20021345 Ver 1_Monitoring Report Year 4_20080414

SANDY CREEK STREAM ENHANCEMENT
AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
2007 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 4)
Durham County
EEP Project No. 322
Design Firm: Becky L. Ward Consulting
KEECEI ED
FEB 1 ti
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENRANCEMENTPROGRAM
February 2008
Prepared for: NCDENR/ ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Prepared by: ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
l%
A PR 14 D
2008
L,(),SyStell, T ADSANDSTO,R1Aj
W? /3.
H
V WOL,N AM

1
1

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... .1
2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... .2
2.1 Mitigation Objectives and Structure ........................................................................................... . 2
2.2 Location and Setting ................................................................................................................ . 2
2.3 Project History and Background ................................................................................................. .4
3.0 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS .................................................................. 11
3.1 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................ 11
3.1.1 Vegetation Problem Areas .......................................................................................... 11
3.2 STREAM ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 Bankfull Events .......................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Bank Stability Assessment ......................................................................................... 11
3.2.3 Stream Problem Areas ................................................................................................ 11
3.3 WETLAND ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................... 13
4.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 13
LIST OF TABLES
Table I Project Mitigation Objectives and Structure .............................................................................. 4
Table II Project Activity and Reporting History ...................................................................................... 4
Table III Project Contacts .......................................................................................................................... 5
Table IV Project Background .................................................................................................................... 6
Table V Hydrological (Bankfull) Verification ........................................................................................1 l
Table VII Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment .........................................................12
Table IX Morphology and Hydrologic Monitoring Summary .................................................................12
Table X Wetland Criteria Attainment ..................................................................................................... 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Site Location ....................................................................................................................................................3
Monitoring Plan View ....................................................................................................................................... 7
EEP Project No. 322
i
Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
1

1

1
1

APPENDIX A: VEGETATION RAW DATA
Vegetation Survey Data Tables
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas
Vegetation Problem Area Plan View
Vegetation Problem Area Photos
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
APPENDIX B: GEOMORPHOLOGIC RAW DATA
Stream Current Condition Plan View
Stream Problem Areas Table
Representative Stream Problem Area Photos
Table B2. Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
Stream Photo-station Photos
Cross-Section Plot
Pebble Count Plot
APPENDIX C: WETLAND RAW DATA
Monitoring Gauge Hydrographs and Precipitation Graphs
Wetland Problem Area Plan View
EEP Project No. 322 ii
Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
1

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site (Site) was selected to mitigate
impacts to Section 404 jurisdictional areas associated with the extension of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Parkway (Parkway) between Cook Road and Hope Valley Road in Durham County. The impacts of the
Parkway on jurisdictional wetlands and non-wetland jurisdictional waters totaled 1.73 acres near Third
Fork Creek. The Site provides 3.6 acres of restoration and creation as mitigation for the impacts. The
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will be using the remaining 1.87 acres as mitigation for other
impacts within the Cape Fear River Basin. In addition to the wetland restoration, Sandy Creek has been
enhanced with the installation of log vanes. The log vanes are intended to create pool features that will
enhance habitat and water quality along 2,700 linear feet of stream. Stream stationing begins at the
downstream end of the project and increases upstream.
Site construction and planting was completed in June 2003. The Site was partially replanted in January
2004. The 2007 monitoring report represents the fourth year of vegetation and hydrological monitoring.
The Site must demonstrate both hydrologic and vegetation success for a minimum of five years or until
the Site is deemed successful. The following paragraphs summarize the results of the on-site monitoring
that has occurred during the fourth year.
Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation success criteria for the wetland restoration areas include a minimum survival of 288 stems per
acre of planted species at the end of the current monitoring year. In addition, six planted species must
survive throughout the Site. Four of the five vegetation plots achieved the density criterion for success at
the Site. However, since only three planted species were recorded in the aggregated vegetation plots, the
Site as a whole fails the diversity criterion.
Low survival of many of the planted species can be attributed to flooding at Plot 4 (located in an on-site
pond) and invasive exotics at Plot 5. The surviving stems are most likely volunteer individuals of the
planted species recruited from the surrounding woods. Initial plantings were previously reported to be
largely destroyed by geese, and this event is assumed to be responsible for low species diversity at the site
at Year 4. Poor soil composition (Urban land soils occupy approximately 5.5 acres of the Site) is another
factor in poor survival.
Stream Enhancement Monitoring
' The log vanes in Sandy Creek were observed and evaluated for stability and effectiveness. The vanes
appear stable with no visible signs of piping. Vegetation has established on the depositional areas behind
the vane arms at many locations. The banks adjacent to all the vanes were stable and vegetated, while
showing no evidence of erosion. However, the enhancement of bed form from the installation of these
vanes is not currently evident. Sandy Creek is a currently classified as a sandbed system within a
suburban watershed. Under conditions free from excessive sediment input, Sandy Creek would be
classified as a gravel cobble system. Based on cursory observations, the high sediment load in the stream
has not allowed pools to form downstream of the structures. No discernable bed features were observed
throughout the reach. The permanent cross-section survey and pebble counts show limited change over
the past year. Bankfull area was observed to increase since last year, and may be attributed to sediment
' transport during peak flow conditions.
Wetland Hydrology Monitoring
The 2007 hydrologic monitoring results indicate limited hydrologic success within the Site. Only one
' gauge (Gauge A) exhibited saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for at least 12.5 percent
(consecutive days) of the growing season (March 30 - November 11 or 227 days). Gauges B and C
EEP Project No. 322 1 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

exhibited saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for 5-12.5 percent of the growing season.
Drought conditions throughout the monitoring period contributed to the limited hydrologic saturation.
2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
' 2.1 MITIGATION OBJECTIVES AND STRUCTURE
The Site is located adjacent to Sandy Creek Park (future Sandy Creek Environmental Education Center)
' in Durham, North Carolina near the intersection of Highway 15-501 Bypass / 15-501 Business (Figure 1).
Site directions: from Raleigh, follow I-40 west to Highway 15-501. Take Highway 15-501 north
approximately 2 miles. Pass under 15-501 Bypass and turn left onto Tower Boulevard. Take Tower
Boulevard until it dead ends at Pickett Road. Turn left. Sandy Creek Road will be on the left directly
after crossing over 15-501 Bypass. Take Sandy Creek Road to the end and enter into the Sandy Creek
Park. The entrance to the wetland restoration area is accessed by following the greenway trail (Sandy
Creek Trail) to a dilapidated bridge crossing over Sandy Creek. The stream enhancement reach begins
' approximately 1525 feet upstream of the bridge and ends approximately 1175 feet downstream of the
bridge at the stream culverts located under Highway 15-501.
The objectives of this project are to restore habitat and water quality in Sandy Creek and restore the
abandoned sludge drying bed locations to riparian wetlands. The restored wetland ecosystem will provide
quality habitat and food for wildlife, as well as buffer and water storage benefits within the Sandy Creek
watershed.
2.2 LOCATION AND SETTING
The Site occupies areas once used by the defunct New Hope Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility owned
by the City of Durham (City). As part of a park and greenway development plan the City Parks and
Recreation Department removed existing structures including piping, control buildings, and fencing of the
existing sludge drying beds located west of Sandy Creek within the proposed wetland restoration area.
Prior to construction of the wetland project, the City had completed phase one of the Sandy Creek Trail, a
greenway trail located along the east side of Sandy Creek. Demolition of the treatment plant east of
Sandy Creek continued concurrently with the wetland and stream restoration project.
' Wetland Restoration Activities
The area proposed for wetland restoration was excavated as an extension of existing ponds and vegetated
wetlands located adjacent to the Site (Figure 2). The wetland was designed so that a broad berm set at the
elevation of the seasonal high water table of the pond (262.0 feet) separates the restored wetland into two
sections. The southern section ties into the grade of the existing wetland and slopes gradually up to the
berm. From the berm, the ground gradually slopes down to the north into a depression that stores run-off
' from adjacent slopes and floodwaters from Sandy Creek. In the middle of the depression, an elevated
island was constructed to allow for various vegetation assemblages. Following the completion of
earthwork the Site was planted with native tree and shrub species.
Stream Enhancement Activities
Thirteen log vane structures were placed along 2700 linear feet of Sandy Creek in order to create pool
features within the sandbed system. The log vanes consisted of two hardwood trees, stacked together to
form each structure. The logs were secured together with rebar and tied with cables at both ends.
Vegetation was planted on the banks to stabilize the disturbance created during installation. Additional
modifications to the channel included regrading and stabilizing a small section of bank directly above the
culverts located under Highway 15-501 and the removal of fallen trees and debris to improve flow
conditions.
EEP Project No. 322 2 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

el,Q 4 N c ,.. a
so I)
A W. E .?. '1 p LAM
¢, n ,?lr
Io?
/
?
G
-. Efendr.
. 70 `. i?.. kr ar'rrJy? t.F vs?rg? ? t' :-i ¢?
`
kfilkb?o WkSA ? ?1 Xw?gh'

85 !JIM ? ? .
_ r? % ? (198(1' ,? °' J? /?S l )
/ ? %•uH
?

40
t%ME KMESf '`??? _
' a \E`wJ UiViSKN, ? '? 1 <r \ ?E ? 1 ( l .ul
_ _ ? Joy s"Y ,.? K w? 7C `_- ,M _ ,md ?r}?ar R
r
5
l
+
g

jJ a1 ?
? i sa
a w<
}8
J P M h r Site I Pq`v 0
751 '-
Location DURHAM
lu ?? J Ee, Fes:' £: { -kl,/ f F ?1 1
Iy3 i\_' 1 - h1a? a w?' / 1µ td ? I ?? h'd' ( 1+a ki

nt.Ikp
r £ _ l (_.
ESE,
r5 J MrV S![/
i
I
?
?,d n qtr r-n++Wi ? ?r?`?t"'f-?f:.'xg'a
- ?_.. /.: ... rwh•1 .( ? ? yw,
-_ Ayr ?Cl:_. - a+I / }-

1

44 '?\ '? }
hit .
pp
741
t
11
?_ 1'? '?,.. ?-? a'+!' S` Y-rm v _ ? ? ; / ? «? ?o \y f r' 75?/?'' x..iG 55 -
\
i! ? , \I - ? ? a Mar MtN (-`i ,p ? I ag?t i ?d t r--
? I'

,< a Chapcd Hal -
a y s.
r ? ? $ . ? j? t tgF 1 I r?

? uvy ,t/'? / \, t N?urrh.Leraury.rrt 501. ?.°, .`fir „'/ uM. ?,: i 54
54
r -
ai u+a
ei F,
1
/
`

-
e
a
? ,?.r,?„^? ( +b :. f
4 r
2
` ? -?d ?l.y ?:
1 1 7 a 3
,N
n
? n.w:
L 0aar?t _ y\ "\ ? . ? F
p°j"rcr?iT w ??
`?r°
r
r ??. ?
? } ?:
•.
°?
?
- =
?^
,
r ?,
h
b
+
?
,?
F
.
ja

751 /'- Ft< ?...

HGPE Cie3MEND
'
?
' POLRS l
"
\
1 ml. 0 1 ml. 4 mi.
inn ? - v
/
1:144,000
Source: 1997 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p.39. ? y ? ?? r+^'` •. \? ?j _ - , . -
win=

LcoSclcncc
corporation SITE LOCATION

andy Creek Stream Enhancement

and Wetland Restoration Site D- by
MAF
Ckdby

MCG
Date:
DEC zoos
FIGURE
Raleigh. North Carolina
Durham County, North Carolina Project
06-282.03

Exhibit Table I. Project Mitigation Objectives and Structure
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322

Project
°F a u
°
Linear
Segment or F- Z. Footage or
Reach ID d Acreage Stationing*** Comments
00+00 to Primarily achieved with
Reach I Ell SSS 2700 linear feet
27+00 placement of to vanes
Wetland
R - 3.6 acres NA
Restoration
* Ell = Enhancement II, R = Restoration
** SSS = Stream Bank Stabilization
*** Stationing begins at the downstream end of the project and increases upstream
2.3 PROJECT HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
Exhibit Table II. Project Activity and Reporting History
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322

Activity Report
Scheduled
Completion Data
Collection
Complete Actual
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan NA* NA* NA*
Final Design 90%) NA* NA* NA*
Construction NA* NA* Jun 2003
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area NA* NA* NA*
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/se ments NA* NA* NA*
Bare Root Seedling Installation NA* NA* NA*
Mitigation Plan / As-builts (Year 0 Monitoring - baseline) NA* Jun 2003 Oct 2003
Year 1 Monitoring NA* May 2004 NA*
Site Replanting (portions of Zone 3) NA* NA* Mid 2004
Year 1 Monitoring re-sampling NA* Se 2004 Dec 2004
Year 2 Monitoring (Vegetation) Dec 2005 Oct 2005 Dec 2005
Year 2 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges) Dec 2005 Oct 2005 Dec 2005
Year 3 Monitoring (Vegetation) Dec 2006 Nov 2006 Dec 2006
Year 3 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges) Dec 2006 Nov 2006 Dec 2006
Year 4 Monitoring (Vegetation) Dec 2007 Nov 2007 Dec 2007
Year 4 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges) Dec 2007 Nov 2007 Dec 2007
Bolded items represent those events or deliverables that are variable. Non-bolded items represent events that are standard over
the course of a typical project.
*NA - Historical project documents necessary to provide this data were unavailable at the time of this report submission.

EEP Project No. 322
4
Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
Exhibit Table III. Project Contacts
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Designer Ms. Becky Ward
1512 Eglantyne Court
Becky L. Ward Consulting Raleigh, NC 27613
919 870-0526
Construction Contractor Mr. Greg Kiser
6106 Corporate Park Drive
Shamrock Environmental, Inc Browns Summit, NC 27214
336 375-1989
Planting Contractor NA*
Seeding Contactor NA*
NA*
Seed Mix Sources
NA*
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Monitoring Performers EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
919 828-3433
Stream Monitoring POC Jens Geratz
Vegetation Monitoring POC Elizabeth Scherrer
Wetland Monitoring POC Jens Geratz
*NA - Historical project documents necessary to provide this data were unavailable at the time of this report submission.
EEP Project No. 322 5 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
1

1
1

1
Exhibit Table IV. Project Background
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Project County Durham
Drainage Area 7.3 square miles to culvert at Bypass 15-501
Impervious cover estimate (%) 10 percent
Stream Order 3rd order
Physiogra hic Region Piedmont
Ecoregion (Griffith and Omernik) Triassic Basin
Rosgen Classification of As-built NA (Enhancement only)
Cowardin Classification Stream (R3UB2)
Wetlands (PFOl)
Dominant soil types Stream - Chewacla and Wehadkee soils (Ch)
Wetlands - Urban Land (Ur)
SCO #ID 010542301
USGS HUC for Project and Reference 03 03 0002060110 / NA
NCDWQ Sub-basin for Project and Reference 03-06-05 / NA
NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference C, NSW / NA
Any portion of an project segment 303d listed? No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a
303d listed segment? No
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor NA
Percent of project easement fenced None
EEP Project No. 322
Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
??
?,.
S
dt ti -"
^?:;`
"?, i o !?+
e' s ..+4 ?

LEGEND
-C/E- CONSERVATION EASEMENT
EXISTING STREAM
BOTTOM OF BANK
i
PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
- - EXISTING WETLAND BOUNDARY
--- EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EXISTING TREE LINE
LOG VANE
+- FLOW DIRECTION
a THALWEG
N
I
N

W

L?

SANDY CREEK W
2
c?
L 2 ..ac

?•pO
3 U
Q
L

vd -- -------- ------ --------------- ?? a
? .
a+ L4
14-

? ? Cif _
t ?

>100 0 l O
SCALE IN FEET ---
Gent: iilk?
MONITORING PLAN VIEW Dwn Bye Doles
FKAW
GWN FE8 2008
Project' Ck0 By Scole:
EcoSclence
f?
t Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site JWG ,••• 100•
Corporation (1«`
Ctll EEP Project No. 322 ESC Project No.: 2-1
DURHAM COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA 06.282.03

?- LEGEND

I 3/, -C/E- CONSERVATION EASEMENT
REFERENCE
SITE GAUGE
EXISTING STREAM
/ BOTTOM OF BANK
VEGETATION
MONITORING PLOT
MONITORING GAUGE
J? \
P3 PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
`
Pl
A
3
`.
EXISTING
BOUNDARY WETLAND

A - - ?- EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
\ EXISTING TREE LINE
\ n' / LOG VANE ch
N ` pZ MONITORING CROSS-SECTION N
I j
Lu - --_? - I
- - i--- FLOW DIRECTION W
THALWEG =

C
P5
, P4
?5
V
a b

'0iao bf

,. L5 i
ANDY CR K
13-aD L7
s.oo
i 1
L

SF
100 0 1 0

SCALE IN FEET

Dke°`: Tale: MONITORING PLAN VIEW D- By
GWN Dale:
FEB 2008 FKUW
Project
cka By:
S-le.
FcoScience Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoratio n Site JWG r•• 100•
11Sv-StC111
Corporation EEP Project No. 322 ESC Project No, 2-2
x°-g --, C-11h, DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06.282.03 1 1

100 0 I Q0
SCALE IN FEET

? V

04 /
f W ~
° e
CV
CA ,
..
LLI "_- ...__
1

Z i
V

' 1
C
C f
' -L 13 E
t 1
r ?
, `
?;

.r
j LEGEND

-C/E- CONSERVATION EASEMENT
EXISTING STREAM
BOTTOM OF BANK
PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
L1 - EXISTING WETLAND BOUNDARY
L9 1' ?p .0.a - 01
«- °--' EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
L
21- Lit
Ss
EXISTING TREE LINE
LOG VANE
FLOW DIRECTION
?f THALWEG
Cueat: Title: MONITORING PLAN VIEW D- By Dale: FGURE
CWN F 2008
POeS ckd By $C01e:
EcoScience andy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site DWG V. 100•
[,
Co
stenl
Corpor2tion v
., EEP Project No. 322 ESC Project Na: 2-3

(DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06.282.03

' 3.0 PROJECT CONDITION AND AND RESULTS
3.1 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT
' Vegetation success criteria for the wetland restoration areas include a minimum survival of 288 stems per
acre of planted species at the end of Year 4. In addition, six planted species must survive throughout the
Site. Stem counts were conducted for all woody species, including volunteer species following EEP Stem
' Counting protocols. The taxonomic standard for vegetation follows Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia,
Georgia, and surrounding areas (Weakley, 2007). A total of 267 stems of planted species were counted
in the four plots. Stem density per acre for Plots 1-5 are 9300, 2200, 1500, 0, and 350 respectively. The
average density for planted species in all plots is 2670 stems per acre. Four of the five vegetation plots
achieved the density criterion for success at the Site. However, since only three planted species were
recorded in the aggregated vegetation plots, the Site fails the diversity criterion. Despite successful
average density for planted species in four of the five plots, the Site as a whole fails overall vegetation
success criteria for wetland restoration due to the failed diversity criterion. Vegetation Survey Data
Tables, as well as plot photos, are provided in Appendix A.
' 3.1.1 Vegetation Problem Areas
Low survival of many of the planted species can be attributed to permanent flooding of Plot 4 (located in
an on-site pond) and invasive exotics at Plot 5. Initial plantings were previously reported to be largely
destroyed by geese, and this event is assumed to be responsible for low species diversity at the site in
Year 4. High occurrences of Fraxinus pennsylvanica and Salix nigra are likely due to volunteer
' individuals of planted species. Poor soil composition (Urban land soils occupy approximately 5.5 acres
of the Site) is another factor in poor survival. A Vegetation Problem Areas Table, Vegetation Problem
Area Plan View, and photos are provided in Appendix A.
3.2 STREAM ASSESSMENT
1

3.2.1 Bankfull Events
Exhibit Table V. Hydrological (Bankfull) Verifications
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Date of Data
Collection Date of
Occurrence
Method
Photo Number
01/12/07 12/26/06 Photographed evidence on-site N/A
11/12/07 10/27/07 Photographed evidence on-site BE1 (Appendix B)
' 3.2.2 Bank Stability Assessment
A detailed BEHI and NBS assessment are required in year 5. This report represents the fourth year of
monitoring, therefore no bank stability assessment was performed.
' 3.2.3 Stream Problem Areas
An analysis of stream features was performed in order to evaluate the current condition of Sandy Creek.
Identified problem areas exist in the form of an overall aggradation of sediment throughout the restored
reach of Sandy Creek, presumably from an upstream source. The Stream Problem Areas Table and photos
are located in Appendix B.
EEP Project No. 322 11 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

Exhibit Table VII. Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
Sandy Creek Stream Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Se ment/Reach: 2,700 feet
Feature Initial* MY-01* MY-02 MY-03 MY-04** MY-05
A. Riffles NA NA 0% 0% 0%
B. Pools NA NA 0% 0% 0%
C. Thalwe NA NA 0% 0% 0%
D. Meanders NA NA 100% 100% 100%
E. Bed General NA NA 0% 0% 0%
F. Bank Condition NA NA NA* NA* 100%
G. Lo Vanes NA NA 100% 100% 100%
*NA - Historical project documents necessary to provide this data were unavailable at the time of this report submission.
' **The riffles, pools, thalweg, and bed features of Sandy Creek are continuously changing due to the sandy composition of the
streambed. None of these features are considered visually stable. See Table 132 in Appendix B for assessment details.

Exhibit Table IX. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Parameter Cross-Section 1
Dimension MY-01 MY-02 MY-03 MY-04 MY-05
BF Width (ft) NA* 28.8 29.5 31.1
Floodprone Width (ft) NA* >500 >500 >500
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft) NA* 75.1 92.7 105.1
BF Mean Depth (ft) NA* 2.6 3.1 3.4
Width/Depth Ratio (ft) NA* 11 9.4 9.2
Entrenchment Ratio (ft) NA* >2.2 >2.2 >2.2
Wetted Perimeter (ft) NA* 32.7 34.0 35.2
Bank Height Ratio NA* 1.23 1.42 1.27
Hydraulic Radius (ft) NA* 2.3 2.7 3.0
Substrate
d50 mm 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.55
d84 mm 1.5 0.98 0.98 0.89
*NA - Historical project documents necessary to provide this data were unavailable at the time of this report submission.
I EEP Project No. 322 12 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

3.3 WETLAND ASSESSMENT
1

Exhibit Table X. Wetland Criteria Attainment
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322

ract

ell ID Well
Hydrology
Threshold
Met?

Tract
Mean

Vegetation
Plot ID
Vegetation
Density Met
(260 stems/acre)
Diversity
Met?
(6 species)

Tract
Mean
1 A ? (28%) 14% of P1 ? (9300) 2 Failed
1 B (5%) growing P2 ? (2200) 2 because
1 C (9%) season P3 ? (1500) 2 of lack
REF Ref Site (4%) P4 (0) 0 of
P5 ? (350) 1 diversity
4.0 REFERENCES
' Weakley, A.S. 2007. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding areas. Working draft of
January 2007. University of North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden,
University of North Carolina. 1015pp.

EEP Project No. 322 13 Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

1

APPENDIX A
VEGETATION RAW DATA
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
= m m = m = = = m m m m m = = m m = =
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Survey Data Tables

1

1
1
Stem Counts for Each Species Arranged by Plot
Plots Year 4 Year 4 % Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Year 0
Species 1 2 3 4 5 Total Survival Total Total Total Total
Acer rnbrum 4 4 13 4 4 12 30
Alnus serrulata 1
Betula nigra 5 2
Carya ovata 4
Cephalanthits
occidentalis
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica 91 37 18 146 913 128 148 104 16
Liriodendron tuli ifera 2 9
Nyssa sylvatica 5
Quercus lyrata 3 5
uercus hellos 3 3 14
Salix nigra 95 7 8 7 117 2340 88 108 73 5
Sambucus canadensis 1 11
Viburnum nudum 3 8
Stem Counts for Volunteer Species Arranged by Plot
Plots Year 4 Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Year 0
Species
1
2
3
4
5
Totals
Totals
Totals
Totals
Totals
Acer negundo 1 1 2 1 2
Baccharis halimifolia 2 2
Celtis leavigata 1 2
Cornus amomum 2 2 2 2
Gleditsia triacanthos 1 1 1
Liquidambar styraciflua 25 1 26 6 1
Pinustaeda 11 11
Platanus occidentalis 1 1 1 2
Populhts deltoides
Omits americana 2 2
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

1
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Monitoring Year 4
I

1
1

1
1
Exhibit Table 6. Vegetative Problem Areas
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Feature / Issue Station # / Range Probable Cause Photo #
Bare Flood lain Vegetation Plot 4 Flooding from and creation VPA1
Poor Survival Vegetation Plot 5 Invasive exotics VPA 2
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Problem Areas Photos
VPA Photo 1. Low species survival and flooding at Plot 4.
VPA Photo 2. Invasive exotics within Plot 5.
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 (August 1, 2007)
ter,.
.3C'- •': t ? /? ?t?i? ''jam
y 1
j b t • t ylk a?.fx; c
c ., : !dr'? ° ` t ?0 3; }Ra!r , a , "J?, .. K x? is il+ .. s ..#` _

Photo 1
7, 4"
ry` r' rn?
G? r ? (Q V `ct
p
?a?` t F ? •. ?,, Air ., +To?'., '
F*#' i
?,`;Y.?VP xY},., ? {
51,
Photo 1A
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 2 (August 1, 2007)
Photo 2
Photo 2A
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 3 (August 1, 2007)
r p
i
Photo 3

?? ;;;t r r r •??• t t o 4?s
W U,it 'f?';t+j
???'? -t•v?'?i?'i ? w . >? a.?i 4?,? t?."°i"?',? 1 A, ..1 ? '?` ,t •??,y',? miT.
'y
Ali, d• ????? ?? ttv ? ?-? 'P
%
c:
t, +• .t ° i 9
1t??t{t'iJrg' gr 4 gT3 ?.

Photo 3A
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 4 (August 1, 2007)
Photo 4
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 5 (August 1, 2007)

C , ar
?
Alv
•.±'-0?S .i 4,?t4??R)?> ' F .._ -2?1 1E. ?!`•i?NOa ?rt 'k:.k°%i. -
Photo 5
+"i
r

Y? !rY''k ?9r ? ? tea/ •i ? ?.t yy
I -.A r?U."
i•. us "d-?. .?b.? Ci '.+f:»•-:M P.9t?a.

Photo 5A
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix A Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

1

1
APPENDIX B
GEOMORPHOLOGICAL RAW DATA
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

w Mobil. ?utl

P
c
fir/ •
f ,
?'

n
`. r.
FIGURE 131

y r

. ..
: „
41,
?1
w
A
f
:-

x
,.

r
e

$$7
! and
Client. Title. STREAM CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW SHEET INDEX Dwn By. Dote- FKAK
TAL FEB 2008
Projects Ckd By: Scale
EcoScierce
C(
Stelll
S? Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site MCC r•. 400• B
Corporation ?
,
?
i.? EEP Project No. 322 ESC Project No
DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06.282.03

M M M M M I? 1=1 r M M M M M M M M M M
LEGEND
-CIE- CONSERVATION EASEMENT
EXISTING STREAM
BOTTOM OF BANK
EXISTING TREE LINE
•-© PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
LOG VANE (FUNCTIONAL.)
FLOW DIRECTION
?•? THALWEG

? N
m
CAE
SANpy CREEK

L 2 ..uo 2
w
E. l3 U
H

L4
4 b

?c Cif
'9y
!s
S

100 0 1 0
SCALE IN FEET

1 CfieM: Title: STREAM CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW D- By:
TAIL Dale:
FES 2008 vKxi?E
Project Ckd By: Scale
EcoScience
1'
(115? tCi11 Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site MCC 1 . 100•
e
Corporation a
, EEP Project No. 322 ESC Project Na B
l
DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06-282.03

- LEGEND
3/J -C/E- CONSERVATION EASEMENT

EXISTING STREAM
i ?, - - - - BOTTOM OF BANK
EXISTING TREE LINE
PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
LOG VANE (FUNCTIONAL)

?-- FLOW DIRECTION

\ o+? THALWEG

V M
m
ILI
LL W
u-

U
\J

SANDY CREEK ?0
V
- 's•oo L 7
L6 L

100 0 0
SCALE IN FEET
Client: Ti11eSTREAM CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW D.n By: Dote: FIGURE
19 `- T"` 2008
l
Project: Ckd By: e
S-
L7EcoScience ?
}
t Sandy Cree k Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restorat ion Site MCG r•• 100•

rinn
?
S?S
em
EEP Project No. 322
D Project N._ B2
DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06-282.03
M M M M M M M M M M i M M M M M M M M
100 0 l Q0
SCALE IN FEET

V
".oo cp
M
W ?•ca µOJ JB
I= CAE

_V
u-

U
H t
Q
? Al
L 13
`

LEGEND
-C/E- CONSERVATION EASEMENT

t EXISTING STREAM

O BOTTOM OF BANK
L 12
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ SPN EXISTING TREE LINE
l9 10 a?•0g Ltt rE
L10 .-© PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION
L1t
Cl
LOG VANE (FUNCTIONAL)
r f FLOW DIRECTION
0:!t-? THALWEG
Cent.
7 Tine: STREAM CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW D•^ By
TAL Dole
FES
2008 raw
;?? Projed Ck0 By al
e
Scale
EcoScience
H
osvSteI11 Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland
j Restoration Site MCG r•• 1001
Cor or2tion
P ?
j
? EEP Pro
ect No. 322 g3
i b
,1 1r I? ESC Project No.=
DURHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 06.282.03

1
1
1

Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Monitoring Year 4
Table B1. Stream Problem Areas
Sand Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Station Photo
Feature Issue Numbers Suspected Cause Number
Aggradation/Bar
00+00 to 27+00 Excessive sediment load from upstream sources SPA1, 2
Formation
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Problem Area Photos
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report

SPA Photo 1. Excessive sediment load from upstream sources.
SPA Photo 2. Excessive sediment load from upstream sources.
Table 132. Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
Sandy Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
2,700 linear feet
Feature
Category Metric (per As-built and reference baselines) (# Stable)
Number
Performing
as
Intended Total
number
per
As-built Total
Number
/ feet in
unstable
state %
Perform
in Stable
Condition Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A. Riffles 1. Present'? 0 N/A N/A 0
2. Armor stable (e. g. no displacement)? N/A N/A N/A N/A
3. Facet grade appears stable? 0 N/A N/A 0
4. Minimal evidence of embedding/fining? 0 N/A N/A 0
5. Length appropriate? 0 N/A N/A 0 0%

B. Pools 1. Present? (e.g not subject to severe aggrad. or
mi rat.? 0 N/A N/A 0
2. Sufficiently deep (Max Pool D:Mean Bkf
>1.6?) 0 N/A N/A 0
3. Length appropriate? 0 N/A N/A 0 0%

C. Thalweg 1. Upstream of meander bend (run/inflection)
centering'? 0 N/A N/A 0
2. Downstream of meander (glide/inflection)
centering? 0 N/A N/A 0 0%

D. Meanders 1. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled
erosion? N/A N/A N/A
2. Of those eroding, # w/concomitant point bar
formation? N/A N/A N/A
3. Apparent Re within spec? N/A N/A N/A
4. Sufficient flood lain access and relief? 2700 ft N/A N/A 100 100%

E. Bed 1. General channel bed aggradation areas (bar
formation N/A N/A 2700 ft 0
General 2. Channel bed degradation - areas of increasing
down-cutting or head cutting'? N/A N/A 2700 ft 0 0%

F. Bank 1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank N/A N/A 0 100% 100%

G. Vanes 1. Free of back or arm scour? 13 13 N/A 100
2. Height appropriate? 13 13 N/A 100
3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate'? 13 13 N/A 100
4. Free of piping or other structural failures? 13 13 N/A 100 100%

EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
Photo L2: Log Vane 2 at Station 4 + 12 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Photo L1: Log Vane 1 at Station 2 + 04 (August 21, 2007)
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
Photo L3: Log Vane 3 at Station 6 + 55 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Photo L4: Log Vane 4 at Station 8 + 88 (August 21, 2007)
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
Photo L6: Log Vane 6 at Station 13 + 83 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Photo L5: Log Vane 5 at Station 10 + 99 (August 21, 2007)
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
Photo L7: Log Vane 7 at Station 15 + 39 (August 21, 2007)

Photo L8: Log Vane 8 at Station 17 + 45 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
'
y„A
-
*--
i l

R

Photo L10: Log Vane 10 at Station 20 + 91 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Photo L9: Log Vane 9 at Station 19 + 72 (August 21, 2007)
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations

If ? ?, T4 JJ
Ale"

? .. 1
TT -0
y r

rt ? ??
:•
F '.tilt _ '56
so
6
yF
J
Photo L11: Log Vane 11 at Station 22 + 66 (August 21, 2007)
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
Photo L12: Log Vane 12 at Station 24 + 20 (August 21, 2007)
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Stream Photo-stations
Photo L13: Log Vane 13 at Station 26 + 12 (August 21, 2007)

%

.T
.

4
.
7
Photo L14: Permanent Cross-Section (18 + 25) Viewed Looking Downstream
EEP Project No. 322 Appendix B Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
m
m
b
-o
0
0
w
N
b
'v
G
/.
a
U.
L?
G
.C
n
fp
0
0
UQ
cro
A
O

104
102
0 00
198
;96
94
92
90

0 10 20 30 40 50
* vaa,-across se ro' tai2vm) -+- Year-3 cross se-ron ti voa/oe)
-?-- Year-2 Cmss Section (10/14/05) BanVA

Cross-section, upstream looking downstream
Cross-section, downstream looking upstream
Project Sandy Creek Stream and Wetland Restoration Site, Durham County
Survey Date Survev Weather Field Team
8/21/07 Sunny Michael Gloden, Justin
rction Appendix C
Location
ation IS+_'s

m
m
b
0
ro
z
0
w
J
D
?a
'a
2
X
cc
n
0
0
ttc
rn
0

silt/clay 0 - 0.062
very tine sand 0.062 - 0.125
tine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
very fine gravel 2 - 4
tine gravel 4 - 6
fine gravel 6 - 8
medium gravel 8 - 11
medium gravel I 1 - 16
coarse gravel 16 - 22
coarse gravel 22 - 32
very coarse gravel 32 - 45
very coarse gravel 45 - 64
small cobble 64 - 90
medium cobble 90 - 128
large cobble 128 - 180
very large cobble 180 - 256
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder, 2048 - 4096
total particle count: 100
bedrock
clay hardpan
detritus/wood
artificial
Note:
total count: 100
Bed Surface Pebble Count,
-*-cumulative % -# of particles
100% - IU I A I bbl b Id
90%
80%
CU 70%
w
c 60%
w
c
v 50%
C
CL
40%
30%
20%
10%
0°/
si c ay san grave co e ou er

r

i
1
t
f

0
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
D16 0.16
D35 0.22
D50 0.55
D65 0.68
D84 0.89
D95 9.4
60
50
40
c
3
Cr
rn
30 °
W
m
20
10
0
1000 10000
Size Distribution
dispersion 2.5
skewness -0.19
silt/clay 0%
sand 92%
gravel 8%
cobble 0%
boulder 0%

1
APPENDIX C
WETLAND RAW DATA

1

1

EEP Project No. 322 Appendix C Sandy Creek Monitoring Report
a;is uoi;ejojsad Naaio Apues 0 xlpueddy ZZE •ON;aafad d33
G1
tD
r-r
(D
Q
0
3
CD

Water Depth (in)
,
A W W N N NL L , , ? - N N N W W A
O O N Oo A 0 0 N Oo A O N. Oo N M O A w N O O
son - March 30
m - April 11
ison - April 28
- November 11
E
O
O
3
M -4 n
D (DD
I cD
D
w
-Ph
D
O O N N
O M O CT1 O cn
Precipitation (in.)
ajls uogejolsab ?aajo Apues 0 xipueddy ZZ£ 'ON ;Oafad d93
N O
lD fD
N N
Q ?
fD -
(D N
-0 Q
C
N ?
N. n
CD 3
Q
O CO
7
D
v
N
lD
m
CL
av
N
Q
CD
cn '
7
U)
O
?F
Water Depth (in)
A W W N N N ?? ?? N N N W W A
O O N CO A Cl O N Oo A O A Oo N O O A w N O O
arch 30
111
kpril 28
ember 11
E
O
1-
f-0
?• 0
Y ,
CD q<
0
?T 0 0
W CD
1
tD
v
M
M
IT1
N
O O ? ? N N
O cn O Cn O cn
Precipitation (in.)
a;ls uogejolsad ?aajo Apues 0 xlpueddy ZZE *ON;oafad d33
G)
N
C
co
m
5
N
N
N
Q
N
0
S
CO
0
.-r
Water Depth (in)
A W W N N N??? i ? -? N N N W W A
O W N w A 0 0 N Oo A O A OD N W O A w N W O
rch 30
111
kpril 28
/ember 11
ic
0
M
0
Q
M ° 0
CD
v
M
4
0
0
00
O O N N
O C n O Cli O U1
Precipitation (in.)
atis uol;ejo}sad ?aajo ApueS
0 xlpueddy ZZE 'ON toafad d33
W
1
C
a
0'
v
(D
v
A
O
6
(D
0
3
(D
(o
l
O
C
7
a
y
C
N
n
(D
r+
Water Depth (in)
A W W N N N??? ? ? -? N N N W W A
O W N 0o A O O N 00 A O A OD N O O A OD N O O
arch 30
111
April 28
ember 11
K
O
O
C
CL
O O ?G
O
3 y 0
n ?D
cD ?p
Cn X
O
W/?
n
n
4
a
M
0
O O N N
O M O (n O (n
Precipitation (in.)
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m ¦¦.
ii
EcoScience
Corporation
R?l,ig6. KorcL Carolina
a
1,.cos\stem
¦
IV, v L11101
SANDY CREEK
STREAM
ENHANCEMENT
r+ M? AND WETLAND
/ RESTORATION SO
SITE
EEP Project
Yo ? n ,
a '+A
W . a
0
No. 322
DURHAM COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA

` WETLAND
PROBLEM
AREAS

By Dote

! TAL NOV 2007
?Ir p.
? a Br Scale.
MCG 1-60'

- 06-282.03
FIGURE
? I C