The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20181349 Ver 1_Mill Dam Creek_97136_MY04_2023_20240229Annual Monitoring Report Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Yadkin River Basin - 03040101 Monitoring Year 04 DEQ Contract 6898 DMS Project Number 97136 RFP#16-006706 (Date of Issue: October 21, 2015) DWR #: 18-1349 USACE Action ID: 2016-01335 Yadkin County, North Carolina Prepared for: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 Data Collected: 2023 Date Submitted: January 2024 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 MY04 Monitoring Report Monitoring and Design Firm Prepared by: KCI Associates of North Carolina 4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 (919) 783-9214 Project Contact: Adam Spiller Email: adam.spiller@kci.com KCI ASSOCIATES OF N ORTH C AROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com Employee-Owned Since 1988 MEMORANDUM Date: February 21, 2024 To: Matthew Reid, DMS Project Manager From: Adam Spiller, Project Manager KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA Subject: Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site MY-03 Monitoring Report Comments Yadkin River Basin CU 03040101 NCDMS Project # 97136 Contract # 6898 Please find below our responses in italics to the MY-03 Monitoring Report comments from NCDMS received on February 6, 2023, for the Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site.  Please ensure the Monitoring Phase Performance Bond has been updated and approved by Kristie Corson before invoicing for Task 10. KCI Response: The Performance Bond will be updated as necessary before Task 10 is invoiced.  Title Page: Please add DMS RFP No. 16-006706 and Date of Issue: October 21, 2015. KCI Response: This change has been made.  Photo on cover page is from the MY3 report. Please update with a current photo of the site. KCI Response: This change has been made.  Thank you for addressing the IRT concerns from the 2023 Credit Release Meeting.  Monitoring Results: Piping structures are discussed in the section. Please include the total number of piping structures. Currently report says two on T6, one on T5 and majority on T4. CCPV indicates three structures are located on T4. Please update. KCI Response: That is the correct number of structures. The report has been updated to reflect this.  Please include an update of piping structures in future reports and DMS recommends including photos of piping structures in future reports. KCI Response: Piping structures will continue to be assessed and reported on in future monitoring years. Photos of these structures will be included in the MY05 report.  Live stakes were installed on April 18, 2023. Please include the quantity and species that were installed and the locations on the CCPV. KCI Response: This information has been added to the report. E NGINEERS  S CIENTISTS  S URVEYORS  C ONSTRUCTION M ANAGERS 4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 (919) 783-9214 (919) 783-9266 Fax KCI ASSOCIATES OF N ORTH C AROLINA, P.A. www.kci.com Employee-Owned Since 1988  Table 2: Please include the live stake supplemental planting and invasive species treatment that occurred in MY4. KCI Response: This change has been made.  T8A stream flow gauge graph indicates that there was a camera malfunction. Has this camera been repaired or replaced? KCI Response: This camera has been replaced with a functioning one.  Please continue to include Appendix F from previous year report in all monitoring reports. The IRT communications are helpful for reviewing the site history. KCI Response: Appendix F has been included in the report. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these responses. Sincerely, Adam Spiller Project Manager Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 MY04 Monitoring Report TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1 SUCCESS CRITERIA .................................................................................................................................. 2 MONITORING RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 3 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................. 5 Appendix A – Background Tables Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 7 Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History .......................................................................................... 9 Table 3. Project Contacts ............................................................................................................................ 10 Table 4. Project Information ....................................................................................................................... 11 Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data CCPV .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment ........................................................................ 17 Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment. ............................................................................................... 33 Photo Reference Points ............................................................................................................................... 34 Appendix C – Vegetation Plot Data Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species ...................................................................... 39 Appendix D – Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data Table 9. Baseline Stream Data Summary ................................................................................................... 41 Table 10. Cross-section Morphology Data Table ....................................................................................... 54 Appendix E – Hydrologic Data 30/70 Percipitation Plot ............................................................................................................................... 59 Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events .................................................................................................. 60 Stream Level Hydrographs ......................................................................................................................... 61 Table 12. Verification of Stream Flow ....................................................................................................... 63 Table 13. Stream Flow Criteria Attainment ................................................................................................ 63 Stream Flow Hydrographs .......................................................................................................................... 64 Table 14. Wetland Hydrology Verification ................................................................................................ 67 Wetland Hydrographs ................................................................................................................................. 68 Appendix F – Additional Information IRT 8/15/2022 Meeting Minutes................................................................................................................. 71 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 1 MY04 Monitoring Report PROJECT SUMMARY The Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site (MDCRS) was completed in March 2020 and restored and enhanced a total of 13,505 linear feet of stream. The MDCRS is a riparian system in the Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin (3040101 8-digit cataloging unit) in Yadkin County, North Carolina. The site’s natural hydrologic regime had been substantially modified through the relocation and straightening of the existing stream channels, livestock impacts, and clearing of riparian buffer. This completed project will restore streams impacted by pasture and agriculture to a stable headwater ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer and floodplain access. The MDCRS is protected by a 40.2 acre permanent conservation easement, held by the State of North Carolina. The site is located approximately 0.5 miles north of East Bend, NC. Specifically, the site is 0.2 mile north on Shady Grove Church Road (SR-1538) from its intersection with Shoals Road (SR-1546). The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) published the Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) in 2009. The project’s 14 digit CU (03040101110070, Grassy Creek and Horne Creek) was identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the RBRP. The goals and priorities for the MDCRS are based on the information presented in the Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities: maintaining and enhancing water quality, restoring hydrology, and improving fish and wildlife habitat (NCEEP, 2009). The project will support the following basin priorities: ‐ Managing stormwater runoff ‐ Reducing fecal coliform inputs ‐ Improving/restoring riparian buffers ‐ Reducing sediment loading ‐ Improving stream stability ‐ Reducing nutrient loading ‐ Excluding livestock and implementing other agricultural BMP’s ‐ Protecting high-resource value waters, including water supply watershed designated waters The project is also located in the Ararat River Local Watershed Plan (LWP) study area. The Ararat River was designated a LWP Study Area due to poor water quality and aquatic habitat degradation issues, as well as the presence of good candidate sites for stream restoration in rural catchments (NCEEP, 2009). The stressors within the Ararat River LWP are erosion and sedimentation, missing or degraded riparian buffers, stormwater runoff, and nutrient and fecal coliform “hot spots” (NCEEP, 2013). The goals for the project are to: ‐ Restore channelized and livestock-impacted streams to stable C and B type channels. ‐ Restore a forested riparian buffer to provide bank stability, filtration, and shading. The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives: ‐ Relocate or stabilize channelized and/or incised streams to connect to a floodplain or floodprone area. ‐ Install a cross-section sized to the bankfull discharge. ‐ Create bedform diversity with pools, riffles, and habitat structures ‐ Fence out livestock to reduce nutrient, bacterial, and sediment impacts from adjacent grazing and farming practices to the project tributaries ‐ Plant the site with native trees and shrubs and an herbaceous seed mix. Project construction was completed in December 2019 and project planting was completed in March 2020. The 13,505 linear feet of streams at MDCRS were enhanced and restored by re-meandering the stream and by tying the bankfull elevation to the historic floodplain where feasible. The entire site was planted to Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 2 MY04 Monitoring Report establish a forested riparian buffer. The site was constructed as designed with only minor modifications from the design plan. These modifications generally consisted of slight adjustments in the alignment and spacing of riffles/pools due to bedrock encountered during construction. Several areas of additional bank stabilization were also installed. On February 6, 2020, shortly after construction was completed and before woody stems had been planted, the site received over 6 inches of rain in a 24 hour period. This storm caused significant damage to portions of the site and required repairs to the site, which were completed in March 2020. These repairs mainly involved repair of bank erosion through the installation of live lifts, removal of aggradation from the stream channel, and regrading areas of floodplain scour. Approximately 500 cubic yards of topsoil were also brought in and placed on the floodplain in areas of severe scour. Additional heavy precipitation events took place in the fall of 2020. These events caused isolated areas of bank erosion and the movement of a boulder sill. In July 2021, these areas were repaired by sloping back the eroding banks, reapplying coir matting, installing new live stakes, and repairing the damaged boulder sill on UTHC 4-1. The monitoring components were installed in March/April 2020. Five automatically recording pressure transducer stream gauges that take a reading every 10 minutes were installed: one each in the upper third of T1A, T5A, and T8A to document flow within those reaches, and two on UTHC to record the occurrence of bankfull events. Cameras were installed in the vicinity of each of the flow gauges and set to record a short video once a day to provide additional verification of flow. Two automatically recording pressure transducer groundwater monitoring gauges were installed within pre-existing wetlands on the site to monitor wetland hydrology and ensure the existing wetlands on the site are not adversely affected by the restoration project. One of these gauges is located in the vicinity of the pre-existing wetland on the left bank of T7 and the other is located within the pre-existing wetland on the right bank of T8. To determine the success of the planted mitigation areas, eighteen 10 m x 10 m permanent vegetation monitoring plots were established. An additional twelve 10 m x 10 m random temporary vegetation monitoring plots are sampled during each monitoring year as well. The locations of the planted stems relative to the origin were recorded within the permanent plots and the species and height of each planted stem were recorded for all plots. Any volunteers found within the plots were grouped into size categories by species, but separate from the planted stems. Twelve permanent photo reference points were established and are taken annually. Thirty-two permanent cross-sections (24 riffle cross-sections and 8 pool cross-sections) were also established and a detailed longitudinal profile of the stream was taken. Wolman pebble counts were performed at all of the riffle cross-sections. The cross-section measurements are repeated in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7, but the longitudinal profile and Wolman pebble counts will only be repeated if there are concerns about bed elevation adjustments. Reports will be submitted to DMS each year. SUCCESS CRITERIA Vegetative success criteria for the stream mitigation is 260 woody stems/acre after five years, and 210 woody stems/acre after seven years. Trees in each plot must average seven feet in height at Year 5 and ten feet in height at Year 7. Volunteer species must be present for a minimum of two growing seasons and must be a species from the approved planting list to count toward vegetative success. A single species may not account for more than 50% of the required number of stems within any plot. A minimum of four bankfull events must also be recorded during the monitoring period. All project streams must show a minimum of 30 continuous days of flow within a calendar year (assuming normal precipitation) A “normal” year is based on NRCS climatological data for Yadkin County with the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as documented in the USACE Technical Report “Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000.” Bank height ratios (BHR) should not exceed 1.2 and the entrenchment ratios (ER) should be 2.2 or greater. BHR and ER at any measured riffle cross-section should not change more than 10% from the previous Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 3 MY04 Monitoring Report condition during any given monitoring interval (e.g. no more than 10% between years 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 5, or 5 and 7). Visual assessments will also be used to identify problem areas. MONITORING RESULTS Neither vegetation nor cross-section monitoring were conducted during MY04, as stipulated in the Mitigation Plan. Vegetation and cross-section monitoring will resume in MY05. During MY03, it was noted that the bed and banks of both XS24 and XS25 had aggraded. These cross- sections are located along the lower portion of T6. This reach is a small stream with an un-stabilized section above the project reaches. During MY04, KCI investigated the upper portions of this stream to determine the source of the sediment that has been moving through the project reaches. It was found that there are some areas of erosion within the cattle pasture just off site. Due to the topography of this area, loose sediment produced by this erosion is washed into the crossing on T6, where it enters the project reach. This has lead to aggradation on T6 just downstream from the crossing, until the confluence with T6A. At this point the grade of the stream increases from about 2.8% to 4.2% and the stream is able to move the sediment through the reach effectively. Once T6 reaches the floodplain of UTHC, the grade decreases to approximately 1.5% and the sediment drops out. This lower portion of T6 is where XS24 and XS25 are located. Despite the aggradation that has built up in these two areas, the stream has maintained a defined bed and banks throughout the entire reach and the development of additional flow paths has not been noted. The stream is still functioning as a stream, and KCI does not believe that this aggradation represents a threat to project success but is just the natural evolution of the project within its watershed. During a site walk on December 18, 2023, several piping structures were noted. Two of these are at the beginning of the aggradation along the lower reach of T6 described above. One more is located near the bottom of T5 and three are located along T4. Piping along T4 has been caused by the steep slope of the project stream. Despite this piping, all of the structures on this reach are maintaining their grade. KCI will continue to monitor these structures carefully and is evaluating the need for repairs in this area. During 2023, the stream gauge on UTHC-1 recorded 9 bankfull events, while the gauge on UTHC-3 recorded 7 bankfull events. All three of the reaches being monitored for flow demonstrated more than 30 consecutive days of flow during 2023. The gauge on T1A recorded a maximum of 79 consecutive days. The gauge on T5A recorded flow for 335 consecutive days (the entire period of record for 2022) and the gauge on T8A recorded a maximum of 220 consecutive days. The gauge data was further verified by the cameras on site. Based on the video recordings obtained from the cameras, T1A had a maximum of 83 consecutive days of flow, T5A had a maximum of 140 consecutive days of flow, and T8A had a maximum of 80 consecutive days of flow. The differences between the number of days of flow documented by the cameras versus the gauges is largely due to extended periods of time during which the cameras were obscured by vegetation during the growing season and periods of time when the stream flow was at levels too low for the gauges to record. On August 15, 2022, the IRT met on-site to evaluate the site conditions and see the results of the July 2021 repairs. At this meeting the IRT requested that KCI add live stakes to the outer bend areas that were repaired. Approximately 150 black willow (Salix nigra) live stakes were planted in these outer bends on April 18, 2023. While no areas of thick invasives were noted, there were scattered individuals of Chinese privet, mainly in areas of the site that had existing forest that were not cleared during construction. Invasives on site were treated on June 15, 2023 by mechanical cutting and spraying the stumps with herbicide. KCI will continue to monitor the site for invasives and any other threats to project success. Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 4 MY04 Monitoring Report The site boundaries were inspected on December 18, 2023 and no areas of encroachment were noted. Small trees have fallen on the fence in several of the areas along the boundary north of T6, but these have since been removed and have not damaged the fence significantly. No other areas of damage to the fence were noted. REFERENCES NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009. Raleigh, NC. https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Yadkin_River_B asin/2009%20Upper%20Yadkin%20RBRP_Final%20Final%2C%2026feb%2709.pdf NCDEQ, Division of Mitigation Services. June 2017. “As-built Baseline Monitoring Report Format, Data and Content Requirement.” https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Libra ry/Guidance%20and%20Template%20Documents/6_AB_Baseline__Rep_Templ_June %202017.pdf NCIRT. October 24, 2016. “Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.” https://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington-District-Mitigation- Update.pdf USACE, Sprecher, S. W.; Warne, A. G. 2000. “Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology.” https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/ADA378910.xhtml NC-67 Silo a m R d Flint H i l l R d F o r b u s h R d Main St Hauser Rd Sho a l s R d Uni o n H i l l R d S h o a l s R d Mill H i l l R d Mt Be t h e l C h R d Smit h t o w n R d B u t n e r M i l l R d A p p e r s o n R d Pride's Rd Indi a n H e a p s R d Hol l y S p r i n g s R d C a u d l e R d Stony Ridge Rd S h a d y G r o v e C h u r c h R d Butner R d MacEd o n i a R d Ba l t i m o r e R d Nunn Rd Smithe r m a n R d B o r d e n L n Old M i l l R d M a r t i n s M i l l R d Mo c c a s i n G a p R d J o h n S c o t t R d Grassy C r e e k R d Sam S c o t t R d Flin t H i l l R d Aztec Dr Isi a D r He n n i n g s R d NC-67EAST BEND Yadkin River Logan Creek H a l l C r e e k Miller Creek G r a s s y C r e e k Ho r n e C r e e k Marti n M i l l C r e e k Ararat Riv e r H o g a n C r e e k Lo n e y C r e e k Ü 0 10.5 Miles Figure 1. Vicinity Map, Mill Dam Creek, Yadkin County, NC Project EasementCities and Towns StreamsMajor Rivers RoadsState Highway ÊÚ YADKIN COUNTY DAVIE COUNTY SURRY COUNTY ROWAN COUNTY Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 6 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX A Background Tables Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 7 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Mitigation Credits Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Wetland Buffer Nitrogen Nutrient Offset Phosphorous Nutrient Offset Type R RE R RE R RE R RE Linear Feet/Acres 7,166 6,340 Credits 7,166.000 3,124.666 TOTAL CREDITS 10,290.666 Project Components Project Component -or- Reach ID Stationing/ Location Existing Footage/ Acreage Restoration Footage or Acreage Creditable Footage or Acreage Restoration Level Approach (PI, PII etc.) Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Mitigation Credits Notes/Comments UTHC1 Top 10+00- 22+81 1,333 1,281 1,249 R P2 10+00- 11+50, then P1 1 1,249.000 Crossing Exception STA 20+51 – 20+83 UTHC1 Bottom 22+81- 27+39 541 457 438 R P1, then P2 24+50-27+39 1 438.000 Crossing Exception STA 25+72 – 25+91 UTHC2 27+39- 42+32 1,494 1,493 1,493 EI N/A 1.5 995.333 UTHC3 42+32- 55+57 1,411 1,325 1,240 R P1 except P2 42+32-44+00 and 53+50- 55+57 1 1,240.000 Utility Exception STA54+07 – 54+49 Crossing Exception STA 55+14 – 55+57 UTHC4-1 55+57- 58+53 1,840 297 297 EI N/A 1.5 198.000 UTHC4-2 58+53- 63+75 521 521 EII N/A 2.5 208.400 UTHC4-3 63+75- 68+55 481 419 EI N/A 1.5 279.333 Crossing Exception STA 63+75 -64+37 UTHC4-4 68+55- 73+97 542 497 EII N/A 2.5 199.800 Utility Exception STA 68+55 – 69+00 T1 100+00- 107+51 764 751 734 R P2 100+00- 101+80, then P1 1 734.000 Crossing Exception STA 104+00-104+16 T1A 150+00- 157+95 746 795 795 R P2 1 795.000 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 8 MY04 Monitoring Report Project Component -or- Reach ID Stationing/ Location Existing Footage/ Acreage Restoration Footage or Acreage Creditable Footage or Acreage Restoration Level Approach (PI, PII etc.) Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Mitigation Credits Notes/Comments T2-1 200+00- 204+98 499 498 498 EII N/A 2.5 199.200 T2-2 204+98- 207+63 232 265 265 R P2 1 265.000 T3 300+00- 303+69 378 369 369 R P1/P2 1 369.000 T4 400+00- 401+51 151 151 151 R P1 1 151.000 T5 1000+00- 1012+13 1,205 1,213 1,182 EII N/A 2.5 472.800 Crossing Exception STA 1003+59- 1003+90 T5A 1200+00- 1200+65 65 65 65 EII N/A 2.5 26.000 T5B 1300+00- 1304+38 438 438 438 EII N/A 2.5 175.200 T6-1 600+00- 603+22 325 322 259 EII N/A 2.5 103.600 Crossing Exception STA 602+59 – 603+22 T6-2 603+22- 609+80 621 658 658 R P1 1 658.000 T6A-1 650+00- 650+60 60 60 60 EII N/A 2.5 24.000 T6A-2 650+60- 651+61 97 101 101 R P1 1 101.000 T7-1 700+00- 701+65 165 165 165 EII N/A 2.5 66.000 T7-2 701+65- 705+13 335 348 348 R P1 1 348.000 T8-1 800+00- 804+45 445 445 445 EII N/A 2.5 178.000 T8-2 804+45- 808+94 486 448 426 R P1 1 426.000 Crossing Exception STA 808+20 – 808+42 T8A 850+00- 852+63 258 263 263 R P1 1 263.000 T9 900+00- 901+29 133 129 129 R P1, then P2 900+71-901+29 1 129.000 TOTAL 14,024 13,882 13,505 10,290.666 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 9 MY04 Monitoring Report Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Actual Completion or Delivery Mitigation Plan Dec. 7, 2018 Final Design - Construction Plans Jan. 14, 2019 Construction Grading Completed Dec. 12, 2019 Repairs from Storm Damage March 26, 2020 Planting Completed March 26, 2020 Baseline Monitoring/Report April 2020 May 2020 Vegetation Monitoring April 24, 2020 Stream Survey April 16, 2020 Year 1 Monitoring December 2020 December 2020 Vegetation Monitoring October 28, 2020 Stream Survey December 22, 2020 Repairs from Storm Damage July 23, 2021 Year 2 Monitoring November 2021 December 2021 Vegetation Monitoring July 22, 2021 Stream Survey July 22, 2021 Year 3 Monitoring January 2023 January 2023 Vegetation Monitoring August 4, 2022 Stream Survey January 12, 2023 Live stake supplemental planting April 18, 2023 Invasive Treatment June 15, 2023 Year 4 Monitoring December 2023 January 2024 Table 2. Project Activity & Reporting History Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Component Summation Restoration Level Stream (linear feet) Riparian Wetlands (Acres) Non-Riparian Wetlands (Acres) Buffer (square feet) Riverine Non-Riverine Restoration 7,166 Enhancement Enhancement I 2,209 Enhancement II 4,130 Creation Preservation High Quality Preservation Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 10 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 3. Project Contacts Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Design Firm KCI Associates of North Carolina 4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller Phone: (919) 278-2514 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Construction Contractor Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc. PO Box 1905 Mount Airy, NC 27030 Contact: Mr. Wayne Taylor Phone: (336)320-3849 Planting Contractor Shenandoah Habitats 1983 Jefferson Highway Waynesboro, VA 22980 Contact: Mr. David Coleman Phone: (540) 941-0067 Monitoring Performers KCI Associates of North Carolina 4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609 Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller Phone: (919) 278-2514 Fax: (919) 783-9266 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 11 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 4. Project Information Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Project Name Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site County Yadkin County Project Area 40.2 acres Project Coordinates (lat. and long.) 36.2390 °N, 80.5201°W Planted Acreage (acres of woody stems planted) 29.2 acres Project Watershed Summary Information Physiographic Province Piedmont River Basin Yadkin USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 030401014 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03010101110070 DWQ Sub-basin 03-07-02 Project Drainage Area (acres) 400 acres Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 3% CGIA Land Use Classification Forest (45%), Pasture/Farmland (39%), Low-density Residential Development (15%), and Roads (1%) Existing Reach Summary Information Parameters All Reaches Combined Length of reach (linear feet) 14,024 Valley confinement Partially confined to confined Drainage area (acres) 400 acres Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Intermittent – Perennial NCDWQ Water Quality Classification C (Aquatic Life, Secondary Recreation) Rosgen Stream Classification (Existing / Proposed) F4/G4/C4/B4 Evolutionary trend (Simon) Stage III FEMA classification Zone AE at confluence of T8 and Hall Creek, otherwise none Existing Wetland Summary Information Parameters WA, WB, WE, WG, WK WC WH, WI , WJ Size of Wetland (acres) 0.23 0.10 0.10 Wetland Type Riparian Non-riverine Riparian Non-riverine Riparian Non-riverine Mapped Soil Series Fairview Fairview Siloam Drainage class Well drained Well drained Well drained Soil Hydric Status Non-Hydric Non-Hydric Non-Hydric Source of Hydrology Groundwater Groundwater Groundwater Restoration or Enhancement Method N/A (Preservation) Areas of erosion to stabilize N/A (Preservation) Regulatory Considerations Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Waters of the United States – Section 404 Yes NWP 27 Preliminary JD Waters of the United States – Section 401 Yes NWP 27 Preliminary JD Endangered Species Act Yes Yes USFWS Historic Preservation Act No Yes NCSHPO Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) No N/A N/A FEMA Floodplain Compliance No Yes N/A Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 12 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX B Visual Assessment Data DD DDD DDD^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ")")")")")") ") ") ") ") ") ")")") ") ") ") ")") ")") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ")") ") ")")") ") ") ") ")")")")") ")")")")")")")")")")")")")") ")") ")") ")") ") ") ")") ") ") ")")")")")")")")") ")")")")")")")")")")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")")")") ") ")")")")")")")")")")") ")")")")")")")")") UTHC 4-4 ! UTHC 4-3 UTHC 4-2 !T9! UTHC 4-1! T7 ! T7-2 !! T8-1 ! T8-2 T8A! UTHC3 T6-1 ! T5B ! ! T6A-1 T6-2 ! T5 ! T5A! ! T4 ! T3 T2-1 ! UTHC2 !T2-2 ! UTHC1 Bottom UTHC1 Top ! !T1A ! T1 ! ! ! ! T6A-2 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Ü 0 1,000500Feet Current Conditions Plan ViewMill Dam Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project #97136Yadkin County, NCOverview Page Image Source: NC OneMap Orthoimagery, 2015. Project EasementExisting WetlandsStream MitigationR(7,165 lf / 7,165 SMC's)EI (2,209 lf / 1,472 SMC's)EII (4,130 lf / 1,653 SMC's)AggradationStructures ")Functioning ")Piping Bankfull GaugeCameraFlow GaugeWetland Gauge ^_Photo PointsCross-Sections DDDDDDDDDD Live Staked AreasInvasive TreatmentVegetation Monitoring PlotsSuccess Criteria MetSuccess Criteria Not Met ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ")")")")")") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ")")") ") ")")")")")")")") ")") ")")")") ")") ")") 151+00 !T1A ! T1 ! UTHC1 Top !UTHC1 Bottom ! T2-1!T2-2 ! T3 T4 ! T5A ! T5 !UTHC2 33+00 32+00 31+00 30+00 29+00 28+00 27+00 26+00 25+00 24+00 23+00 22+00 21+00 20+00 19+00 18+00 17+00 16+00 15+00 14+00 13+00 12+00 11+00 10+00 149+00 401+00 400+00 157+00 156+00 155+00 154+00 153+00 152+00 151+00 150+00 303+00 302+00 301+00 300+00 207+00 206+00205+00 204+00 203+00202+00 201+00200+00 107+00106+00 105+00104+00 103+00102+00 101+00 100+00 1004+00 1003+001002+001001+001000+00 PP1 PP3 PP4 PP5 3 2 1 6 7 4 5 R5 R3 R2 R4 R1 XS 18 X S 2 2 R6 XS 2XS 3 XS 1 XS 5XS 4 X S 1 4 XS 15 XS 16 X S 6 X S 1 7 XS 19 X S 2 1 X S 2 0 Ü 0 350175Feet Current Conditions Plan ViewMill Dam Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project #97136Yadkin County, NC Image Source: NC OneMap Orthoimagery, 2015. Project EasementExisting WetlandsStream MitigationR(7,165 lf / 7,165 SMC's)EI (2,209 lf / 1,472 SMC's)EII (4,130 lf / 1,653 SMC's)AggradationStructures ")Functioning ")Piping Bankfull GaugeCameraFlow GaugeWetland Gauge ^_Photo Points Cross-Sections DDDDDDDDD Live Staked AreasInvasive TreatmentVegetation Monitoring PlotsSuccess Criteria MetSuccess Criteria Not Met Page 1 ^_^_ ^_ ^_ DDDDD D D DDDDDD DDDDD D D ")")")")")") ")") ")") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ")")")")") ")") ")") ")")") ")")")")")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") 606+00 T3 T4 ! T5A ! T5 T5B T6A-1 !T6A-2 T6-2 ! ! UTHC3 ! T7 ! T7-2 ! UTHC4-1 55+00 54+00 53+00 52+00 51+00 50+00 49+00 48+00 47+00 46+00 45+00 44+00 43+00 42+00 41+00 40+00 39+00 38+00 37+00 36+00 35+00 34+00 33+00 32+00 31+00 30+00 29+00 401+00 400+00 705+00 704+00 703+00 702+00 701+00 700+00 651+00 650+00 609+00 608+00 607+00 605+00 604+00 603+00 602+00 601+00 600+00 302+00 301+00 300+00 1304+00 1303+00 1301+00 1300+00 1302+00 1012+001011+001010+00 1009+00 1 0 0 8 +0 0 1007+00 1006+00 1005+00 1004+00 1003+001002+001001+001000+00 PP5 PP8 PP7 9 7 8 R9 11 12 10 R8 R7 X S 7 XS 10 X S 2 2 13 XS 8XS 9 XS 25 X S 6 XS 24 XS 26 X S 27 XS 23 Ü 0 350175Feet Current Conditions Plan ViewMill Dam Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project #97136Yadkin County, NC Image Source: NC OneMap Orthoimagery, 2015. Project EasementExisting WetlandsStream MitigationR(7,165 lf / 7,165 SMC's)EI (2,209 lf / 1,472 SMC's)EII (4,130 lf / 1,653 SMC's)AggradationStructures ")Functioning ")Piping Bankfull GaugeCameraFlow GaugeWetland Gauge ^_Photo Points Cross-Sections DDDDDDDDD Live Staked AreasInvasive TreatmentVegetation Monitoring PlotsSuccess Criteria MetSuccess Criteria Not Met Page 2 ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ DDDDDDD ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ")") ") ")")") ")")")") ")")")")") 62+00 61+00 T7-2 ! UTHC4-1 ! UTHC4-2 ! T9 ! UTHC4-3 ! UTHC4-4 ! T8-2 ! T8 T8A ! ! 73+00 72+00 71+00 70+00 69+00 68+00 67+00 66+00 65+00 64+0063+00 60+0059+00 58+00 57+00 56+00 55+00 54+00 53+00 52+00 51+00 50+00 49+00 901+00900+00 852+00 851+00 850+00808+00 807+00 806+00 805+00 804+00803+00 802+00 801+00800+00 705+00 704+00 703+00 702+00 701+00 PP8 PP9 PP10 PP12 PP11 15 16 11 17 12 14 R8 R11R12 XS 1018 13 R10 XS 13 X S 1 1 XS 12 XS 28 XS 30 X S 2 9XS 32 XS 26 X S 27 X S 3 1 Ü 0 350175Feet Current Conditions Plan ViewMill Dam Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project #97136Yadkin County, NC Image Source: NC OneMap Orthoimagery, 2015. Project EasementExisting WetlandsStream MitigationR(7,165 lf / 7,165 SMC's)EI (2,209 lf / 1,472 SMC's)EII (4,130 lf / 1,653 SMC's)AggradationStructures ")Functioning ")Piping Bankfull GaugeCameraFlow GaugeWetland Gauge ^_Photo Points Cross-Sections DDDDDDDDD Live Staked AreasInvasive TreatmentVegetation Monitoring PlotsSuccess Criteria MetSuccess Criteria Not Met Page 3 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 17 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID UTHC1 Assessed Length 1,739 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 30 30 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 29 29 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)29 29 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 29 29 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 29 29 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 22 22 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 22 22 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 22 22 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 22 22 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.22 22 100% Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 18 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID UTHC2 Assessed Length 1,494 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 8 8 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 8 8 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)8 8 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 8 8 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 8 8 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 0 0 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 0 0 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 0 0 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 00 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.00 Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 19 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID UTHC3 Assessed Length 1,325 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 18 18 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 17 17 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)17 17 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 17 17 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 17 17 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 8 8 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 8 8 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.8 8 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Meander Pool Condition 4.Thalweg Position 1. Bed 2. Bank Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 20 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID UTHC4-1 Assessed Length 297 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 3 3 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 3 3 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)3 3 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 3 3 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 3 3 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 2 2 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 2 2 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 2 2 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 2 2 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.2 2 100% Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 3. Engineered Structures 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Meander Pool Condition 4.Thalweg Position 1. Bed 2. Bank Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 21 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID UTHC4-3 Assessed Length 419 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 4 4 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 3 3 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)3 3 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 3 3 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 3 3 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 1 1 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 1 1 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 1 1 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 1 1 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.1 1 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Meander Pool Condition 4.Thalweg Position 1. Bed 2. Bank Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 22 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T1 Assessed Length 751 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 16 16 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 16 16 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)16 16 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 16 16 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 16 16 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 8 8 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 8 8 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.8 8 100% Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Bed Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 23 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T1A Assessed Length 795 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 16 16 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 16 16 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)16 16 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 16 16 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 16 16 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 11 11 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 11 11 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 11 11 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 11 11 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.11 11 100% 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Bed Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 24 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T2-2 Assessed Length 265 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 8 8 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 7 7 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)7 7 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 7 7 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 7 7 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 5 5 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 5 5 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 5 5 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 5 5 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.5 5 100% Totals Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Bed Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 25 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T3 Assessed Length 369 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 13 13 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 12 12 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)12 12 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 12 12 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 12 12 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 14 14 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 14 14 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 14 14 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 14 14 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.14 14 100% Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 4.Thalweg Position Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Totals Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 26 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T4 Assessed Length 151 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 7 7 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 7 7 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)7 7 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 7 7 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 7 7 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 6 6 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 6 6 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 3 6 50% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 6 6 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.6 6 100% Totals 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Meander Pool Condition 4.Thalweg Position 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 27 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T6-2 Assessed Length 658 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)231752% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 15 15 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 15 15 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)15 15 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 15 15 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 15 15 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 16 16 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 16 16 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 14 16 88% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 16 16 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.16 16 100% Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Totals 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 28 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T6A-2 Assessed Length 101 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 3 3 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 3 3 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)3 3 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 3 3 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 3 3 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 6 6 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 6 6 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 6 6 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 6 6 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.6 6 100% Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Totals Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 29 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T7-2 Assessed Length 348 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 6 6 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 6 6 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)6 6 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 6 6 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 6 6 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 4 4 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 4 4 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 4 4 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 4 4 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.4 4 100% Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 4.Thalweg Position Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Totals Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 30 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T8-2 Assessed Length 448 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 10 10 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 10 10 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)10 10 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 10 10 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 10 10 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 12 12 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 12 12 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 12 12 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 12 12 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.12 12 100% Totals 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 31 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T8A Assessed Length 262 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 7 7 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 7 7 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)7 7 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 7 7 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 7 7 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 7 7 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 7 7 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 7 7 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 7 7 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.7 7 100% Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 3. Meander Pool Condition Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended 4.Thalweg Position 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) Totals Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 32 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Reach ID T9 Assessed Length 129 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars)0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 4 4 100% 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 3 3 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)3 3 100% 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 3 3 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 3 3 100% 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 2. Undercut Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat. 0 0 100% 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 4 4 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 4 4 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 4 4 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 4 4 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.4 4 100% Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Major Channel Category Channel Sub-Category Metric Number Stable, Performing as Intended Total Number in As-built Number of Unstable Segments 4.Thalweg Position 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 3. Engineered Structures 2. Bank 1. Bed Totals Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 33 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site, DMS Project # 97136 Planted Acreage 29.5 Assessment Date: 12/18/2023 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold CCPV Depiction Number of Polygons Combined Acreage % of Planted Acreage 1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.1 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0% 2. Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria.0.1 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0% 00.000.0% 3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year.0.25 acres Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0% 00.000.0% Easement Acreage 20.6 Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold CCPV Depiction Number of Polygons Combined Acreage % of Easement Acreage 4. Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).1000 SF Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0% 5. Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).none Pattern and Color 0 0.00 0.0% Total Cumulative Total Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 34 MY04 Monitoring Report Photo Reference Photos PP1 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP1 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP2 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP2 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP3 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP3 – MY04 – 12/18/23 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 35 MY04 Monitoring Report PP4 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP4 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP5 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP5 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP6 – MY00 – 4/16/20 PP6 – MY04 – 12/18/23 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 36 MY04 Monitoring Report PP7 – MY00 – 4/16/20 PP7 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP8 – MY00 – 4/16/20 PP8 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP9 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP9 – MY04 – 12/18/23 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 37 MY04 Monitoring Report PP10 – MY00 – 4/17/20 PP10 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP11 – MY00 – 4/16/20 PP11 – MY04 – 12/18/23 PP12 – MY00 – 4/16/20 PP12 – MY04 – 12/18/23 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 38 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX C Vegetation Plot Data Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 39 MY04 Monitoring Report Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total American Holly (Ilex opaca )1 American Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana )2 American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis )163 272 204 232 159 207 88 88 Black Cherry (Prunus serotina )6 Black Walnut (Juglans nigra )28 13 6 4 Black Willow (Salix nigra )91139431414 5 5 Boxelder (Acer negundo )63 37 20 Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis )11 Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana )6 1 Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis )112 Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida )3 Ironwood (Ostrya virginiana )11 Northern Red Oak (Quercus rubra )23 1 1 1 Oak (Quercus sp.)20 6 20 6 Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana )410 1 1 Pin Oak (Quercus palustris )17 17 22 22 20 20 Red Maple (Acer rubrum )36 8 River Birch (Betula nigra )117 118 7 6 76 83 85 107 107 Sassafras (Sassafras albidum )1 Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata )8 Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum )34 Silver Willow (Salix sericea )2 Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata )11 5 Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii )16 16 14 14 15 15 20 20 Tag alder (Alnus serrulata )3 Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera )76 81 88 92 99 109 172 172 Water Oak (Quercus nigra )3 Witch Hazel (Hamamelis virginiana )2 White Oak (Quercus alba )7 7 12 13 10 12 Willow Oak (Quercus phellos )182 183 180 180 220 223 30 30 Unknown 89 89 597 896 636 725 620 731 718 723 12 26 9 13 8 17 9 11 805 1,209 858 978 836 986 969 975 Species count Stems per ACRE 30 30 3030 size (ACRES)0.741 0.741 0.741 0.741 Stem count size (ares) Table 7. Stem Count by Plot and Species Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Species MY00 (2020)MY03 (2022) MY02 (2021) MY01 (2020) Annual Means Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 40 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX D Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 41 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 8a. UTHC-1 Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.8 – 10.6 9.0 – 10.0 6.5 – 9 6.0 7.6 8.9 3 Floodprone Width (ft) 9.0 – 27.3 13 – 21 50 59.1 64.6 68.3 3 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 – 0.8 1.1 – 1.2 0.5 – 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 – 1.2 1.3 – 1.5 0.8 – 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 3 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.8 – 4.5 10.4 – 10.7 3.4 – 6.1 4.5 5.1 5.5 3 Width/Depth Ratio 7.6 – 28.2 8 – 10 12.4 – 13.4 8.2 11.6 14.4 3 Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 – 2.6 1.3 – 2.3 5.6 – 7.7 6.6 8.7 11.0 3 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 – 10.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 45 26 – 61 26 – 61 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 13 – 42 18 – 27 18 – 27 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 1.3 – 4.4 2.0 – 4.1 2.0 – 4.1 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 93 – 136 54 – 125 54 – 125 Meander Width Ratio * 4.5 – 5.0 4.0 – 7.5 4.0 – 7.5 Riffle Length (ft) * 4.2 27.2 40.9 30 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.024 – 0.033 0.013 – 0.028 0.018 – 0.046 0.011 0.024 0.059 30 Pool Length (ft) * 9.8 61.1 161.9 28 Pool Spacing (ft) * 30 – 59 48 – 70 31.3 59.3 118.6 27 SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 2/18/51/28/0/0 1/19/51/26/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 1.3/18/37/97/130 Gravel Gravel 1.3/9.7/31/91/147 Channel length (ft) 1,874 1,739 1,739 Drainage Area (acres) 114 Variable 114 114 Rosgen Classification F4 B4c C4 C4 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.021 0.013 0.025 0.026 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 42 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9b. UTHC3 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 8.5 – 14.1 9.0 – 10.0 12 10.9 11.3 11.7 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 17.1 13 – 21 68 69.4 72.6 75.8 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 – 1.6 1.1 – 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.1 – 2.0 1.3 – 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.7 2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 8.5 – 12.5 10.4 – 10.7 11.4 10.6 12.0 13.3 2 Width/Depth Ratio 17 8 – 10 12.7 10.2 10.7 11.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 1.3 – 2.3 5.7 5.9 6.5 7.0 2 Bank Height Ratio 3.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 45 39 – 57 39 – 57 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 13 – 42 24 – 36 24 – 36 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 1.3 – 4.4 24 – 36 24 – 36 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 93 – 136 111 – 173 111 – 173 Meander Width Ratio * 4.5 – 5.0 3.3 – 4.8 3.3 – 4.8 Profile Riffle Length (ft) * 18.2 46.0 85.8 18 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.015 0.013 – 0.028 0.0007 – 0.032 0.003 0.015 0.040 18 Pool Length (ft) * 15.9 26.6 49.1 17 Pool Spacing (ft) * 30 – 59 52 – 101 48.8 75.5 113.5 16 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 3/15/57/19/0/6 0/13/48/37/1/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 2.7/15/26/40/92 Gravel Gravel 2.5/23/48/125/165 Channel length (ft) 1,411 1,325 1,325 Drainage Area (acres) 297 Variable 297 297 Rosgen Classification F4 B4c C4 C4 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.014 0.013 0.015 0.015 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 43 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9c. T1 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built Dimension – Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 4.1 – 7.5 6.5 6.5 Floodprone Width (ft) 6.0 – 32.8 35 48.4 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 – 0.7 0.5 0.6 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8 – 1.0 0.8 1.2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.7 – 3.8 3.4 3.9 Width/Depth Ratio 6.2 – 14.9 12 – 18 12.4 10.9 Entrenchment Ratio 1.5 – 4.4 2.2+ 5.4 7.5 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 – 4.5 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 23 – 41 23 – 41 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 15 – 22 15 – 22 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 2.2 – 3.4 2.2 – 3.4 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 60 – 83 60 – 83 Meander Width Ratio * 3.5 – 6.3 3.5 – 6.3 Profile Riffle Length (ft) * 7.8 22.0 42.2 16 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.019 – 0.028 0.015 – 0.60 0.002 0.022 0.035 16 Pool Length (ft) * 3.5 12.6 20.1 16 Pool Spacing (ft) * 25 – 63 24.4 41.3 58.4 15 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 31/21/44/4/1/0 2/15/66/17/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.13/0.37/3/38/66 Gravel Gravel 1.9/8.8/22/67/94 Channel length (ft) 764 751 751 Drainage Area (acres) 43 Variable 43 43 Rosgen Classification B4, C4, G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.026 N/A 0.026 0.025 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 44 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9d. T1A Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data (SF) Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 7.1 5.5 5.4 5.6 5.8 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 7.7 35 44.5 49.4 54.4 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.8 2.5 1.8 2.1 2.3 2 Width/Depth Ratio 18.2 12 – 18 12.1 14.1 15.0 15.9 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 2.2+ 6.4 7.7 8.9 10.1 2 Bank Height Ratio 19.6 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 20 – 28 20 – 28 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 15 – 22 15 – 22 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 2.3 – 3.4 2.3 – 3.4 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 72 – 84 72 – 84 Meander Width Ratio * 3.6 – 5.1 3.6 – 5.1 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 1.4 20.7 51.8 16 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.025 0.020 – 0.062 0.000 0.025 0.046 16 Pool Length (ft) 4.9 14.7 27.2 16 Pool Spacing (ft) * 32 – 58 32.8 44.7 65.8 15 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 31/51/12/6/0/0 5/19/62/14/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.062/0.072/0.13/2.9/71 Gravel Gravel 0.7/5.8/20/59/99 Channel length (ft) 746 795 795 Drainage Area (acres) 29 Variable 29 29 Rosgen Classification F4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.022 N/A 0.030 0.030 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 45 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9e. T2-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 3.1 4.5 4.7 Floodprone Width (ft) 4 22 24.1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.4 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8 0.6 0.9 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 1.5 1.7 2.3 Width/Depth Ratio 6.3 12 – 18 12.0 9.9 Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 2.2+ 4.9 5.1 Bank Height Ratio 3.3 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 1.6 13.2 40.9 8 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.04 0.024-0.063 0.023 0.049 0.099 8 Pool Length (ft) 3.6 14.8 31.4 7 Pool Spacing (ft) * 21 – 34 24.1 37.8 55.6 6 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 11/14/63/13/0/0 14/30/27/30/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.26/13/21/58/84 Gravel Gravel 0.1/0.7/6/87/130 Channel length (ft) 232 265 265 Drainage Area (acres) 16 Variable 16 16 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.038 N/A 0.042 0.040 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 46 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9f. T3 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 3.5 4.5 4.7 Floodprone Width (ft) 4.2 18 19.2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.4 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 0.6 0.7 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 1.1 1.7 1.9 Width/Depth Ratio 11.3 12 – 18 12.0 11.6 Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 2.2+ 4.0 4.1 Bank Height Ratio 3.3 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 2.2 13.3 25.7 13 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.058 0.051 – 0.074 0.032 0.058 0.125 13 Pool Length (ft) 3.4 9.5 20.7 12 Pool Spacing (ft) * 20 – 30 22.8 28.2 46.7 11 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 28/5/38/27/4 6/11/71/13/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.062/3.1/25/130/240 Gravel Gravel 1.7/7.8/28/61/84 Channel length (ft) 378 369 369 Drainage Area (acres) 7 Variable 7 7 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.059 N/A 0.059 0.057 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 47 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9g. T4 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 2.5 4.5 4.0 Floodprone Width (ft) 4.7 16 18.7 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.6 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 0.6 0.8 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 0.7 1.7 1.9 Width/Depth Ratio 9.4 12 – 18 12.0 8.3 Entrenchment Ratio 1.9 2.2+ 3.6 4.7 Bank Height Ratio 6.9 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 7.9 13.4 22.2 7 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.1 0.102 – 0.103 0.039 0.11 0.23 7 Pool Length (ft) 3.2 5.4 11.0 7 Pool Spacing (ft) * 24 – 27 9.5 19.5 26.5 6 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 12/65/13/8/2/0 0/15/77/8/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.11/0.16/0.21/4.3/120 Gravel Gravel 2.2/9.6/15/48/76 Channel length (ft) 151 151 151 Drainage Area (acres) 3 Variable 3 3 Rosgen Classification B4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.0 1.1 – 1.3 1.0 1.0 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.089 N/A 0.113 0.109 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 48 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9h. T6-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 4.4 5.5 5.6 Floodprone Width (ft) 5.4 24 27.4 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6 0.5 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.7 0.7 1.0 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.6 2.5 2.6 Width/Depth Ratio 7.5 12 – 18 12.1 11.9 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 2.2+ 4.4 4.9 Bank Height Ratio 4.4 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 15.4 25.1 37.9 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.02 0.020 – 0.063 0.007 0.033 0.070 15 Pool Length (ft) 5.9 14.1 22.7 15 Pool Spacing (ft) * 32 – 47 28.8 42.9 50.9 14 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 7/33/60/0/0/0 1/16/53/30/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.19/1.6/4.1/13/27 Gravel Gravel 1.7/16/38/93/140 Channel length (ft) 621 658 658 Drainage Area (acres) 29 Variable 29 29 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.0 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.041 N/A 0.034 0.037 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 49 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9i. T6A-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) ** 4.5 4.4 Floodprone Width (ft) ** 24 25.3 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) ** 0.4 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) ** 0.6 0.6 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) ** 1.7 1.7 Width/Depth Ratio ** 12 – 18 12.0 11.0 Entrenchment Ratio ** 2.2+ 5.3 5.8 Bank Height Ratio ** 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) ** N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) ** N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) ** N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) ** N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio ** N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) ** 9.3 14.8 24.0 3 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) ** 0.087 – 0.099 0.056 0.091 0.118 3 Pool Length (ft) ** 14.2 16.7 19.5 3 Pool Spacing (ft) ** 22 – 23 29.4 30.0 30.6 2 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% ** 0/14/70/16/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) ** Gravel Gravel 2.6/25/36/64/85 Channel length (ft) 97 101 101 Drainage Area (acres) 9 Variable 9 9 Rosgen Classification ** B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity ** 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) ** N/A 0.091 0.095 ** Existing conditions are ponded Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 50 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9j. T7-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 3.2 6.5 10.1 Floodprone Width (ft) 4.6 28 47.4 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 0.5 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.1 0.8 1.0 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.4 3.4 4.3 Width/Depth Ratio 4.1 12 – 18 12.4 23.9 Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 2.2+ 4.3 4.7 Bank Height Ratio 1.7 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * 20 – 24 20 – 24 Radius of Curvature (ft) * 15 – 22 15 – 22 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * 2.3 – 3.4 2.3 – 3.4 Meander Wavelength (ft) * 85 – 88 85 – 88 Meander Width Ratio * 3.1 – 3.7 3.1 – 3.7 Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 4.5 32.4 68.1 6 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.032 0.017 – 0.043 0.015 0.025 0.029 6 Pool Length (ft) 4.9 12.5 19.7 6 Pool Spacing (ft) * 36 – 57 45.7 54.6 86.6 5 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 3/18/62/16/1/0 0/20/62/17/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 1.2/7.9/22/66/89 Gravel Gravel 0.8/8.5/17/67/110 Channel length (ft) 335 348 348 Drainage Area (acres) 41 Variable 41 41 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.033 N/A 0.024 0.022 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 51 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9k. T8-2 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.6 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.7 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 4.1 25 34.8 39.1 43.4 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.9 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.4 2.5 3.2 3.3 3.4 2 Width/Depth Ratio 5.5 12 – 18 12.1 9.1 9.6 10.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 2.2+ 4.4 6.3 7.0 7.6 2 Bank Height Ratio 2.5 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Riffle Length (ft) 9.3 23.3 31.9 10 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.041 0.043 – 0.050 0.033 0.048 0.063 10 Pool Length (ft) 7.9 13.4 16.6 10 Pool Spacing (ft) * 32 - 45 34.1 42.2 53.6 9 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 18/27/40/14/0/0 4/17/52/27/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.13/2.2/8.5/81/140 Gravel Gravel 0.7/14/37/95/135 Channel length (ft) 486 448 448 Drainage Area (acres) 21 Variable 21 21 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.044 N/A 0.045 0.048 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 52 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9l. T8A Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Min Mean Max n Bankfull Width (ft) 3.1 4.5 4.7 5.7 6.6 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 4.1 20 21.6 44.7 67.9 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.9 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.1 2 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 1.0 1.7 2.6 2.7 2.9 2 Width/Depth Ratio 5.5 12 – 18 12.0 8.6 11.9 15.2 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 2.2+ 4.4 4.6 7.4 10.3 2 Bank Height Ratio 2.7 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Riffle Length (ft) 12.3 22.7 42.7 7 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.044 0.019 – 0.062 0.027 0.053 0.10 7 Pool Length (ft) 6.3 12.4 22.4 6 Pool Spacing (ft) * 28 – 38 27.7 40.3 66.1 5 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 100/0/0/0/0/0 4/17/54/25/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.062/0.062/0.062/0.062/0.062 Gravel Gravel 1.8/23/32/84/135 Channel length (ft) 258 262 262 Drainage Area (acres) 7 Variable 7 7 Rosgen Classification G4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.1 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.052 N/A 0.044 0.047 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 53 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 9m. T9 Baseline Stream Data Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design As-built Dimension - Riffle Bankfull Width (ft) 2.9 5.5 4.1 Floodprone Width (ft) 5.5 22 29.6 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 0.5 0.7 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.9 0.7 0.9 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 2.0 2.5 2.8 Width/Depth Ratio 4.3 12 – 18 12.1 6.0 Entrenchment Ratio 1.9 2.2+ 4.0 7.2 Bank Height Ratio 1.7 1.0 – 1.1 1.0 1.0 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) * N/A N/A Radius of Curvature (ft) * N/A N/A Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) * N/A N/A Meander Wavelength (ft) * N/A N/A Meander Width Ratio * N/A N/A Profile Min Mean Max n Riffle Length (ft) 10.5 22.8 31.7 4 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.031 0.037 0.033 0.039 0.056 4 Pool Length (ft) 3.9 6.2 7.7 3 Pool Spacing (ft) * 34 – 36 37.02 39.1 41.1 2 Substrate and Transport Parameters SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% /Be% 26/66/8/0/0/0 3/7/59/31/0/0 d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm) 0.062/0.13/0.15/0.23/3.7 Gravel Gravel 12/32/42/90/150 Channel length (ft) 133 129 129 Drainage Area (acres) 29 Variable 29 29 Rosgen Classification B4 B4c C4b C4b Sinuosity 1.0 1.1 – 1.3 1.1 1.1 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.039 N/A 0.042 0.038 * : no data shown due to channelization / lack of bed diversity Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 54 MY04 Monitoring Report Dimension and Substrate MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 948.8 948.8 948.9 948.9 931.0 930.9 930.7 930.9 930.3 930.1 930.0 930.2 Bankfull Width (ft) 6.0 6.6 6.1 7.1 8.0 7.0 7.8 7.7 8.4 7.8 8.2 17.3 Floodprone Width (ft) 66.3 66.6 67.4 67.1 68.3 70.7 69.6 68.6 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 4.5 4.4 3.8 3.8 5.3 6.1 8.3 5.9 7.4 9.5 10.1 10.4 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 8.2 9.6 8.3 11.4 12.1 9.2 11.6 11.4 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 11.0 10.1 11.0 9.4 8.6 10.1 8.9 8.9 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 --- --- --- --- d50 (mm) 48 48 37.0 --- 24 40 22.0 --- --- --- --- --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 923.0 922.9 923.0 923.0 922.8 922.9 922.9 922.9 908.7 908.7 908.7 908.7 Bankfull Width (ft) 13.1 12.1 12.0 12.5 8.9 8.6 9.6 9.0 22.6 22.8 23.0 22.8 Floodprone Width (ft) --- --- --- --- 59.1 57.6 57.9 58.8 43.0 43.0 41.1 43.1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.5 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.4 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 55.5 55.5 55.5 55.5 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 15.4 16.8 16.6 16.4 5.5 4.9 4.7 5.0 55.5 55.9 54.9 56.5 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio --- --- --- --- 14.4 13.2 16.5 14.6 9.2 9.3 9.5 9.4 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio --- --- --- --- 6.6 6.7 6.0 6.5 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio --- --- --- --- 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 d50 (mm) --- --- --- --- 21 38 58 --- 19 31 33.0 --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 883.7 883.7 883.8 883.8 871.2 871.2 870.3 870.4 871.0 870.9 871.0 871.3 Bankfull Width (ft) 12.9 11.8 11.6 13.5 10.4 10.4 10.9 11.3 10.9 11.2 11.9 12.5 Floodprone Width (ft) 37.6 38.4 37.6 38.3 --- --- --- --- 75.8 76.1 76.0 72.6 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.1 3.8 3.8 2.8 3.1 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.7 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 10.6 10.6 10.6 10.6 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 16.7 16.6 15.8 15.8 20.8 20.8 31.9 30.3 10.6 11.4 10.9 6.8 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 9.9 8.3 8.0 10.9 --- --- --- --- 11.1 11.7 13.2 14.6 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 2.9 3.3 3.3 2.8 --- --- --- --- 7.0 6.8 6.4 5.8 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 --- --- --- --- 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 d50 (mm) 19 55 66 --- --- --- --- --- 50 64 58 --- Cross-Section 6 (Riffle) Station 30+20, UTHC-2 Cross-Section 7 (Riffle) Station 38+52, UTHC-2 Cross-Section 8 (Pool) Station 46+20, UTHC-3 Cross-Section 9 (Riffle) Station 46+48, UTHC-3 Table 10. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Cross-Section 1 (Riffle) Station 13+50, UTHC-1 Cross-Section 2 (Riffle) Station 19+25, UTHC-1 Cross-Section 3 (Pool) Station 19+50, UTHC-1 Cross-Section 4 (Pool) Station 23+17, UTHC-1 Cross-Section 5 (Riffle) Station 23+32, UTHC-1 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 55 MY04 Monitoring Report Dimension and Substrate MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 861.6 861.7 861.8 861.6 853.8 853.9 853.8 853.9 845.4 845.4 845.4 845.5 Bankfull Width (ft) 11.7 14.0 11.5 12.8 11.9 12.1 12.7 12.0 17.6 19.0 20.0 18.9 Floodprone Width (ft) 69.4 69.5 69.3 70.0 43.2 43.8 44.2 44.2 30.7 17.7 19.8 27.9 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.6 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.2 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.7 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.2 30.2 29.7 30.2 30.2 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 13.3 12.1 10.9 12.6 17.3 16.0 17.2 16.1 30.2 29.7 28.9 28.6 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 10.2 14.7 9.9 12.2 8.2 8.5 9.4 8.4 10.3 12.2 13.2 11.9 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 5.9 5.0 6.0 5.5 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.7 1.7 0.9 1.0 1.5 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 d50 (mm) 45 51 47 --- 19 72 52 --- 20 65 39 --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 847.4 847.2 847.2 847.3 943.6 943.6 943.6 943.6 938.9 939.1 939.0 939.0 Bankfull Width (ft) 24.9 27.3 27.2 27.8 5.4 4.8 4.7 7.2 5.8 5.5 6.1 5.6 Floodprone Width (ft) 67.7 68.1 68.8 68.3 54.4 54.3 54.7 54.6 44.5 46.4 46.4 44.4 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.6 3.2 3.1 3.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 38.7 38.7 38.7 38.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 38.7 42.1 42.3 39.8 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 2.3 1.7 1.9 1.9 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 16.0 19.3 19.1 20.0 15.9 12.5 12.4 28.7 14.1 12.9 15.6 13.5 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.5 10.1 11.4 11.5 7.6 7.7 8.4 7.7 7.9 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 d50 (mm) 21 37 47 --- 24 29 32 --- 16 19 48 --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 929.2 929.2 929.2 929.4 928.4 928.4 928.4 928.6 923.4 923.4 923.4 923.5 Bankfull Width (ft) 6.5 8.6 7.0 6.8 8.7 7.8 8.4 6.0 4.7 5.8 5.9 6.1 Floodprone Width (ft) 48.4 49.6 47.7 48.8 --- --- --- --- 24.1 24.6 24.5 24.4 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2 1.3 1.0 1.0 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 3.9 3.7 3.4 2.5 8.3 8.4 7.7 6.9 2.3 1.9 1.9 1.7 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 10.9 19.3 12.6 11.9 --- --- --- --- 9.9 14.7 15.6 16.4 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 7.5 5.7 6.8 7.2 --- --- --- --- 5.1 4.3 4.1 4.0 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 --- --- --- --- 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 d50 (mm) 22 27 9.4 --- --- --- --- --- 6.4 69 21 --- Table 10. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Cross-Section 10 (Riffle) Station 53+10, UTHC-3 Cross-Section 11 (Riffle) Station 57+40, UTHC-4 Cross-Section 12 (Riffle) Station 65+80, UTHC-6 Cross-Section 13 (Riffle) Station 67+20, UTHC-6 Cross-Section 14 (Riffle) Station 155+00, T1A Cross-Section 15 (Riffle) Station 156+20, T1A Cross-Section 16 (Riffle) Station 104+80, T1 Cross-Section 17 (Pool) Station 105+10, T1 Cross-Section 18 (Riffle) Station 206+60, T2 Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 56 MY04 Monitoring Report Dimension and Substrate MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 922.6 922.6 922.7 922.6 918.0 918.1 917.9 918.0 916.6 916.6 916.6 916.7 Bankfull Width (ft) 6.7 6.6 6.2 6.4 9.9 7.8 10.8 6.9 7.8 7.2 6.8 9.3 Floodprone Width (ft) --- --- --- --- 21.8 21.1 20.7 21.5 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.8 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 7.7 7.7 7.3 7.7 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 5.6 5.2 5.2 5.2 1.9 1.3 2.0 1.8 7.7 8.1 7.4 6.8 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio --- --- --- --- 27.2 16.9 32.2 13.4 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio --- --- --- --- 2.2 2.7 1.9 3.1 --- --- --- --- Bankfull Bank Height Ratio --- --- --- --- 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 --- --- --- --- d50 (mm) --- --- --- --- 28 26 20 --- --- --- --- --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 906.2 906.2 906.3 906.0 894.3 894.3 894.6 894.5 877.9 878.4 878.4 878.7 Bankfull Width (ft) 4.0 4.4 8.7 2.9 4.4 3.5 3.2 3.9 5.6 3.8 3.5 3.9 Floodprone Width (ft) 18.7 19.2 19.3 18.1 25.3 29.8 32.0 29.7 27.4 43.8 46.5 49.8 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.7 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.9 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 1.9 1.9 0.9 2.5 1.7 1.8 1.1 1.1 2.6 0.8 0.9 0.4 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 8.3 10.0 38.7 4.3 11.0 7.1 5.9 8.7 11.9 5.5 4.6 5.8 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.7 4.4 2.2 6.3 5.8 8.5 10.0 7.7 4.9 11.6 13.4 12.8 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.7 0.8 d50 (mm) 15 12 15 --- 36 35 32 --- 38 15 12 --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 877.6 877.7 878.1 878.8 868.2 868.0 868.1 868.2 867.5 867.6 867.8 867.7 Bankfull Width (ft) 8.4 5.1 6.3 3.8 7.2 6.0 6.2 6.2 10.1 7.3 5.7 7.2 Floodprone Width (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 47.4 47.0 44.0 43.5 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6 1.0 0.8 1.3 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.6 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.1 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 5.1 4.4 2.6 0.8 4.6 5.8 5.1 4.7 4.3 3.5 2.8 3.1 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 23.9 12.4 7.5 12.1 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 4.7 6.5 7.8 6.1 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 d50 (mm) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 17 22 28 --- Cross-Section 24 (Riffle) Station 608+15, T6 Cross-Section 25 (Pool) Station 608+40, T6 Cross-Section 26 (Pool) Station 703+40, T7 Cross-Section 27 (Riffle) Station 703+70, T7 Table 10. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Cross-Section 19 (Pool) Station 206+80, T2 Cross-Section 20 (Riffle) Station 302+80, T3 Cross-Section 21 (Pool) Station 303+30 T3 Cross-Section 22 (Riffle) Station 400+90, T4 Cross-Section 23 (Riffle) Station 651+25, T6A Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 57 MY04 Monitoring Report Dimension and Substrate MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BKF area 853.0 853.3 853.3 853.3 849.8 849.9 850.0 849.9 842.8 842.8 842.9 842.8 Bankfull Width (ft) 4.1 4.7 5.3 8.1 5.5 5.5 5.4 6.7 5.7 5.8 7.1 8.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 29.6 31.9 31.6 31.3 34.8 43.8 40.6 37.3 43.4 42.0 42.5 42.7 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.9 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 2.8 1.5 1.5 1.3 3.4 2.9 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.4 3.0 3.2 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 6.0 7.9 9.9 23.1 9.1 9.0 8.5 13.1 10.1 10.5 15.5 21.1 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 7.2 6.7 6.0 3.9 6.3 7.9 7.6 5.6 7.6 7.2 6.0 5.2 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 d50 (mm) 42 6.7 9.3 --- 36 68 83 --- 37 16 55 --- MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 MY00 MY01 MY02 MY03 MY05 MY07 Bankfull Elevation (ft) based on AB BK F area 850.8 850.9 850.8 850.7 845.8 845.6 845.7 845.6 Bankfull Width (ft) 4.7 5.2 5.7 4.6 4.8 4.1 4.5 4.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 21.6 21.8 22.0 19.7 49.3 49.4 49.3 49.2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF area 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) based on AB BKF elevation 2.6 2.3 2.6 3.0 2.1 2.8 2.5 3.5 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 8.6 10.7 12.6 8.1 11.4 8.2 10.0 8.5 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.6 4.2 3.9 4.3 10.2 12.0 10.9 11.8 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 d50 (mm) 54 5 6.6 --- 10 54 37 --- Table 10. Cross Section Dimensional Morphology Summary Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Cross-Section 28 (Riffle) Station 900+80, T9 Cross-Section 29 (Riffle) Station 806+10, T8 Cross-Section 30 (Riffle) Station 807+45, T8 Cross-Section 31 (Riffle) Station 850+60, T8A Cross-Section 32 (Riffle) Station 851+75, T8A Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 58 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX E Hydrologic Data 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 No v - 2 2 De c - 2 2 Ja n - 2 3 Fe b - 2 3 Ma r - 2 3 Ap r - 2 3 Ma y - 2 3 Ju n - 2 3 Ju l - 2 3 Au g - 2 3 Se p - 2 3 Oc t - 2 3 No v - 2 3 De c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l ( i n ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site 30-70 Percentile Graph WETS Station Name: Yadkinville 6E, NC 2022 Rainfall 2023 Rainfall 30% Less Than 30% Greater Than Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 60 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Monitoring Year Date of Occurrence Method Reach MY01 January 24, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 February 6, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 February 11, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 February 13, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 March 24, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 April 13, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 April 25, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 April 29, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 May 21, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 May 27, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 December 16, 2020 Photos taken on-site UTHC1, UTHC3, T1, T2, T6, T8 December 16, 2020 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 MY02 January 1, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 January 27, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 February 13, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 February 15, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 February 18, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 March 19, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 March 25, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 July 2, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 August 16, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 August 18, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 September 21, 2021 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 MY03 January 3, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 March 12, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 March 23, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 March 31, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 April 18, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 May 27, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 July 9, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 August 22, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 September 5, 2022 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 MY04 January 12, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 January 25, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 February 12, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1 February 17, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 March 3, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 April 28, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 June 19, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 June 20, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 June 22, 2023 Onsite stream gauge UTHC1, UTHC3 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 920 921 922 923 924 925 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l ( i n ) St r e a m S t a g e E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph UTHC-1 Stream Gauge Rainfall Sensor Elevation Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Bankful Elevation 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 869 870 871 872 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l St r e a m S t a g e E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph UTHC-3 Stream Gauge Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Bankfull Elevation Sensor Depth Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 63 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 12. Verification of Stream Flow Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Gauge Camera Reach Dates Achieving Maximum Consecutive Days Dates Achieving Maximum Consecutive Days T1A January 11 – March 30 79 January 12 – April 4 83 T5A January 11 – December 11 335 January 12 – May 30 140 T8A January 11 – August 18 220 January 12 – March 30 80 Table 13. Stream Flow Criteria Attainment Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Greater than 30 Days of Flow/Max Consecutive Days Reach MY-01 2020 MY-02 2021 MY-03 2022 MY-04 2023 MY-05 2024 MY-06 2025 MY-07 2026 T1A (Gauge) Yes/68 Yes/121 Yes/34 Yes/79 T1A (Camera) Yes/44 Yes/55 Yes/104 Yes/83 T5A (Gauge) Yes/152 Yes/322 Yes/303 Yes/335 T5A (Camera) Yes/70 Yes/116 Yes/114 Yes/140 T8A (Gauge) Yes/152 Yes/167 Yes/217 Yes/220 T8A (Camera) Yes/84 Yes/180 Yes/92 Yes/80 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 939 940 941 942 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l ( i n ) St r e a m S t a g e E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph T1A Stream Flow Gauge Rainfall Sensor Depth Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera) 79 Days Camera obscured 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 920 921 922 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l St r e a m S t a g e E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph T5A Stream Flow Gauge Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Sensor Depth Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera) 335 Days Camera obscured 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 849 850 851 852 853 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l St r e a m S t a g e E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph T8A Stream Flow Gauge Rainfall Stream Stage Elevation Stream Bed Elevation Sensor Depth Flow Elevation Stream Flow (Camera) 220 Days Camera malfunction Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 67 MY04 Monitoring Report Table 14. Wetland Hydrology Verification Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site, DMS Project #97136 Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage) MY-01 2020 MY-02 2021 MY-03 2022 MY-04 2023 MY-05 2024 MY-06 2025 MY-07 2026 Gauge # Location Normal Rainfall Normal Rainfall Below Average Rainfall Normal Rainfall Gauge 1 T7 45 (19.7%) 57 (24.8%) 5 (2.2%) 6 (2.6%) Gauge 2 T8 Gauge malfunction 37 (15.6%) 9 (3.6%) 6 (2.6%) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l ( i n ) Re l a t i v e G r o u n d w a t e r E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph Wetland Gauge 1, T7 Rainfall Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12" Below Ground Surface Sensor-Depth Begin Growing Season March 26 End Growing Season November 9 6 Days 6 Days 6 Days 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 1- J a n - 2 3 10 - J a n - 2 3 19 - J a n - 2 3 28 - J a n - 2 3 6- F e b - 2 3 15 - F e b - 2 3 24 - F e b - 2 3 5- M a r - 2 3 14 - M a r - 2 3 23 - M a r - 2 3 1- A p r - 2 3 10 - A p r - 2 3 19 - A p r - 2 3 28 - A p r - 2 3 7- M a y - 2 3 16 - M a y - 2 3 25 - M a y - 2 3 3- J u n - 2 3 12 - J u n - 2 3 21 - J u n - 2 3 30 - J u n - 2 3 9- J u l - 2 3 18 - J u l - 2 3 27 - J u l - 2 3 5- A u g - 2 3 14 - A u g - 2 3 23 - A u g - 2 3 1- S e p - 2 3 10 - S e p - 2 3 19 - S e p - 2 3 28 - S e p - 2 3 7- O c t - 2 3 16 - O c t - 2 3 25 - O c t - 2 3 3- N o v - 2 3 12 - N o v - 2 3 21 - N o v - 2 3 30 - N o v - 2 3 9- D e c - 2 3 18 - D e c - 2 3 27 - D e c - 2 3 Ra i n f a l l ( i n ) Re l a t i v e G r o u n d w a t e r E l e v a t i o n ( f t ) Date Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site Hydrograph Wetland Gauge 2, T8 Rainfall Ground Surface Groundwater Depth 12" Below Ground Surface Sensor-Depth Begin Growing Season March 26 End Growing Season November 9 6 Days Mill Dam Creek Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC, PA DMS Project #97136 70 MY04 Monitoring Report APPENDIX F Additional Information To: Matthew Reid, DMS PM Todd Tugwell, USACE FROM: Adam Spiller, KCI DATE: August 15, 2022 SUBJECT: Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Project IRT Site Meeting KCI Project Number - 201601703 Yadkin River Basin - 03040101 DEQ Contract 6898 DMS Project Number 97136 DWR #: 18-1349 USACE Action ID: 2016-01335 Attendees: Paul Wiesner, DMS Tommy Seelinger, KCI Melonie Allen, DMS Erin Davis, DWR Matthew Reid, DMS Kim Browning, USACE Adam Spiller, KCI David McHenry, WRC Kevin O’Briant, KCI In IRT field review meeting was conducted for the above referenced project on August 15, 2022, starting around 1:30pm. The site was damp from a previous rain and the weather was mild and slightly overcast. The group walked most of the restoration portions of T6 and UTHC3. We also drove to the top of the site where we walked T1A and T1. The comments from the site walk are listed below. - Pay attention to invasives. There were no areas of thick invasives, but there were some scattered in the easement around the areas of the site that had not been cleared for construction. - In some portions of the buffer, the sycamores are the most notable tree. Watch the diversity data from the veg plots and supplement if necessary. - Take photos of the crossings, from the stream and include those in future monitoring reports. - Overall, the site is well vegetated with thick herbaceous vegetation. Some areas of Priority 2 restoration have less vegetation on the floodplain/benches. Watch those areas for future vegetation vigor. - A couple of structures were found to be piping. Pay attention to those to make sure the structures are still maintaining function and not degrading. - Some of the previously repaired areas from flood damage were lacking in live stakes. KCI will add live stakes to those areas during this upcoming dormant season. - There was a previous encroachment area near the bottom of T1, where the landowner had driven inside the easement as short cut between two gates instead of going outside of the easement. We checked this area during the site walk and it did not appear that this was still an issue, but we will continue to pay attention to this area and document any future encroachments. These comments were all discussed at the site walk and this meeting memo will be included in the MY03 monitoring report. Generally, the site was viewed positively, with the stream and buffers all looking healthy and functioning. The meeting ended around 3pm.