. &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2690-79-8897
PORTION OF DB: 4949 PG: 1803 (TRACT SIX)
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, JR. &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2691-70-3338
DB: 4821 PG: 1023
PB: 71 PG: 58 (LOT 6)
CLARENCE V. THORNBURG & WIFE
MELANIE P. THORNBURG
PIN: 2691-70-4792
DB: 2083 PG: 506
PB: 46 PG: 16 (TRACT VII)
STEVE B. EAKER & WIFE
KATHY M. EAKER
PIN: 2691-71-4423
DB: 2243 PG: 713
PB: 46 PG: 16
(PORTION OF TRACTS I & II)
STEPHEN B. EAKER & WIFE
KATHY M. EAKER
PIN: 2691-71-6541
PORTION OF DB: 4887 PG: 2200
CITY OF CHERRYVILLE
PIN: 2691-90-9995
DB: 2086 PG: 714
HAROLD R. LINEBERGER & WIFE
PATSY E. LINEBERGER
PIN: 3601-00-0464
DB: 1898 PG: 658
ESTATE FILE 14E/780
TERRY A. RIDDLEY & WIFE
LORIE B. RIDDLEY
PIN: 2690-89-8022
DB: 4483 PG: 1040
CAROLYN B. TURNER (LIFE ESTATE)
ROBERT F. TURNER &
CHARLES B. TURNER
PIN: 2690-89-1434
DB: 4999 PG: 501
NICOLE L. MASSEY
PIN: 2690-89-0562
DB: 4782 PG: 590
CAM
E
R
O
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

J
R
.

&
CAME
R
O
N

R
U
S
T
Y

E
A
K
E
R
,

S
R
.
PIN:
2
6
9
0
-
7
9
-
9
5
7
7
DB: 4
9
4
9

P
G
:

1
8
0
3

(
T
R
A
C
T

T
H
R
E
E
)
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, JR. &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2690-79-9620
DB: 4949 PG: 1803 (TRACT FOUR)
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, JR. &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
PIN: 2690-79-8664
DB: 4949 PG: 1803 (TRACT FIVE)
SALLY EAKER HARRIS,
PATSY EAKER LINEBERGER,
FREIDA EAKER SCHODERBECK &
CAMERON RUSTY EAKER, SR.
DB: 1332 PG: 282
SEE NOTE #10
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+003+30
GW
G
4
GW
G
5
GW
G
6
GW
G
8
GW
G
9
GW
G
1
0
CG
3
GW
G
1
1
GWG1
GWG2
GWG3
GWG
7
Barotroll
CG2
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE CE CE
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
CE
-
I
X
WET
L
A
N
D

1
(SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

2
.
2
)
WE
T
L
A
N
D

3

A
N
D

4
(S
E
E

S
H
E
E
T

2
.
4
)
WETLAND 2
(SEE SHEET
2
.
3
)
ROBER
T

R
O
A
D
EXISTING POND
UT1
U
T
1
A
UT1B
U
T
2
UT3OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
R
O
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
O
A
D
0+00
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
STA: 122+49
OUTLET CHANNEL STABILIZED FOR
ADDED SUPPORT TO ROADSIDE CULVERT
0+00
1+00
1+88
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
3+
0
0
3+
7
0
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
2+
3
0
0+00
1+00
2+00
2+89
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'100'200'300'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1.5:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND CREATION
PROPOSED AT A 3:1 CREDIT RATIO
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
W
e
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
2.
1
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g

-

O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #3
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION
#2
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #1
SE
E

W
E
T
L
A
N
D

3

a
n
d

4
(S
H
E
E
T

2
.
4
)
R
O
B
E
R
T

R
O
A
D
3+00
4+
0
0
4+89
BMP #2
0
+
0
0
1
+
0
0
2
+
0
0
3
+
0
0
4
+
0
0
0
+
0
0
1
+
0
0
2
+
0
0
3
+
0
0
3
+
3
0
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LINE
MATCHES PARCEL BOUNDARY
FROM ROBERT ROAD TO UT2
OAK HILL CREEK
UT
2
UT
3
107
+
0
0
10
8
+
0
0
109+
0
0
110+00
111+00
112+00
1
1
3
+
0
0
114
+
0
0
1
1
5
+
0
0
116+
0
0
117+00
118+0
0
11
9
+
0
0
1
2
0
+
0
0
121+00
122+0
0
123+0
0
124+00124+02
GWG
6
GWG8
GWG9
GWG10
CG3
GWG11
GW
G
7
CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECE
CE
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
UT1
0
+
0
0
1
+
0
0
2
+
0
0
3
+
0
0
4
+
0
0
STA: 122+49
OUTLET CHANNEL STABILIZED FOR
ADDED SUPPORT TO ROADSIDE CULVERT
2
1
7
+
0
0
218+0
0
2
1
9
+
0
0
220+00
2
2
1
+
0
0
2
2
1
+
1
1
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
3+
0
0
3+
7
0
302+85
3
0
0
+
0
0
30
1
+
0
0
302
+
0
0
790
795
790
795
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 3+70
DESIGN GRADE ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
PRECONSTRUCTION GRADE
TIED TO EXISTING
GROUND TIED TO EXISTING
GROUND
788
790
795
788
790
795
1+30 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
PRECONSTRUCTION GRADE
785
790
795
785
790
795
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+30
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
PRECONSTRUCTION GRADE
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #2
Section View
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #3
Section View
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #1
Section View
Wetland #1
Plan View
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1.5:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND CREATION
PROPOSED AT A 3:1 CREDIT RATIO
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
W
e
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
2.
2
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g

-

W
e
t
l
a
n
d

1
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
2+00
3+00 3+94
810810
805
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #5
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #4
80
0
815
810
805
800
800
805
810
815
820
825
830
870
865
860
855
850
845
840
830
820
810
8
0
5
810
815
820
801
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
80
4
80
4
803
801
79
8
UT1
808
807
807
808
809
810
8
1
5
GWG1
GWG2
GWG3
GWG
7
Barotroll
CG2
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
C
E
-
I
X
UT1B
UT
1
A
BMP #1
806
SE
E

W
E
T
L
A
N
D

#
3
AN
D

#
4
(S
H
E
E
T

2
.
4
)
201+00 202+00
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
205+0
0
206+00
20
7
+
0
0
208+00
209+00
210+00
211
+
0
0
212+00
213
+
0
0
214+00
2
1
5
+
0
0
216
+
0
0
217+00
21
8
+
0
0
3
0
5
+
0
0
3
0
6
+
0
0
3
0
6
+
4
0
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
2+
3
0
SE
E

W
E
T
L
A
N
D

#
1
(S
H
E
E
T

2
.
2
)
0+00
797
800
805
810
797
800
805
810
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+30
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
TIED INTO
EXISTING GROUND TIED INTO
EXISTING GROUND
795
800
805
810
795
800
805
810
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
TIED INTO
EXISTING
GROUNDTIED INTO
EXISTING
GROUND
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #5
Section View
Wetland #2
Plan View
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #4
Section View
WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1.5:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND CREATION
PROPOSED AT A 3:1 CREDIT RATIO
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
W
e
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
2.
3
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g

-

W
e
t
l
a
n
d

2
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
WETLAND #3
WETLAND #4
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #6
8
0
0
801
798 800
830
825
820
815
810
805
8
0
0
8
0
0
80
5
81
0
815
820
825
830
8
2
5
8
2
0
815
810
8
0
5
800
795795
8
0
0
800
805
810
8
0
5
8
0
0
80
1
80
2
803
79
8
799
OAK HILL CREEK
1
0
0
+
0
0
101
+
0
0
102
+
0
0
103+
0
0
104+
0
0
105
+
0
0
106+0
0
107+00
1
0
8
+
0
0
GWG4
GWG5
GWG6
CE
CECECECECECECE
CE
CE
CECECECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE-IX CE-IX CE-IX
CE-IXCE-IXCE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
CE-IX
21
7
+
0
0
0
+
0
0
1
+
0
0
1
+
8
8
WETLAND
CROSS-SECTION #7
OAK HILL CREEK
DESIGN
ALIGNMENT
SEE WETLAND 2
(SHEET 2.3)
SE
E

W
E
T
L
A
N
D

1
(S
H
E
E
T

2
.
2
)
0+
0
0
1+
0
0
2+
0
0
2+
8
9
794
795
800
805
794
795
800
805
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 2+89
ASBUILT GRADE
WETLAND CREDITING
BOUNDARY (TYP)
CE
CE
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BOUNDARY (TYP)
DESIGN GRADE
TIED INTO
EXISTING GROUND
TIED INTO
EXISTING GROUND
795
800
805
795
800
805
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 1+88
DESIGN GRADE
ASBUILT GRADE
DESIGN WETLAND
CREDITING BOUNDARY
(TYP)
CE
CE
CE
DESIGN CONSERVATION
EASEMENT BOUNDARY
(TYP)
CE
CE
CE
TIED INTO EXISTING
GROUND
TIED INTO EXISTING
GROUND
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #7
Section View
Wetland #3 and #4
Plan View
0'20'40'60'
(HORIZONTAL)
0'2'4'6'
(VERTICAL)
Wetland Grading Cross-Section #6
Section View
WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND REHABILITATION
PROPOSED AT A 1.5:1 CREDIT RATIO
WETLAND CREATION
PROPOSED AT A 3:1 CREDIT RATIO
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
W
e
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
2.
4
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g

-

W
e
t
l
a
n
d

3
-
4
We
t
l
a
n
d

G
r
a
d
i
n
g
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
3.
1
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pl
a
n
t
i
n
g

L
i
s
t
Open Buffer Planting Zone Trees
Bare Root
Species Common
Name
Max
Spacing
Indiv.
Spacing
Min.
Caliper
Size
Stratum Wetland
Indicator
# of Stems
Acer negundo Boxelder 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 10%
Platanus
occidentalis Sycamore 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACW 15%
Betula nigra River Birch 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACW 15%
Liriodendron
tulipifera Tulip Poplar 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACU 2%
Quercus
phellos Willow Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 10%
Oxydendrum
arboreum Sourwood 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy UPL 5%
Diospyros
virginiana Persimmon 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 6%
Populus
deltoides
Eastern
Cottonwood 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 10%
Carya
cordiformis
Bitternut
Hickory 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACU 5%
Quercus alba White Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACU 5%
Quercus rubra Northern Red
Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACU 5%
Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACU 1%
Total 89%
Riparian Seeding - Open Canopy
Pure Live Seed (21 lbs/ acre)
Approved Date Species Name Common Name Stratum Wetland
Indicator
Density
(lbs/acre)
All Year Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem Herb FACU 4.0
All Year Panicum virgatum Switchgrass Herb FAC 2.0
All Year Panicum rigidulum Redtop Panicgrass Herb FACW 1.0
All Year Rudbeckia hirta Blackeyed Susan Herb FACU 1.0
All Year Coreopsis lanceolata Lanceleaf Coreopsis Herb FACU 1.0
All Year Echinacea purpurea Purple coneflower Herb UPL 1.0
All Year Panicum clandestinum Deertongue Herb FAC 2.0
All Year Elymus virginicus Virginia Wild Rye Herb FACW 2.0
All Year Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass Herb FACU 3.0
All Year Bidens aristosa Bur-Marigold Herb FACW 1.0
All Year Helianthus angustifolia Narrowleaf Sunflower Herb FACW 1.0
All Year Coreopsis tinctoria Plains corepsis Herb FAC 1.0
All Year Achillea millefolium Common yarrow Herb FACU 1.0
Notes:
(1) Apply Permanent Riparian seeding in all disturbed areas within Conservation Easement.
(2) Apply Permanent seeding in all other disturbed areas outside of Easement per specification.
Notes:
(1) Substitute species: Sweetshrub, northern red oak, slippery elm.
(2) Transplants from on-site to be used at Designer's discretion for streambank and floodplain planting.
(3) Percentages of each species may be varied at Designer's discretion but shall not exceed 20% per each species.
(4) Designer may substitute container plantings or other plantings for bare roots.
Open Area Buffer Planting
Riparian Corridor and
Inundated Wetland Planting
Note: See live staking and herbaceous plugs detail.
Streambank Planting Zone
Live Stakes
Species Common Name Max Spacing Indiv.
Spacing
Min. Size Stratum Wetland
Indicator
% of Stems
Salix nigra Black Willow 8 ft.6-8 ft.0.5”-1.5” cal.Shrub OBL 25%
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood 8 ft.6-8 ft.0.5”-1.5” cal.Shrub FACW 20%
Salix sericea Silky Willow 8 ft.6-8 ft.0.5”-1.5” cal.Shrub OBL 25%
Cephalanthus
occidentalis Buttonbush 8 ft.6-8 ft.0.5"-1.5" cal.Shrub OBL 15%
Sambucus
canadensis Elderberry 8 ft.6-8 ft.0.5"-1.5" cal.Shrub FAC 15%
Total 100%
Herbaceous Plugs
Juncus effusus Common Rush 5 ft.3-5 ft.1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb FACW 40%
Carex crinita Fringed Sedge 5 ft.3-5 ft.1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb OBL 10%
Carex lurida Lurid Sedge 5 ft.3-5 ft.1.0”- 2.0” plug Herb OBL 20%
Carex lupulina Hop Sedge 5 ft.3-5 ft.1.0"-2.0" plug Herb OBL 15%
Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass 5 ft 3-5 ft.1.0"-2.0" plug Herb FACW 15%
Total 100%
Open Buffer Planting Zone Small Trees / Shrubs
Bare Root
Species Common
Name
Max
Spacing
Indiv.
Spacing
Min.
Caliper
Size
Stratum Wetland
Indicator
# of Stems
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Sub-Canopy OBL 2%
Hamamelis
virginiana Witch Hazel 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Shrub FACU 2%
Cornus florida Flowering
Dogwood 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Sub-Canopy FACU 2%
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Shrub FAC 2%
Amelanchier
arborea Serviceberry 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FAC 2%
Calycanthus
floridus Sweet Shrub 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FACW 1%
Sambucus
canadensis Elderberry 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FAC 2%
Total 11%
Permanent Seeding
Notes:
(1) Substitute species: Silky willow, silky dogwood.
(2) Tag Alder shall be limited to Wetland 1 or other wetter areas of the site as designated by Designer.
(3) Transplants from on-site to be used at Designer's discretion for streambank and floodplain planting.
(4) Percentages of each species may be varied at Designer's discretion but shall not exceed 20% per each species.
(5) Designer may substitute container plantings or other plantings for bare roots.
Wetland Planting
Notes:
(1) Apply Pasture Seeding for grading outside Conservation
Easement, utility easements, and stream crossings.
(2) Install temporary seed and mulch with all permanent
seed.
Stabilization Seeding
Pure Live Seed (32 lbs/ac)
Species Name Common Name lbs/acre
Festuca arundinacea Fescue (KY 31)20
Dactylis glomerata Orchard Grass 12
Stabilization Seeding
Partially Vegetated Buffer Area Planting
Wetland Planting Zone Trees
Bare Root
Species Common
Name
Max
Spacing
Indiv.
Spacing
Min.
Caliper
Size
Stratum Wetland
Indicator
# of Stems
Platanus
occidentalis Sycamore 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACW 15%
Betula nigra River Birch 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACW 15%
Quercus
phellos Willow Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FAC 10%
Ulmus
americana American Elm 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACW 10%
Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 5%
Quercus
michauxii
Swamp
Chestnut Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACW 8%
Acer negundo Boxelder 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FAC 5%
Quercus nigra Water Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACW 7%
Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACW 5%
Total 80%
Wetland Planting Zone Small Trees/Shrubs
Bare Root
Species Common
Name
Max
Spacing
Indiv.
Spacing
Min.
Caliper
Size
Stratum Wetland
Indicator
# of Stems
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Sub-Canopy OBL 1%
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Shrub FAC 5%
Cephalanthus
occidentalis Buttonbush 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub OBL 5%
Sambucus
canadensis Elderberry 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FAC 5%
Cornus
amomum Silky Dogwood 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FACW 1%
Salix sericea Silky Willow 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub OBL 2%
Livestakes
Salix nigra Black Willow 8 ft 6-8 ft.0.5"-1.5"Shrub OBL 1%
Total 20%
Wetland Seeding - Open Canopy
Pure Live Seed (19 lbs/ acre)
Approved Date Species Name Common Name Stratum Wetland
Indicator
Density
(lbs/acre)
All Year Coleataenia anceps Beaked Panicgrass Herb FAC 3.0
All Year Carex vulpinoidea Fox Sedge Herb OBL 2.0
All Year Elymus virginicus Virginia Wild Rye Herb FACW 4.0
All Year Bidens aristosa Bur-Marigold Herb FACW 3.0
All Year Panicum cirgatum Switchgrass Herb FAC 2.0
All Year Polygonum pensylvanicum Smartweed Herb FACW 0.5
All Year Juncus effusus Common Rush Herb OBL 1.5
All Year Panicum dichotomiflorum Panicgrass Herb FACW 2.0
All Year Helianthus augustifolia Narrowleaf sunflower Herb FACW 1.0
TEMPORARY SEEDING
APPROVED DATE TYPE PLANTING
RATE (lbs/acre)
Jan 1 – May 1
Rye Grain (Secale Cereale)120
Ladino clover (Trifolium Repens)5
Crimson Clover (Trifolium incarnatum)5
Straw Mulch 4,000
May 1 – Aug 15
German Millet (Setaria italica)40
Ladino clover (Trifolium Repens)5
Crimson Clover (Trifolium incarnatum)5
Straw Mulch 4,000
Aug 15 – Dec 31
Rye Grain (Secale Cereale)120
Ladino clover (Trifolium Repens)5
Crimson Clover (Trifolium incarnatum)5
Straw Mulch 4,000
Open Buffer Planting Zone Trees
Bare Root
Species Common
Name
Max
Spacing
Indiv.
Spacing
Min.
Caliper
Size
Stratum Wetland
Indicator
# of Stems
Carpinus
caroliniana
American
Hornbeam 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Sub-Canopy FAC 14%
Euonymus
americana
Strawberry
Bush 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Shrub FAC 14%
Lindera benzoin Spicebush 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Shrub FAC 8%
Fagus
grandifolia
American
Beech 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FACU 14%
Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25”-1.0”Canopy FAC 7%
Hamamelis
virginiana Witchhazel 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FACU 7%
Calycanthus
floridus Sweetshrub 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Shrub FACU 7%
Cornus florida Flowering
Dogwood 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Sub-Canopy FACU 7%
Asimina triloba Pawpaw 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Sub-Canopy FAC 14%
Quercus rubra Northern Red
Oak 12 ft.6-12 ft.0.25"-1.0"Canopy FACU 8%
Total 100%
Note:
Rates of fertilizer and lime if necessary can be found in the site preparation plan
included in the specification documents.
Best Management Practice (BMP) Planting
Notes:
(1) Apply "Wetland Seeding - Open Canopy" seed mix to all disturbed
areas of BMP including bottom of basin.
(2) Apply "Riparian Corridor Planting - Herbaceous Plugs and Livestakes"
species in areas shown in detail.
SS
E
S
S
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
S
S
E
SS
E
SS
E
S
S
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
SS
E
ROBE
R
T

R
O
A
D
12
4
+
0
2
100
+
0
0
1
0
1
+
0
0
10
2
+
0
0
1
0
3
+
0
0
10
4
+
0
0
10
5
+
0
0
1
0
6
+
0
0
1
0
7
+
0
0
108+
0
0
10
9
+
0
0
11
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113+00
1
1
4
+
0
0
115+00
1
1
6
+
0
0
11
7
+
0
0
118
+
0
0
1
1
9
+
0
0
120+00
12
1
+
0
0
122
+
0
0
123
+
0
0
12
4
+
0
0
3
0
0
+
0
0
3
0
1
+
0
0
3
0
2
+
0
0
3
0
3
+
0
0
3
0
4
+
0
0
3
0
4
+
9
1
RO
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
O
A
D
U
T
1
A
UT1
UT1B
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
OA
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
U
T
3
2+
0
0
3
+
0
0
4
+
0
0
U
T
2
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECECECECECECE
CECE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE CE CE
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
CE
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
SHEET 3.3
SHEET 3.4
SH
E
E
T

3
.
5
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VE
GVE
G
VE
G
VE
G
VP2
VP3
VP
1
2
VP
1
3
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VEG
VP5
VP6
VP4
VP1
VP7
VP1
0
VP1
1
VE
G
VE
G
VE
G
VE
G
VP8
VP9
OAK

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
302+8
5
300+
0
0
3
0
1
+
0
0
3
0
2
+
0
0
0+00 1+00
2+00 3+00
221+11
200+00
201+00 202+00
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
205+0
0
206+00
20
7
+
0
0
208+00
209+00
210+00
211
+
0
0
212+00
213
+
0
0
214+00
2
1
5
+
0
0
216
+
0
0
217+00
21
8
+
0
0
219+00
22
0
+
0
0
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'100'200'300'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
OPEN BUFFER PLANTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND INUNDATED
WETLAND PLANTING
WETLAND PLANTING
PARTIALLY VEGETATED BUFFER PLANTING
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
3.
2
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pl
a
n
t
i
n
g

O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
BMP PLANTING
BMP PLANTING CONSISTS OF WETLAND
SEEDING, PLUGS (10'X10') AND LIVES
STAKES (10'X10')
3
0
0
+
0
0
3
0
1
+
0
0
3
0
2
+
0
0
3
0
3
+
0
0
3
0
4
+
0
0
3
0
4
+
9
1
U
T
1
A
UT1
UT1B
UT1
R
O
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
O
A
D
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECECE
CECECECE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE CE CE CE CE CE
CE
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
C
E
-
X
S
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VP2
VP3
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VP5
VP6
VP4
VP1
NO PLANTING
0+00 1+00
2+00 3+00
200+00
201+00 202+00
2
0
3
+
0
0
204+00
205+0
0
206+00
20
7
+
0
0
208+00
209+00
210+00
211
+
0
0
212+00
213
+
0
0
214+00
2
1
5
+
0
0
216
+
0
0
217+00
NO BARE ROOTS WERE PLANTED
DUE TO DEPTH OF STANDING WATER
NO BARE ROOTS WERE PLANTED
DUE TO DEPTH OF STANDING WATER
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
3.
3
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pl
a
n
t
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
OPEN BUFFER PLANTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND INUNDATED
WETLAND PLANTING
WETLAND PLANTING
PARTIALLY VEGETATED BUFFER PLANTING
BMP PLANTING
SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
S
S
E
CROSSING PLANTED WITH
STABILIZATION SEEDING
1
0
0
+
0
0
101
+
0
0
102
+
0
0
103+
0
0
104+
0
0
105
+
0
0
106+0
0
107+00
1
0
8
+
0
0
109+00
11
1
+
0
0
OAK HILL

C
R
E
E
K
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
U
T
1
CE
CECECECECECECE
CE
CE
CECECECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS CE-XS CE-XS CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XS
CE-XSCE-XSCE-XSCE-XS
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VP
7
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
VP
8 VP
9
NO PLANTING
2
2
1
+
1
1
21
7
+
0
0
218+00
21
9
+
0
0
220+
0
0
NO BARE ROOTS WERE PLANTED
DUE TO DEPTH OF STANDING WATER
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
3.
4
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pl
a
n
t
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
OPEN BUFFER PLANTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND INUNDATED
WETLAND PLANTING
WETLAND PLANTING
PARTIALLY VEGETATED BUFFER PLANTING
BMP PLANTING
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
SSE
BMP PLANTING CONSISTS OF
WETLAND SEEDING, PLUGS (10X10)
AND LIVESTAKES (10X10)
124+02
107
+
0
0
10
8
+
0
0
109+
0
0
111+00
112+00
1
1
3
+
0
0
114
+
0
0
1
1
5
+
0
0
116+
0
0
117+00
118+0
0
11
9
+
0
0
1
2
0
+
0
0
121+00
122+0
0
123+0
0
124+00
R
O
B
E
R
T

R
O
A
D
OAK HILL CREEK
UT2
UT3
OAK HILL CREEK
UT1
3+00
4+
0
0
CE CE CE CE CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECECECE
CE
CE
CE-X
S
CE-X
S
CE-X
S
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VP12
VP13
VE
G
VE
G
VEG
V
E
G
V
E
G
VEG
VE
G
V
P
7
VP10
VP11
NO P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
3
0
2
+
8
5
3
0
0
+
0
0
30
1
+
0
0
302
+
0
0
2
2
1
+
1
1
2
1
7
+
0
0
218+0
0
2
1
9
+
0
0
220+00
NO BARE ROOTS WERE PLANTED
DUE TO DEPTH OF STANDING WATERNO BARE ROOTS WERE PLANTED
DUE TO DEPTH OF STANDING WATER
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
0'50'100'150'
(HORIZONTAL)
N
X:
\
S
h
a
r
e
d
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
0
0
5
-
0
2
1
8
2

O
a
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y
\
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
\
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

-

2
0
2
2
\
P
l
a
n
s
\
A
B
-
0
2
1
8
2
-
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
.
d
w
g
Ma
y

1
3
,

2
0
2
2
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
3.
5
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Pl
a
n
t
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
OPEN BUFFER PLANTING
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND INUNDATED
WETLAND PLANTING
WETLAND PLANTING
PARTIALLY VEGETATED BUFFER PLANTING
BMP PLANTING
00
5
-
0
2
1
8
2
AM
R
JC
K
JM
4.
1
Ma
y

1
2
,

2
0
2
2
N
0'100'200'300'
(HORIZONTAL)
Oa
k

H
i
l
l

D
a
i
r
y

M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

S
i
t
e

R
e
c
o
r
d

D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
Ga
s
t
o
n

C
o
u
n
t
y
,

N
o
r
t
h

C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
Fe
n
c
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
Sh
e
e
t
Ch
e
c
k
e
d

B
y
:
Jo
b

N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Dr
a
w
n

B
y
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
:
Da
t
e
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
16
7
-
B

H
a
y
w
o
o
d

R
d
As
h
e
v
i
l
l
e
,

N
C

2
8
8
0
6
Te
l
:

8
2
8
.
7
7
4
.
5
5
4
7
Li
c
e
n
s
e

N
o
.

F
-
0
8
3
1
J A C OB P. M
C
L
E
A
N
03
3
5
7
8
N
O
R
T
H

CAROLIN A
PR
O
F
E
SSION A L
ENGIN
E
E
R
SE
A
L
UT1
UT1
UT
3
U
T
1
A
OAK

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
O
A
K

H
I
L
L

C
R
E
E
K
UT1B
UT
2
ONE 12' GATE AT NON-CROSSING
LOCATIONS (TYP)
80
0
80
0
800
800
801
801
801
80
2
802
800
80
2
802
803
803
8
0
3
804
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
RO
Y

E
A
K
E
R

R
O
A
D
B
U
C
K

F
R
A
L
E
Y

R
O
A
D
R
O
B
E
R
T

R
O
A
D
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
CE
C
E
CE
C
E
C
E
C
ECECE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
CE
C
E
CE
CE
RUN CLOSER TO
TOP OF SLOPE
MOVED TO
TOP OF SLOPE
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D
DocuSign Envelope ID: B2BD400F-10BD-4052-8946-793A438C0C6D

Appendix F 
Correspondence 

To: DMS Technical Workgroup, DMS operations staff 
From: Periann Russell, Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) 
RE: Pebble count data requirements 
Date: October 19, 2021 

The DMS Technical Work Group met September 29, 2021 to discuss Interagency Review Team (IRT) and 
DMS requirements for collecting pebble count data as part of monitoring (MY0‐MYx).  Agreement was 
reached between all attending parties that pebble count data will not be required during the monitoring 
period for all future projects.   
Sediment data and particle distribution will still be required for the mitigation plan as part of the 
proposed design explanation and justification. 
Pebble counts and/or particle distributions currently being conducted by providers for annual 
monitoring may be discontinued at the discretion of the DMS project manager.  If particle distribution 
was listed as a performance standard in the project mitigation plan, the provider is required to 
communicate the intent to cease data collection with the DMS project manager. The absence of pebble 
count data in future monitoring reports where pebble count data was listed as part of monitoring in the 
mitigation plan must be documented in the monitoring report.  The September 29, 2021 Technical Work 
Group meeting may be cited as the source of the new policy. 
The IRT reserves the right to request pebble count data/particle distributions if deemed necessary 
during the monitoring period. 

1
Kristi Suggs
From:Reid, Matthew <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, October 27, 2021 1:26 PM
To:Kristi Suggs
Cc:Mimi Caddell
Subject:RE: [External] FW: Pebble Count Data Requirements
I am absolutely OK with not doing pebble counts anymore! 

As stated in the memo, please add a statement in the monitoring reports citing the policy. 

Thanks! 

Matthew Reid
Project Manager – Western Region
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services

828-231-7912 Mobile
[e-mail]

Western DMS Field Office
5 Ravenscroft Dr
Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Kristi Suggs [mailto:[e-mail]]  
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 1:24 PM 
To: Reid, Matthew <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Mimi Caddell <[e-mail]> 
Subject: [External] FW: Pebble Count Data Requirements 

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to 
Report Spam. 

Matthew, 

Jason Lorch in our Raleigh Office forwarded this meeting memo to me.  It says that conducting pebble counts for DMS 
monitoring (MY0 – MY7) projects is no longer needed as long as it has been okayed by the DMS PM.  Moving forward, 
are you going to allow us to stop doing them on your projects?  If so, will DBB projects be treated the same?  Please let 
me know.  Thank you! 

Kristi 
2

Kristi Suggs  |  Senior Environmental Scientist 
O: 704.332.7754  x110  M: 704.579.4828 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 
1430 S. Mint St, Suite 104  
Charlotte, NC 28203 

From: Jason Lorch <[e-mail]>  
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 9:05 AM 
To: Kristi Suggs <[e-mail]> 
Subject: FW: Pebble Count Data Requirements 

FYI! 

Jason Lorch, GISP  |  Senior Environmental Scientist 
O: 919.851.9986  x107  M: 919.413.1214 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 
312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 
Raleigh, NC 27609 

From: Russell, Periann <[e-mail]>  
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 10:05 AM 
To: King, Scott <[e-mail]>; Catherine Manner <[e-mail]>; Tugwell, Todd J 
CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Brad Breslow <[e-mail]>; 
Davis, Erin B <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; grant lewis <[e-mail]>; Jeff 
Keaton <[e-mail]>; katie mckeithan <[e-mail]>; Kayne Van Stell 
<[e-mail]>; Kevin Tweedy <[e-mail]>; Reid, Matthew 
<[e-mail]>; Ryan Smith <[e-mail]>; Melia, Gregory <[e-mail]>; Allen, 
Melonie <[e-mail]>; Famularo, Joseph T <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Bryan 
Dick <[e-mail]>; Ryan Medric <[e-mail]>; Kim Browning 
<[e-mail]>; Kayne Van Stell <[e-mail]>; Worth Creech 
<[e-mail]>; Jason Lorch <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>; Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Tsomides, Harry 
<[e-mail]>; Reid, Matthew <[e-mail]>; Dow, Jeremiah J 
<[e-mail]>; Horton, Jeffrey <[e-mail]>; Ullman, Kirsten J 
<[e-mail]>; Ackerman, Anjie <[e-mail]>; Blackwell, Jamie D 
<[e-mail]>; Xu, Lin <[e-mail]>; Mir, Danielle <[e-mail]>; Corson, Kristie 
<[e-mail]>; Russell, Periann <[e-mail]>; Sparks, Kimberly L 
<[e-mail]> 
Subject: Pebble Count Data Requirements 

Please review the attached memo documenting the agreed upon policy for pebble count data requirements.   
Please reply (me only) to this email if accept that this memo represents (or misrepresents) our discussion on Sept 29. 
Thank you. 

Periann Russell
Geomorphologist
Division of Mitigation Services, Science and Analysis
NC Department of Environmental Quality
3

919 707 8306 office
919 208 1426 mobile
[e-mail]

Mailing: 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Physical: 217 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27603

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties