20201292 Ver 1_Crane_100165_MY0_2023_Combined_DMSResponse_20230612

ID#* 20201292 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:
Maria Polizzi
Initial Review Completed Date 06/12/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 6/12/2023
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* Yes No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name: * Email Address:
Matthew Harrell [e-mail]
Project Information
ID#: * 20201292 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Crane Mitigation Site
County: Lee
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation As -Built Plans
File Upload: Crane _100165_MYO_2023_Combined_DMSResp... 82.3MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:*
Signature: *
Matthew Harrell
e%w'?em"'r' �;/"'?t till

Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ph: [phone]
Fx: [phone]
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
Response to DMS Comments
DMS Project ID No. 100165
Full Delivery Contract No. 0302-01
RFP No. 16-20190302
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2020-01401
DWR Project No. 20201292

DMS Comments Received (Black Text) & Responses (Blue Text)

1. Title Page(s) – The RFP date of issue is incorrect. Please correct to 12/20/2019 or omit the issue date completely.
The RFP issue date was corrected.

2. Section 1.1 – 2nd paragraph states site design was completed in February 2023. This should presumably be
2022.
The site design completion date was corrected.

3. Table 1 – All original mit plan stream lengths and as-built stream lengths are identical. Please report the actual
surveyed lengths in the as-built column.
Table was revised to include the surveyed as-built stream lengths.

4. Table 2 – The report is generally using the latest DMS monitoring report template tables. For consistency, please
update Table 2 with the latest version of the table. Updating Table 2 would make Section 1.2 and Table C
redundant, and those sections could be removed.
Table 2 was updated to the latest DMS template, and Section 1.2 (Table A) and Table C were removed.

5. Section 4.0 – For the MY0 report, it would be useful to discuss or list construction deviations (red lines) here,
i.e, the vane arm not constructed and the change to seed mix.
Construction deviation discussions were added to this section- stream deviation (omitted vane arm) in Section
4.1 and seed mix changes in section 4.3.

6. Were 1m x 1m herbaceous plots proposed in the mit plan completed, or will those begin with MY1?
As-built monitoring was performed in February, just after the Site was planted, before significant herbaceous
vegetation had established. Herbaceous plots will be surveyed beginning in MY1.

7. Figure 1 – Please differentiate purpose of stream gauges, i.e., crest gauge vs. flow gauge.
Figure 1 was updated to differentiate crest gauges from flow gauges.

8. Appendix C – Recommend removing BHR calculation from pool cross sections.
BHR calculation was removed from all pool cross-sections.

As-Built/Record Drawings:

9. Sheet C5.00 – Please verify whether the riffle at UT1 Sta. 6+94 was surveyed. If not, please survey constructed
riffles in the future.
Constructed riffles will be surveyed moving forward- we apologize for missing this one.

Page 2 of 2

10. Please add in-stream crest and flow gauges to the drawings if they were surveyed (one is shown on Sheet C5.12,
but not on any others).
Stream gauges are shown in the revised 5/2/23 as-built drawings.

11. Sheet C5.04 & Sheet L2.01 – Gravel access path and bridge are called out in red text. Was this a construction
deviation, and if so, what was the deviation? If not, recommend calling out in black.
Callouts have been modified to appear black on paper.

Site Visit:

12. A small area along the fence line on the left side of the UT1 EII area may not have been planted. Please verify.
This area was checked and has been planted.

13. Ditch above start of UT3 is still very deep, and there is concern about its effect on the adjacent re-establishment
wetlands.
The short section of ditch that remains open is expected to fill with organic material as the site matures and
serve as a headwater feature for the surrounding wetlands to the restored stream. This wetland headwater
stream transition is observed in the sandhills ecoregion where surrounding wetlands discharge along the toe of
slope to headwater forest wetlands found at stream origins. As observed in reference conditions this type of
complex maintains wetland hydrology as hydrology discharges at the soil surface along the edges of the
depressional feature.

We understand the concern for potential effects to adjacent wetland re-establishment assets. Given this type
of complex in this ecoregion we propose to visually monitor the area for three years (MY1-3) to evaluate any
potential effects to adjacent wetland assets. Annual visual monitoring of this area will include 4 fixed photo
points of the ditch and surrounding area to document developments. During MY3 a delineation of the area
including a minimum of three wetland delineation forms will be performed to identify any potential areas not
meeting wetland re-establishment requirements.

MY0 FINAL MONITORING REPORT 

CRANE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE 
Lee County, North Carolina 
Cape Fear River Basin  
Cataloging Unit 03030002 

DMS Project No. 100165 
Full Delivery Contract No. 0302‐01 
DMS RFP No. 16‐20190302 (issued 12/20/2019) 
USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐01401 
DWR Project No. 20201292 

Data Collection: December 2022‐February 2023 
Submission: April 2023 

Prepared for: 

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES 
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699‐1652 

MY0 FINAL MONITORING REPORT 

CRANE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE 
Lee County, North Carolina 
Cape Fear River Basin  
Cataloging Unit 03030002 

DMS Project No. 100165 
Full Delivery Contract No. 0302‐01 
DMS RFP No. 16‐20190302 (issued 12/20/2019) 
USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐01401 
DWR Project No. 20201292 

Data Collection: December 2022‐February 2023 
Submission: April 2023 

Prepared for: 

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES 
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699‐1652 

Prepared by: 

And 

Restoration Systems, LLC Axiom Environmental, Inc. 
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 218 Snow Avenue 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 
Contact: Raymond Holz Contact: Grant Lewis 
919‐755‐9490 (phone) 919‐215‐1693 (phone) 
919‐755‐9492 (fax)  

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165) Table of Contents 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1 PROJECT SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 1 
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND, COMPONENTS, AND STRUCTURE ..................................................................................... 1 
2 AS‐BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE) ..................................................................................................................... 5 
3 PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS ................................................................................................................ 5 
3.1 MONITORING ............................................................................................................................................... 5 
4 MONITORING YEAR 0 – DATA ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................... 6 
4.1 STREAM ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................... 6 
4.2 HYDROLOGY ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................. 6 
4.3 VEGETATIVE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................... 6 
4.4 MONITORING YEAR 0 SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 6 
5 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 

LIST OF REPORT TABLES 
Table 1. Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits ....................................................................................................... 2 
Table 2. Summary: Goals, Performance, and Results .................................................................................................... 3 
Table 3. Project Attribute Table ..................................................................................................................................... 4 
Table A. Monitoring Schedule ....................................................................................................................................... 5 

APPENDICES 
Appendix A. Visual Assessment Data 
‐ Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View 
‐ Table 4A‐E. Visual Stream Morphology Stability 
Assessment Table 
‐ Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table 
‐ Vegetation Plot Photographs 
‐ Photo Log 

Appendix B. Vegetation Plot Data 
‐ Table 6A. Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation 
‐ Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix 
‐ Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities 
‐ Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation 
Data Entry Tool 

Appendix C. Stream Geomorphology Data 
‐ Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays 
‐ Longitudinal Profile 
‐ Table 9A‐D. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables 
‐ Table 10A‐B. Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring 
Summary  

Appendix D. Hydrologic Data 
‐ Groundwater Gauge Soil Profiles 

Appendix E: Project Timeline and Contact Info 
‐ Table 11. Project Timeline 
‐ Table 12. Project Contacts 

Appendix F. Record Drawings (As‐built Survey) 
‐ As‐built Drawings 
‐ As‐built Survey 

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165) Page 1 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
1 PROJECT SUMMARY 
Restoration Systems, LLC has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (Site). The Site is on three land parcels along unnamed 
tributaries to Little Crane Creek in the Sandhills Ecoregion of North Carolina. Located in the Cape Fear 
River Basin, cataloging unit 03030002, the Site is in the Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03030004070010 
and North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) subbasin number 03‐06‐14. The Site is located 
within a Local Watershed Plan (LWP), Hydrology Targeted Resource Area (TRA), and Water Quality TRA 
due to modifications/stressors in the watershed. Site hydrology drains to unnamed tributaries and into 
Little Crane Creek (Stream Index Number 18‐23‐16‐4), assigned a Best Usage Classification of WS‐III 
(NCDWR 2021). Little Crane Creek is not listed on the NCDENR draft 2018 or final 2016 303(d) lists (NCDEQ 
2018a, NCDEQ 2018b).  Site watershed sizes range from approximately 0.02 square miles (12.2 acres) on 
UT3 to 0.15 square miles (97.5 acres) on UT 1 at the outfall. 

1.1 Project Background, Components, and Structure 
Located approximately 2 miles southwest of Lemon Springs, 8 miles southwest of Sanford, NC, and west 
of Rocky Fork Church Road (SR 1179) in Lee County, the Site encompasses 27.7 acres. Mitigation work 
within the Site included 1) stream restoration, 2) stream enhancement (Level II), 3) wetland 
reestablishment, 4) wetland rehabilitation, 5) wetland enhancement, and 6) vegetation planting. The Site 
is expected to provide 3,533 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 14.593 Riparian Wetland Mitigation 
Units (WMUs) by closeout (Table 1, Page 2). A conservation easement was granted to the State of North 
Carolina and recorded at the Lee County Register of Deeds on June 22, 2021. 

Before construction, land use at the Site was characterized by livestock pasture and disturbed forest. Site 
design was completed in February 2022. Construction started on June 6, 2022 and ended within a final 
walkthrough on July 15, 2022. The Site was planted on February 3, 2023. Completed project activities, 
reporting history, completion dates, and project contacts are summarized in Tables 11‐12 (Appendix E). 

Space Purposefully Left Blank 

Original
Mitigation Original Original Original
Plan As‐Built Mitigation Restoration Mitigation
Project Segment Ft/Ac Ft/Ac Category Level Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments
Stream
UT 1, Reach 1 694 694 Warm EII 2.5 237.600 Straight‐line valley length used for credit calculation at request of IRT
UT 1, Reach 2 (above crossing)1335 1330 Warm R 1.0 1335.000 60 foot easement break for crossing
UT 1, Reach 2 (below crossing)267 265 Warm R 1.0 267.000
UT 1, Reach 3 232 233 Warm EII 2.5 93.200
UT 2, Reach 1 437 425 Warm R 1.0 437.000
UT 2, Reach 2 88 88 Warm EII 2.5 35.200
UT 3 463 451 Warm R 1.0 463.000
UT 4 422 414 Warm R 1.0 422.000
UT 5 243 241 Warm R 1.0 243.000
Total: 3533.000
Wetland
Wetland Reestablishment 8.815 8.815 R REE 1.00000 8.815
Wetland Rehabilitation 0.683 0.683 R RH 1.50000 0.455
Wetland Enhancement 10.646 10.646 R E 2.00000 5.323
Total: 14.593
Project Credits
Riparian Non‐Rip Coastal
Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh
Restoration 3167.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Re‐establishment 8.815 0.000 0.000
Rehabilitation 0.455 0.000 0.000
Enhancement 5.323 0.000 0.000
Enhancement I 0.000 0.000 0.000
Enhancement II 366.000 0.000 0.000
Creation 0.000 0.000 0.000
Preservation 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Totals 3,533.000 0.000 0.000 14.593 0.000 0.000
Total Stream Credit 3,533.000
Total Wetland Credit 14.593
Wetland Mitigation Category Restoration Level
CM Coastal Marsh P Preservation
R Riparian E Wetland Enhancement
NR Non-Riparian EII Stream Enhancement II
EI Stream Enhancement I
C Wetland Creation
RH Wetland Rehabilitation
REE Wetland Re-establishment
R Restoration
Table 1. Crane Mitigation Site (ID‐100165) Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits
Restoration Level
Stream
Objective/Treatment Likely Functional
Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement
Cumulative Monitoring 
Results
Reconstruct stream channels with appropriate 
bankfull dimensions and depth relative to the 
existing floodplain. Remove overburden to 
reconnect with adjacent wetlands.
Dispersion of high flows on the 
floodplain, an increase in 
biogeochemical cycling within 
the system, and recharging of 
riparian wetlands.
•  The stream shall remain stable, and all other performance 
standards shall be met through four separate bankfull events, 
occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1‐7.
2 crest gauges (pressure 
transducers) on UT1 and 
UT2, and documentation of 
visual/physical evidence of 
bankfull events
To be determined
Construct stream channels that will maintain 
stable cross‐sections, patterns, and profiles over 
time.
Reduction in sediment inputs 
from bank erosion, reduction 
of shear stress, and improved 
overall hydraulic function.
•  All streams must maintain an Ordinary High‐Water Mark 
(OHWM), per RGL 05‐05.
•  Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured 
cross‐section.
•  BHR at any measure riffle cross‐section should not change by 
more than 10% from baseline condition during any given 
monitoring period.
•  Intermittent streams will demonstrate at least 30‐days 
consecutive flow annually.
Total of 16 cross‐sections on 
restored channels and 
surface flow gauges on UT2, 
UT3, UT4, and UT5.
Site streams are stable, 
functioning as designed, and 
stream measurements are within 
design parameters.
Plant native tree and understory species in 
riparian zones and plant appropriate species on 
streambanks.
Reduction in floodplain 
sediment inputs from runoff, 
increased bank stability, 
increased LWD and organic 
material in streams, increased
•  Within planted portions of the Site, a minimum of 320 stems 
per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum of 260 stems 
per acre must be present at year 5; and a minimum of 210 
stems per acre must be present at year 7.
•  Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5 and 10 feet in 
height at year 7 in each plot. 
•  Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are 
included in the approved planting list for the Site; natural 
recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on 
a case‐by‐case basis. Natural recruits can only be counted 
toward success after they have been in the ground for 2 years.
•  Areas of herbaceous vegetation establishment will have a 
minimum of four species present.
17 permenant vegetation 
plots, 6 random vegetation 
plots, and 3 random 
herbaceous plots spread 
across the Site
All plots meeting performance 
criteria during MY0. Herbaceous 
plots will be surveyed beginning 
MY1 to allow time for herbaceous 
vegetation to establish.
Reduce channel depth in incised stream 
reaches, fill drainage ditches, and alleviate soil 
compaction from agriculture activities.
Particulate and pollution 
conversion, groundwater 
storage and reduced 
downstream flooding, habitat 
diversification, and vegetative 
composition conversion. 
•  Annual saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of 
the soil surface for, at a minimum, 12 percent of the growing 
season during average climatic conditions.
15 groundwater gauges 
spread throughout restored 
wetlands
To be determined
Goal
Reconnect channels with floodplains and 
riparian wetlands to allow a natural 
flooding regime.
Restore and enhance native floodplain 
and streambank vegetation.
Improve stability of stream channels.
Restore and enhance groundwater 
hydrology to drained or impacted hydric 
soil areas.
Table 2: Summary: Goals, Performance and Results 
Note: Onsite rain data will be collected throughout each monitoring period. 
UT 1UT 2UT 3 UT4 UT5
2170 489 345 373 319
2429 525 463 421 243
Rosgen Type VIII and III Rosgen Type VIII and III Rosgen Type VIII Rosgen Type VIII Rosgen Type VIII
97.5 22.6 12.2 13.2 47.4
Perennial Intermittent Intermittent Intermittent Intermittent/Perennial
Eg 5G 5Eg 5Eg 5Ge 5
Ce 5Ce 5Ce 5Ce 5Ce 5
III/IV IV IV II/III IV
Applicable?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Historic Preservation Act
Existing Evolutionary Stage (Simon and Hupp 1986)
Pre‐project (acres)
Wetland Summary Information
Wetlands
11.330
20.146
Parameters
Riparian riverine
Parameters
Hydric Soil Status
Mapped Soil Series
Endangered Species Act
Regulatory Considerations
Water of the United States ‐ Section 401
Water of the United States ‐ Section 404
Yes
Yes
Reach Summary Information
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 
 Land Use Classification 
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
Post‐project length of reach (linear feet)
Post‐project (acres)
Valley Classification & Confinement
Drainage Area (acres)
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Existing Morphological Description (Rosgen 1996)
WS III
Parameters
Managed Herbaceous Cover & Hardwood Swamps
Resolved?
3030004070010
03‐06‐14
River Basin
NCDWR Sub‐basin
Pre‐project length of reach (linear feet)
120.1
<2%
Project Drainage Area (acres)
Table 3. Project Attribute Table
Crane Mitigation Site 
Lee County, North Carolina
27.66
35.367351ºN, 79.222369ºW
Project Name
County
Project Area (acres) 
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude decimal degrees)
Project Watershed Summary Information
Sand Hills
Cape Fear
Yes
Supporting Docs?
Section 401 Certification
Section 404 Permit
CE Document
CE Document
Yes
Physiographic Province
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14‐digit
Wetland Type (non‐riparian, riparian)
Wehadkee
Hydric
Proposed Morphological Description (Rosgen 1996)
NA
FEMA Mapping
Essential Fisheries Habitat  ‐‐ NA
 ‐‐ 
YesFEMA Floodplain Compliance
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165) page 5 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
2 AS‐BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE) 
Construction started on June 6, 2022 and ended within a final walkthrough on July 15, 2022. The Site was 
planted on February 3, 2023. As‐built and MY0 data collection occurred between January 2023 and February 
2023. 

In general, no significant issues arose during the construction of the Site. A sealed half‐size set of record 
drawings are provided in Appendix F, which includes the post‐construction survey, alignments, structures, 
and monitoring features. These include redlines for any significant field adjustments made during 
construction that differ from the design plans. 

Additional activities that occurred at the Site included the following. 
 Planting 26.2 acres of the Site with 23,550 stems on February 3, 2023 – planted species are included 
in Table 6A (Appendix B).  
 Applying seed mix across the Site. A species list is included in Table 6B (Appendix B). 

3 PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS  
Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports of the data collected 
will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31st of each monitoring 
year data is collected. The monitoring schedule is summarized in the following table. 

Table A. Monitoring Schedule 
Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 
Streams X X X  X  X 
Wetlands X X X X X X X 
Vegetation X X X  X  X 
Visual Assessment X X X X X X X 
Report Submittal X X X X X X X 

3.1 Monitoring 
The monitoring parameters are summarized in Table 2.  

Space Purposefully Left Blank 

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165) Page 6 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
4 MONITORING YEAR 0 – DATA ASSESSMENT 
Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted between October 2022 and February 2023 to assess the 
condition of the project. Stream, wetland, and vegetation criteria for the Site follow the approved success 
criteria presented in the Mitigation Plan and summarized in Section 1.2; monitoring methods are detailed 
in Section 3.0.  

4.1 Stream Assessment 
Morphological surveys for MY0 were conducted on January 26, 2023. All streams within the Site are stable 
and functioning as designed. Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment 
Table and Stream Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for Stream Geomorphology Data. No stream areas of 
concern were identified during MY0. 

One field adjustment was made during construction that differs from the design plans. A vane arm was 
not constructed on a cross vane on UT 1 at the confluence with UT 5. The vane arm would have extended 
into the UT 5 streambed, and it was determined in the field to be unnecessary (Sheet C5.02, Appendix F). 

4.2 Hydrology Assessment 
15 groundwater monitoring gauges were installed throughout the Site’s wetlands. Hydrologic data will be 
collected and reported during MY1 (2023). 

4.3 Vegetative Assessment 
The MY0 vegetative survey was completed on February 8, 2023. Vegetation monitoring resulted in a 
sitewide stem density average of 600 planted stems per acre, above the interim requirement of 320 stems 
per acre required at MY3. All 23 vegetation plots, including 17 fixed vegetation plots and 6 temporary 
vegetation plots, met the interim success criteria. Please refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot 
Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table, and Appendix B for Vegetation Plot Data. 
No vegetation areas of concern were identified during MY0. 

All twenty planted species were included in the approved Mitigation Plan planting list. Species approved 
in the Mitigation Plan were selected based on Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) data, on‐site 
observations, and community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of North 
Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 2012) – Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwood Forest. Table 6A (Appendix 
B) summarizes planted species and their individual quantities in total. 

Several changes were made to the Site seed mixes based on seed availability at the time of construction. 
Grain Rye (Secale cereale) was omitted from the temporary seed mix, and Brown Top Millet (Urochloa 
ramosa) was applied site‐wide instead. In the permanent seed mix, Agrostis perennans, Carex vulpinoidea, 
Eupatorium coelestinum, Eupatorium perfoliatum, Juncus effusus, Juncus tenuis, and Lespedeza capitata 
were omitted and replaced with equivalent quantities of Eupatorium fistulosum, Panicum 
dichotomiflorum, Panicum rigidulum, and Pycnanthemum tenuifolium. See sheet L5.01 (Appendix F) for 
details regarding as‐built seed mixes. 

4.4 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 on track to exceed the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems per acre, and 
all streams within the Site are stable and are meeting project goals. 

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165) Page 7 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
5 REFERENCES 

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth.  2008.  CVS‐EEP Protocol for Recording 
Vegetation.  Version 4.2.  North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 
Ecosystem Enhancement Program.  Raleigh, North Carolina. 

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018a. Final 2016 Category 5 
Assessments ‐303(d) List (online). Available: 
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2016/2016_NC_Category_5
_303d_list.pdf (February 4, 2019).  

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018b. Draft 2018 North Carolina 303(d) 
List (online). Available: 
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2018/2018‐DRAFT‐NC‐303‐
d‐‐ListwCover.pdf (February 4, 2019).  

North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS).  2014.  Stream and Wetland Mitigation 
Monitoring Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North 
Carolina. 

North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland 
Compensatory Mitigation Update. October 24, 2016. 

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team.  (NC SFAT 2015).  N.C. Stream Assessment Method 
(NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1. 

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team.  (NC WFAT 2010).  N.C. Wetland Assessment 
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1. 

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 2012.  Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: 
Fourth Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and 
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.  
Raleigh, North Carolina.

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data 

Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View 
Table 4A‐E. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table 
Table 5. Visual Vegetation Condition Assessment Table 
Vegetation Plot Photographs 
Photo Log 

!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
^_
##
#
#
#
#
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
GF
GF
1
6
5
4
3
2
XS-8
XS-7
XS-1
XS
-
1
2
X
S
-9
X
S
-
5
XS-11
XS-2
XS-13
XS-14
X S -1 6
XS-15
XS-6
987
4
6
3
2
1
15
14 13
12
11
10
8
7
6
9
3
5
1
4
2
XS-3
XS-10
XS-
4
11
12
16
14
17
10
13
15
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
BEF
APR 2023
1:2700
20-032
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Lee C ounty, NC
CRANEMITIGATIO NSITE
CUR RE NTCONDITIONSPLAN VIEW
1
³
Le g en d
Cra n e E a se me nt = 2 7.7 a cStream R es tor atio nStream E nh an cem e nt (Le vel II)Str eam G en era tin g N o Cre di t
We tla nd R e-e st ab lis hm e ntWetland R eh ab ilit at ionWetland E nh an ce me ntPermanent Ve ge tat io n P lo ts M ee tin g Su cc es s C ri ter ia (1 7)Te mp or ary Veg et at ion Tra ns ec ts Me et in g S uc ce ss C rit er ia (6 )Cro ss -S ec tio n s (16 )
!(Gr ou nd wa te r G a ug es (1 5)
^_Ra in Ga u ge
#Str ea m Fl ow G au ge s (4 )
#Str ea m Cr es t G a ug es (2 )
^_Ve ge tat io n P lo t O ri gin s
GF Per ma ne nt Ph oto Po in ts (2)
0 500 1,00 0250Feet
RockyForkChurchRoad
N ote : B a se ma p i s a eri al orth oi ma g ery fro m 2 02 1 N C On e Ma p.
U T-1
UT-2
UT-3
U T-5
U T -4
Table 4A.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 1, Reach 2
Assessed Stream Length 1602
Assessed Bank Length 3204
Bank 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%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 35 35 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
35 35 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
IntendedMajor Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage

Totals  
Table 4B.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 2, Reach 1
Assessed Stream Length 437
Assessed Bank Length 874
Bank 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%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 19 19 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
19 19 100%
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended

Totals  
Major Channel Category Metric
Table 4C.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 3
Assessed Stream Length 480
Assessed Bank Length 960
Bank 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%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 22 22 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
22 22 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
IntendedMajor Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage

Totals  
Table 4D.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 4
Assessed Stream Length 427
Assessed Bank Length 854
Bank 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%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 14 14 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
14 14 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended

Totals  
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 4E.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 5
Assessed Stream Length 248
Assessed Bank Length 496
Bank 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%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 8 8 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
8 8 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended

Totals  
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 5.  Visual Vegetation Assessment
Planted acreage 26.2
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria. 0.10acres 0.00 0.0%
0.00 0.0%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
0.00 0.0%
Easement Acreage 27.66
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.  Species 
included in summation above should be identified in report summary.  
0.10 acres 0.00 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 0 Encroachments noted
Combined 
Acreage
% of Easement 
AcreageVegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold
% of Planted 
Acreage
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Total
                                                                                                                                                                Cumulative Total
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold
Combined 
Acreage
Crane Mitigation Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken February 8, 2023)
Crane Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data
MY0 Monitoring Report – February 2023
Plot 7
Plot 1 Plot 2
Plot 3 Plot 4
Plot 5 Plot 6
Plot 8
Crane Mitigation Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken February 8, 2023)
Crane Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data
MY0 Monitoring Report – February 2023
Plot 15
Plot 9 Plot 10
Plot 11 Plot 12
Plot 13 Plot 14
Plot 16
Crane Mitigation Site
MY0 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken February 8, 2023)
Crane Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data
MY0 Monitoring Report – February 2023
Plot 17
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 1: CCPV Permanent Photo Point 1
UT 1 Crossing, facing upstream
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 2: CCPV Permanent Photo Point 2
UT 1 Crossing, facing downstream
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 3: Easement Fencing
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 4: West of GW-10 facing East within the
easement
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 5: UT-1 facing North
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 6: UT-2 facing West
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 8: Wetland GA near UT-2 and UT-4
confluence
Photo 7: UT-2 facing Southeast
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 9: UT-4 facing South
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 10: UT-3 facing South
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 11: GW-8
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Photo 12: UT-1 Log Vanes
Crane Mitigation Site
As-Built (2023) Photo Log
Photo 13: Easement Signage
MY0 (2023) Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)Appendices
Crane Mitigation Site Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix B: Vegetation Data 

Table 6A. Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation 
Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix 
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities 
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Table 6A. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 
Vegetation Association 
Coastal Plain 
Bottomland Hardwood 
Forest* 
Coastal Plain Small 
Stream Swamp* Stream‐side Assemblage** TOTAL 
Area (acres) 8 15.4 2.8 26.2 
Species Indicator 
Status 
# 
planted* % of total # planted* % of total # planted** % of total # planted 
Swamp black gum (Nyssa biflora) OBL 0 0.0% 1000 9.5% 0 0.0% 1000 
Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) OBL 500 9.2% 1000 9.5% 0 0.0% 1500 
Tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica) OBL 0 0.0% 1000 9.5% 0 0.0% 1000 
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) FAC 500 9.2% 1000 9.5% 700 9.2% 2200 
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) FACW 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1500 19.7% 1500 
Sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana) FACW 0 0.0% 1000 9.5% 0 0.0% 1000 
Red bay (Persea borbonia) FAC 250 4.6% 500 4.8% 0 0.0% 750 
River birch (Betula nigra) FACW 500 9.2% 500 4.8% 1500 19.7% 2500 
Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 400 5.3% 1200 
American elm (Ulmus americana) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 800 10.5% 1600 
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) FAC 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 800 10.5% 1600 
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 800 10.5% 1600 
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 0 0.0% 800 
Water oak (Quercus nigra) FAC 500 9.2% 300 2.9% 400 5.3% 1200 
Laurel oak (Quercus larifolia) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 0 0.0% 800 
Cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda) FAC 200 3.7% 0 0.0% 400 5.3% 600 
Willow oak (Quercus phellos) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 0 0.0% 800 
Shumard oak (Quercus shumardii) FACW 300 5.5% 500 4.8% 0 0.0% 800 
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata) FACU 300 5.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 300 
Bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis) FAC  300 5.5% 200 1.9% 300 3.9% 800 
TOTAL 5450  10500  7600  23550 
* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre. 
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre. 

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Table 6B. Permanent Seed Mix 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 
Temporary Seed (Erosion and Sediment Control) 
Species Application Rate Application Date Notes 
Urochloa ramosa (Brown Top Millet) 40 lbs. per acre May ‐ September All disturbed soil 

Permanent Seed‐ Sitewide @ 2lbs /acre 
Latin Species Common Name Indicator % 
Agrostis hyemalis Winter bentgrass FAC 3 
Bidens aristosa Bur‐marigold FACW 0.6 
Carex albolutescens Greenwhite Sedge FACW 2 
Carex lupulina Hop Sedge OBL 2 
Chamaecrista fasciculata Partridge Pea FACU 6 
Chamaecrista nictitans Sensitive Pea FACU 3 
Coreopsis lanceolata Lance‐leaved Coreopsis NI 5 
Coreopsis tinctoria Plains Coreopsis FAC 5 
Desmodium canadense Showy ticktrefoil FAC 5 
Echinacea purpurea Coneflower NI 5 
Elymus virginicus Virginia Wildrye FACW 7 
Eupatorium fistulosum Joe Pye Weed FACW 0.1 
Helianthus angustifolius Narrowleaved Sunflower FACW 2 
Heliopsis helianthoides Oxeye sunflower UPL 5 
Hibiscus moscheutos Crimsoneyed rosemallow OBL 0.1 
Liatris spicata Marsh Blazing Star FAC 0.1 
Monarda fistulosa Wild Bergamot FACU 1 
Panicum anceps Beaked panicgrass FAC 5 
Panicum clandestinum Deertongue FAC 10 
Panicum dichotomiflorum Smooth panicgrass FACW 8 
Panicum rigidulum Redtop Panicgrass FACW 2 
Pycnanthemum tenuifolium Narrowleaf mountainmint FACW 0.1 
Rudbeckia hirta Black eyed Susan FACU 5 
Senna hebecarpa Wild Senna FAC 2 
Tridens flavus Purpletop FACU 10 
Verbena hastata Blue vervain FACW 6 

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Table 7. Planted Vegetation Totals 
Laurel Springs Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 
Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met? 
1 405 Yes 
2 526 Yes 
3 648 Yes 
4 607 Yes 
5 607 Yes 
6 607 Yes 
7 486 Yes 
8 607 Yes 
9 324 Yes 
10 526 Yes 
11 688 Yes 
12 607 Yes 
13 445 Yes 
14 526 Yes 
15 607 Yes 
16 607 Yes 
17 729 Yes 
R‐1 607 Yes 
R‐2 729 Yes 
R‐3 607 Yes 
R‐4 364 Yes 
R‐5 891 Yes 
R‐6 1053 Yes 
Average Planted Stems/Acre 600 Yes 
https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
26.2
2023-02-04
NA
2023-03-15
2023-03-15
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 2 2
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FAC 1 1
Carya ovata shagbark hickory Tree FACU 1 1
Celtis occidentalis common hackberry Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1 1 3 3 3 3
Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1
Nyssa aquatica water tupelo Tree OBL 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 2
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 4
Persea borbonia redbay Tree FACW 7 7
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU
Quercus laurifolia laurel oak Tree FACW 2 2 3 3 4 4 1 1 2 2
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 2 2 1 1 1 1
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 3 3 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FACW 1 1
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 2 2 1 1
Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree FAC 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2
Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree OBL 1 1 3 3 2 2 5 5 2 2
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FAC
Sum Performance Standard 10 10 13 13 16 16 15 15 15 15 15 15 12 12 15 15 8 8 13 13
10 13 16 15 15 15 12 15 8 13
405 526 648 607 607 607 486 607 324 526
6 8 7 8 6 9 7 8 4 7
30 38 44 20 33 27 33 20 62 31
1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 13 16 15 15 15 12 15 8 13
405 526 648 607 607 607 486 607 324 526
6 8 7 8 6 9 7 8 4 7
30 38 44 20 33 27 33 20 62 31
1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Post Mitigation
Plan
Performance
Standard
% 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.
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Species
Included in
Approved
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Veg Plot 10 FVeg Plot 7 FScientific Name Common Name
Tree/S
hrub
Indicator
Status
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Plot size (ACRES)
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (cont.)
26.2
2023-02-04
NA
2023-03-15
2023-03-15
0.0247
Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R Veg Plot 6 R
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 2 2 2 2
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FAC 1 1 2 1
Carya ovata shagbark hickory Tree FACU 1 1
Celtis occidentalis common hackberry Tree FACU 2 2
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 3
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 7 2
Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree FACW 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3
Nyssa aquatica water tupelo Tree OBL 1 1 1 1 3 4
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 4 1 2
Persea borbonia redbay Tree FACW 1 2 3 3
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 1 1 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 2 2 2 2
Quercus laurifolia laurel oak Tree FACW 4 4 4 4 9 9 1 2 2
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 4 4 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3
Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 1 1 2 2 6 6 3 3 4 1 2 1
Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 2 3 2 1 1 1 3
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FACW 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 1
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree FAC 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1
Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree OBL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FAC 3
Sum Performance Standard 17 17 10 15 9 11 13 13 15 15 15 15 18 18 15 18 15 9 22 26
17 15 11 13 15 15 18 15 18 15 9 22 26
688 607 445 526 607 607 729 607 729 607 364 891 1053
9 9 5 7 11 5 6 9 11 8 6 9 8
18 20 36 31 13 40 50 27 17 27 33 32 31
0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 15 11 13 15 15 18 15 18 15 9 22 26
688 607 445 526 607 607 729 607 729 607 364 891 1053
9 9 5 7 11 5 6 9 11 8 6 9 8
18 20 36 31 13 40 50 27 17 27 33 32 31
0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Veg Plot 14 F Veg Plot 15 F
Species
Included in
Approved
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan
Performance
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Veg Plot 13 F Veg Plot 16 F Veg Plot 17 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.
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
Indicator
Status
Post Mitigation
Plan
Performance
Standard
% Invasives
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name
Tree/S
hrub
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix C: Stream Geomorphology Data 

Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays 
Longitudinal Profile 
Table 9A‐E. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables 
Table 10A‐B. Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary 

Station Elevation
0.0 388.7 388.48
2.8 388.6 NA
5.0 388.5 387.36
6.5 388.1 388.48
7.1 387.8 1.12
7.7 387.6 5.1
8.4 387.4
9.4 387.4
10.5 387.4
11.3 387.9
13.2 388.7
14.8 388.9
17.3 389.0
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT2, XS -1
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
387
388
389
390
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT2, XS-1, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 389.0 388.92
1.4 388.9 1.00
4.1 388.9 387.92
5.7 388.5 388.92
6.8 388.1 1.00
7.2 387.9 3.8
7.5 388.0
8.0 388.1
8.5 388.1
9.1 388.1
9.9 388.4
11.6 389.0
13.9 389.3
16.8 389.7
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT2, XS-2
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
388
389
390
0 10 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT2, XS-2, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 388.9 388.85
1.9 388.9 1.00
3.6 388.8 388.24
4.4 388.6 388.85
4.8 388.3 0.61
5.5 388.3 2.7
6.0 388.3
6.7 388.3
7.6 388.2
8.1 388.4
9.8 388.7
12.0 389.0
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT4, XS-3
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
388
389
390
0 5 10 15
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT4, XS-3, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 389.2 388.94
1.5 388.9 NA
2.6 388.6 388.06
3.5 388.2 388.94
4.5 388.1 0.88
5.3 388.1 3.0
6.1 388.5
6.8 388.7
7.8 389.0
9.7 389.3
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT4, XS-4
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
388
389
390
0 5 10
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT4, XS-4, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 392.6 391.96
2.7 392.2 1.00
5.6 392.1 391.43
6.8 391.6 391.96
7.5 391.5 0.53
8.0 391.6 1.4
8.9 391.4
9.3 391.7
10.6 392.0
12.2 392.0
16.2 392.1
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT4, XS-5
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
391
392
393
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT4, XS-5, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 392.6 392.04
2.7 392.2 NA
5.2 392.2 391.06
5.8 391.9 392.04
6.6 391.6 0.99
7.3 391.5 3.0
7.8 391.3
8.4 391.1
8.8 391.1
9.2 391.3
10.2 391.6
11.1 392.0
12.6 392.0
15.1 392.3
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT4, XS-6
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
391
392
393
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT4, XS-6, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 390.0 389.84
2.9 389.9 1.00
5.0 389.7 388.83
6.2 389.4 389.84
7.7 389.1 1.01
8.5 388.8 6.7
9.3 388.8
10.4 388.9
11.0 388.9
11.8 388.9
12.4 389.0
13.3 389.3
14.4 389.8
16.4 389.9
18.9 390.0
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-7
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
388
389
390
391
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-7, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 390.1 389.72
3.2 389.9 NA
4.8 389.7 388.24
5.8 389.4 389.72
6.8 389.3 1.48
7.6 388.3 9.7
8.7 388.2
9.6 388.3
10.5 388.3
11.4 388.3
12.0 388.4
12.4 388.6
13.1 388.9
14.1 389.3
15.6 389.8
18.3 390.0
20.2 390.1
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-8
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
388
389
390
391
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-8, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 394.6 394.72
2.8 394.7 1.00
4.4 394.4 393.90
5.5 394.1 394.72
6.6 393.9 0.82
7.6 393.9 3.9
8.5 394.1
9.3 394.1
10.3 394.7
11.1 394.8
12.9 394.8
15.0 395.1
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT3, XS-9
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
393
394
395
396
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT3, XS-9, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 394.9 394.40
2.4 394.6 NA
3.8 394.5 391.94
4.8 394.2 394.40
5.8 394.4 2.46
6.3 391.9 5.3
6.8 392.2
7.6 392.3
8.2 392.3
8.7 394.5
9.7 394.6
11.3 395.1
13.9 395.3
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT3, XS-10
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
391
392
393
394
395
396
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT3, XS-10, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 395.3 395.05
3.8 395.3 1.00
4.9 395.1 394.18
6.0 394.6 395.05
6.8 394.4 0.87
7.6 394.4 5.1
8.7 394.2
9.0 394.2
9.4 394.2
10.3 394.2
10.9 394.2
11.7 394.5
12.8 394.7
13.5 395.1
15.7 395.2
19.3 395.3
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-11
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
394
395
396
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-11, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 395.4 395.00
3.8 395.0 NA
5.5 394.4 393.69
6.5 394.0 395.00
7.6 393.8 1.31
8.5 393.8 8.0
9.4 393.7
10.2 393.8
11.3 394.2
12.1 394.5
13.7 394.9
15.4 395.2
21.2 395.2
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-12
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
393
394
395
396
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-12, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 399.4 399.13
3.2 399.3 1.00
4.6 399.4 398.21
5.6 399.2 399.13
6.5 398.7 0.92
7.8 398.4 4.4
8.9 398.3
9.9 398.2
10.6 398.3
11.1 398.4
11.7 398.7
12.5 398.9
13.0 399.1
15.9 399.1
18.2 399.6
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT5, XS-13
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
398
399
400
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT5, XS-13, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 399.3 398.95
2.5 399.0 NA
4.2 398.9 398.20
5.0 398.7 398.95
5.9 398.4 0.75
6.8 398.3 4.0
8.3 398.2
9.5 398.3
10.7 398.4
11.7 398.7
12.3 399.1
13.3 399.4
15.7 399.2
18.3 399.5
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT5, XS-14
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
398
399
400
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT5, XS-14, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 408.7 408.40
3.8 408.4 1.00
4.8 408.2 407.44
6.3 407.6 408.40
7.4 407.5 0.96
8.3 407.4 5.8
9.1 407.5
10.5 407.5
11.2 407.7
11.9 408.1
13.2 408.6
15.4 408.7
18.2 409.0
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-15
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
407
408
409
410
0 5 10 15 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-15, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Station Elevation
0.0 409.2 408.81
3.3 409.0 NA
4.7 408.8 406.67
6.2 408.2 408.81
7.1 406.9 2.14
7.9 406.8 12.9
8.9 406.7
9.5 406.8
10.2 406.9
11.4 406.8
12.1 406.9
12.7 408.3
13.5 408.3
14.5 408.8
15.4 409.2
19.1 409.2
Site Crane Site
Watershed:Cape Fear River Basin, 03030004
XS ID UT1, XS-16
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Pool
Date:2/7/2023
Field Crew:Adams, Fleming, Smith
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
Stream Type
406
407
408
409
410
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Station (feet)
Crane, UT1, XS-16, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 2/7/23
Project Name Crane Mitigation Site - Baseline (2023) Profile
Reach UT 1 (Sta 00+00 to 17+50)
Feature Profile
Date 1/26/23
Crew Perkinson, Smith
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB
0 393.86
20.36 394.29
35.11 393.98 395.59
37.09 393.73
44.70 393.11
45.43 394.88
60.77 394.77
71.34 394.74 395.82
75.40 394.54
81.23 393.80
82.25 395.43
102.63 395.37 396.41
108.19 396.19
113.54 396.46
127.16 394.95
132.30 395.25
142.25 395.72
157.83 395.44 396.70
162.47 395.07
167.71 394.49
169.04 396.30
188.66 396.36 397.17
192.31 396.09
197.36 395.57
202.56 395.11
203.90 396.59
231.05 396.51 397.61
235.59 396.31
238.95 396.19
240.55 396.24
245.81 396.58
265.44 396.62 397.69
267.70 396.51
269.54 396.64
270.65 396.67
284.48 396.85 397.75
286.48 396.43
291.19 395.47
292.72 397.50
308.99 397.40 398.21
311.21 397.31
315.87 397.35
318.12 397.67
348.96 397.88
358.21 397.92 398.60
362.64 397.62
367.88 396.85
372.32 396.57
373.56 398.58
393.64 398.29 399.29
398.34 397.84
402.66 397.99
403.95 398.11
408.62 398.40
429.57 398.52 399.77
431.94 397.95
436.35 397.29
437.68 399.21
458.75 398.95 399.69
462.55 398.30
469.04 398.52
469.45 398.40
471.64 398.66
477.61 398.86
499.66 399.07 400.15
502.12 398.68
2023
Baseline Survey As needed As needed As needed
390
395
400
405
410
415
420
425
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Crane Mitigation Site, UT 1 (Sta 00+00 to 17+50)
Baseline Profile 2023
Bed Baseline 1/26/2023 TOB 1/26/2023
Project Name Crane Mitigation Site - Baseline (2023) Profile
Reach UT 2 (Sta 00+00 to 05+00)
Feature Profile
Date 1/26/23
Crew Perkinson, Smith
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB
0 394.28 394.90
4.45 393.94
8.45 394.00
11.87 394.46
23.36 394.40 395.16
27.82 394.04
33.94 393.35
36.13 394.81
52.20 394.73 395.58
56.01 394.50
60.33 394.48
61.81 394.58
79.53 394.49 395.59
82.86 393.45
86.22 393.16
87.05 394.92
97.68 394.88 396.04
99.73 394.77
103.03 394.76
116.39 395.24 396.09
118.56 394.09
122.72 394.05
123.63 395.63
135.62 395.44 396.60
137.87 394.70
141.39 393.97
142.37 396.01
150.37 395.63 396.37
163.65 395.09
167.93 394.00
168.99 396.01
177.06 395.55 396.09
179.57 394.78
184.13 394.28
185.14 396.28
195.32 395.83 397.06
196.25 395.33
200.55 394.56
201.67 396.68
213.19 396.43 397.33
216.50 396.19
219.00 396.21
221.33 396.36
229.78 396.54 397.47
233.58 395.97
240.55 395.83
241.62 397.12
248.08 396.91 397.73
254.92 395.92
258.45 395.41
259.89 397.32
269.25 397.09 398.11
271.22 396.93
275.23 396.92
277.50 397.05
291.38 397.04 397.74
294.43 396.65
299.48 395.88
301.04 397.62
310.01 397.36 398.09
312.16 396.38
318.35 395.44
320.53 397.66
329.26 397.41 398.22
334.24 396.84
339.12 395.95
2023
Baseline Survey As needed As needed As needed
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Crane Mitigation Site, UT 2 (Sta 00+00 to 05+00)
Baseline Profile 2023
Bed Baseline 1/26/2023 TOB 1/26/2023
Project Name Crane Mitigation Site - Baseline (2023) Profile
Reach UT 3 (Sta 00+00 to 05+50)
Feature Profile
Date 1/26/23
Crew Perkinson, Smith
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB
0.00 398.81
8.88 398.50 399.19
9.83 398.49
12.71 398.58
14.29 398.60
22.21 398.73 399.14
23.47 398.27
28.17 398.32
29.64 398.60
40.01 398.70 399.26
42.78 398.62
44.63 398.54
47.05 398.55
49.10 399.00
56.38 399.02 399.44
58.18 398.72
61.77 398.62
66.00 398.93
66.93 399.20
76.56 399.29 399.78
78.56 399.02
81.97 398.89
83.08 398.97
93.54 399.05 399.76
95.14 398.82
100.85 398.16
101.55 399.73
107.40 399.48 400.09
109.01 399.15
112.19 399.21
114.39 399.20
115.97 399.35
124.30 399.70 400.02
126.84 399.47
130.16 399.29
134.10 399.36
135.89 399.60
151.50 399.92
168.79 400.28
172.50 400.21 400.89
174.14 399.61
178.57 399.22
179.34 400.79
185.71 400.43 401.27
187.58 400.04
192.02 399.56
192.58 401.12
199.96 400.97 401.73
201.90 400.52
205.63 399.61
206.73 401.38
218.54 401.12 402.00
220.24 400.54
224.40 399.77
225.21 401.87
233.69 401.65 402.32
236.62 401.26
241.72 400.73
242.85 402.23
252.50 402.02 402.78
255.35 401.87
259.39 401.59
260.35 402.74
268.82 402.64 403.17
270.22 401.99
275.07 401.78
2023
Baseline Survey As needed As needed As needed
396
398
400
402
404
406
408
410
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Crane Mitigation Site, UT 3 (Sta 00+00 to 05+50)
Baseline Profile 2023
Bed Baseline 1/26/2023 TOB 1/26/2023
Project Name Crane Mitigation Site - Baseline (2023) Profile
Reach UT 4 (Sta 00+00 to 04+50)
Feature Profile
Date 1/26/23
Crew Perkinson, Smith
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB
0.0 394.75
13.5 394.97
22.2 395.00 395.83
23.8 394.56
27.1 394.19
27.8 395.50
37.5 395.25 396.19
39.7 394.82
41.7 394.75
42.6 395.87
57.8 395.58
73.6 395.83 396.44
75.2 395.46
79.0 395.49
80.4 395.65
88.6 395.69 396.54
92.6 395.14
97.7 394.57
98.9 396.29
108.7 396.13 397.06
110.5 395.53
113.9 395.97
114.9 396.62
130.8 396.48 397.47
133.2 395.76
136.3 396.00
137.6 397.18
150.2 396.97 397.57
152.2 396.41
155.0 396.19
156.6 397.51
167.6 397.26 398.01
170.4 396.96
174.5 396.42
175.8 397.82
184.0 397.66 398.19
186.3 397.36
193.6 397.18
195.1 398.28
204.6 398.15 398.57
209.9 397.52
213.2 397.35
214.7 398.60
227.5 398.31
235.9 398.58 399.35
238.5 397.51
241.3 397.55
242.5 398.80
254.3 398.74
268.8 398.83 399.42
274.1 398.56
276.7 398.62
279.3 398.90
289.9 398.76 399.57
291.8 398.02
294.4 397.99
296.3 399.34
309.6 398.99
324.2 399.24 400.01
327.4 399.02
330.9 399.00
334.1 399.03
345.4 399.37 399.90
348.4 399.11
350.4 399.11
352.9 399.29
2023
Baseline Survey As needed As needed As needed
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Crane Mitigation Site, UT 4 (Sta 00+00 to 04+50)
Baseline Profile 2023
Bed Baseline 1/26/2023 TOB 1/26/2023
Project Name Crane Mitigation Site - Baseline (2023) Profile
Reach UT 5 (Sta 00+00 to 02+50)
Feature Profile
Date 1/26/23
Crew Perkinson, Smith
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation TOB
0.00 405.30
25.13 405.35 406.27
28.24 405.22
32.78 405.20
37.61 405.62
45.39 405.42 406.51
49.00 405.51
53.94 405.46
56.10 405.53
72.60 405.47 406.31
74.01 405.03
79.62 404.52
80.81 405.97
96.46 405.48 406.45
99.14 405.10
103.70 404.16
105.05 406.00
120.25 405.90 406.73
123.21 405.55
132.98 405.49
136.06 405.86
144.95 405.95 407.00
147.95 405.74
155.63 405.25
157.06 406.55
173.62 406.26 407.09
175.71 406.00
180.79 405.27
182.23 406.82
197.63 406.53 407.62
200.05 406.20
204.07 405.87
205.53 407.35
221.49 407.03 407.87
222.74 406.47
227.20 406.16
228.43 407.66
247.83 408.09 408.69
2023
Baseline Survey As needed As needed As needed
404
404
405
405
406
406
407
407
408
408
409
409
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Distance (feet)
Crane Mitigation Site, UT 5 (Sta 00+00 to 02+50)
Baseline Profile 2023
Bed Baseline 1/26/2023 TOB 1/26/2023
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)4.3 6.7 12.5 7.7 8.9 8.5 11.0 3
Floodprone Width (ft)9 75 100 50 150 100 100 3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.9 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.9 1.8 2.9 0.7 1 0.9 1.0 3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)5 5 5 5 5 5.1 6.7 3
Width/Depth Ratio 3.6 10.6 31.3 12 16 13.9 17.9 3
Entrenchment Ratio 1.6 13 23.3 6.5 16.8 9.1 11.8 3
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.7 2.8 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 3
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)2.2 3.3 4.8 4.8 5.5 7.2 7.2 1
Floodprone Width (ft)5 7 12 25 75 50.0 50.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.6 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 1 1.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.0 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 3.8 3.8 1
Width/Depth Ratio 2.8 6 12 12 16 13.8 13.8 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.8 2.1 2.5 5.2 13.6 6.9 6.9 1
Bank Height Ratio 2.2 2.5 3.1 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
Pre-Existing Condition (applicable)
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)Design
Table 9A. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Crane - UT 1
1.1
0.0179 0.0167 0.0167
1.03 1.1
1919 19
Ce 5Eg 5 Ce 5
G 5 Ce 5 Ce 5
Table 9B. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Crane - UT 2
Pre-Existing Condition (applicable) Design
Monitoring Baseline
(MY0)
0.0145 0.0144 0.0144
6.6 6.6 6.6
1.09 1.1 1.1
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)2.1 3.4 4.2 3.8 4.4 7.8 7.8 1
Floodprone Width (ft)4 23 50 25 75 50.0 50.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.3 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 0.8 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.8 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 3.9 3.9 1
Width/Depth Ratio 3.5 10.1 14 12 16 15.6 15.6 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 8.1 23.8 6.6 17.1 6.4 6.4 1
Bank Height Ratio 2 4 7.2 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)1.8 3.3 4.8 3.9 4.6 4.7 7.5 2
Floodprone Width (ft)8 50 26 50 100 75.0 75.0 2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.3 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 1.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 2.7 2
Width/Depth Ratio 2.6 8.9 16 12 16 15.6 20.8 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 9.8 15.6 6.1 15.8 9.9 16.0 2
Bank Height Ratio 1.3 1.9 2.8 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 2
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
Eg 5 Ce 5 Ce 5
Table 9C. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Crane - UT 3
Pre-Existing Condition (applicable) Design Monitoring Baseline
0.0287 0.0264 0.0264
4.2 4.2 4.2
1.01 1.1 1.1
Eg 5 Ce 5 Ce 5
Table 9D. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Crane - UT 4
Pre-Existing Condition (applicable) Design Monitoring Baseline
0.0145 0.0133 0.0133
4.5 4.5 4.5
1.01 1.1 1.1
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)3.7 4.1 4.7 6.1 7 10.3 10.3 1
Floodprone Width (ft)6 8 11 50 150 100.0 100.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.6 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.8 1 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 4.4 4.4 1
Width/Depth Ratio 4.6 5.8 7.8 12 16 24.2 24.2 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 1.9 2.6 8.2 21.3 9.7 9.7 1
Bank Height Ratio 1.8 2.9 4.8 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Other
Ge 5 Ce 5 Ce 5
Table 9E. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Crane - UT 5
Pre-Existing Condition (applicable) Design Monitoring Baseline
0.0149 0.0136 0.0136
11.3 11.3 11.3
1.01 1.1 1.1
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 388.48 388.92 388.85 388.94 391.96
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area NA 1.00 1.00 NA 1.00
Thalweg Elevation 387.36 387.916 388.238
 388.06 391.43
LTOB2 Elevation 388.48 388.918
`388.85 388.94 391.96
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.12 1.00 0.61 0.88 0.53
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.1 3.8 2.7 3.0 1.4
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 392.04 389.84 389.72
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area NA 1.00 NA
Thalweg Elevation 391.06 388.831 388.24
LTOB2 Elevation 392.04 389.842 389.72
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.99 1.01 1.48
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.0 6.7 9.7
0.00
1.80
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area
Thalweg Elevation
LTOB2 Elevation
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 394.72 394.40 395.05 395.00 399.13
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 NA 1.00 NA 1.00
Thalweg Elevation 393.90 391.936 394.18
 393.69 398.21
LTOB2 Elevation 394.72 394.399
`395.05 395.00 399.13
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.82 2.46 0.87 1.31 0.92
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.9 5.3 5.1 8.0 4.4
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 398.95 408.40 408.81
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area NA 1.00 NA
Thalweg Elevation 398.20 407.442 406.67
LTOB2 Elevation 398.95 408.401 408.81
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.75 0.96 2.14
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.0 5.8 12.9
0.00
1.80
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area
Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area
Thalweg Elevation
LTOB2 Elevation
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
  Table 10A.  Monitoring Data ‐ Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Crane/ DMS:100165)    UT 1, UT 2, and UT 4
UT 2 ‐ Cross Section 1 (Pool) UT 2 ‐ Cross Section 2 (Riffle) UT 4 ‐ Cross Section 3 (Riffle) UT 4 ‐ Cross Section 4 (Pool) UT 4 ‐ Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter‐annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases.  Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed.      
UT 4 ‐ Cross Section 6 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 7 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 8 (Pool)
  Table 10B.  Monitoring Data ‐ Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
(Crane/ DMS:100165)    UT 1, UT 3, and UT 5
UT 3 ‐ Cross Section 9 (Riffle) UT 3 ‐ Cross Section 10 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 11 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 12 (Pool) UT 5 ‐ Cross Section 13 (Riffle)
Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter‐annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases.  Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed.      
UT 5 ‐ Cross Section 14 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 15 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 16 (Pool)
The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners.  The outcome resulted 
in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As‐built bankfull area and the 
cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank.  These are calculated as follows:
1 ‐Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation.  For example if the As‐built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull 
elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2.  The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation 
for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator.  This same process is then carried out in 
each successive year.
2  ‐LTOB 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.       
The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners.  The outcome resulted 
in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As‐built bankfull area and the 
cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank.  These are calculated as follows:
1 ‐Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation.  For example if the As‐built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull 
elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2.  The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation 
for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator.  This same process is then carried out in 
each successive year.
2  ‐LTOB 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.       

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix D: Hydrologic Data 

Groundwater Gauge Soil Profiles 

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-1 35.363918, -79.223289
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-8 10 YR 4/2 100 - - - - Sand
8-24 10 YR 4/1 95 10 YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy Clay Loam
24+ 4/10G 90 10 YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-2 35.364841, -79.224065
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-8 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
8-12 10 YR 5/1 97 10 YR 4/6 3 C M Sandy Loam
12+ 10 YR 5/1 95 10 YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-3 35.365244, -79.223755
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-18 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
18-20 10 YR 3/1 95 10 YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy Clay Loam
20+ 4/5BG 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-4 35.365381, -79.223935
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-3 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
3-8 10 YR 6/3 100 - - - - Sand
8+ 10 YR 7/2 90 10 YR 5/6 10 C M Sandy Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-5 35.365311, -79.224294
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-30+ 10 YR 2/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-6 35.365957, -79.223721
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-24+ 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Silty Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-7 35.36660, -79.224025
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-4 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
4-10 10 YR 4/1 95 10 YR 4/6 5 C M Sandy Clay Loam
10-24+ 10 YR 4/1 90 10 YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-8 35.366688, -79.223695
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-8 10 YR 4/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
8-12 10 Yr 4/2 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
12-24 10 YR 4/2 93 10 YR 4/6 7 C M Sandy Clay Loam
24+ 10 YR 4/2 90 10 YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-9 35.366699, -79.223292
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-30+ 10 YR 2/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-10 35.366487, -79.222511
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-20 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Silty Clay Loam
20+ 4/5 BG 100 - - - - Silty Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-11 35.366820, -79.222421
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-8 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Silty Clay Loam
8-30 4/5 BG 100 - - - - Silty Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW-12 35.367102, -79.222764
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-24+ 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW13 35.367350, -79.223216
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-4 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
4-18 10 YR 4/2 93 10 YR 4/6 7 C M Sandy Clay Loam
18+ 10 YR 5/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW14 35.367330, -79.224318
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-12 10 YR 2/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
12-30+ 10 YR 5/2 97 10 YR 4/6 3 C M Sandy Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Date:2/14/2023
Project/Site: 20-032/Crane
County, State: Lee, North Carolina
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW15 35.367921, -79.223351
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Color %Color %Type Location
0-4 10 YR 2/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
4-8 10 YR 4/1 100 - - - - Sandy Loam
8-20+ 10 YR 3/1 100 - - - - Sandy Clay Loam
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix E: Project Timeline and Contact Info 

Table 11. Project Timeline 
Table 12. Project Contacts   
Table 11. Project Timeline
Data Collection Task Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Deliverable Submission
Project Instituted NA 30‐Jul‐20
Mitigation Plan Approved NA 14‐Feb‐22
Construction (Grading) Completed NA 15‐Jul‐22
Planting Completed NA 3‐Feb‐23
As‐built Survey Completed NA 1‐Mar‐23
MY‐0 Baseline Report Jan‐23 Mar‐23
MY1+ Monitoring Reports
Remediation Items (e.g. beaver removal, supplements, repairs etc.)
Encroachment 

Table 12. Project Contacts
Provider Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mitigation Provider POC Ray Holz
919‐755‐9490
Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
Primary project design POC Grant Lewis
919‐215‐1693
Construction Contractor Land Mechanics Designs, Inc.
126 Circle G Lane
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Primary construction POC Charles Hill
919‐639‐6132
Crane Site/100165

Final MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100165)  Appendices 
Crane Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC 
Lee County, North Carolina April 2023 
Appendix F: Record Drawings (As‐Built Survey)