20140041 Ver 1_Year 0 Monitoring Report_2016_20170119

AS -BUILT BASELINE
LITTLE PINE III STREAM AND WETLAND
RESTORATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT Alleghany County, NC
DEQ Contract D12010S
DMS Project Number 94903
Final D W R # 14-0041
USACE Action ID 2012-01299
Data Collection Period: April -May 2016
Final Submission Date: September 19, 2016
PREPARED FOR:
Mk
NC Department of Environment Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
W
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) completed design and construction management on a design --
bid -build project at the Little Pine III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project (Site) for the North
Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) to restore, enhance, and preserve a total of 13,112 linear
feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream, and to enhance and preserve 2.9 acres of wetlands in
Alleghany County, NC. The Site is expected to generate 6,973 stream mitigation units (SMUs), and 1.40
wetland mitigation units (WMUs), for the New River Basin (Table 1). The Site is located approximately
eight miles east of the Town of Sparta, NC and approximately four miles south of the Virginia border in
the New River Basin; eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 05050001 and the 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 05050001030030 (Figure 1). The Site streams consist of Little Pine Creek, a third order stream, as
well as an unnamed second order tributary to Little Pine Creek (UT2), an unnamed first order tributary
to Little Pine Creek (UT2a) and four unnamed zero order tributaries to Little Pine Creek (UT1, UT2b, UT3,
and UT4). (Figure 2). Little Pine Creek flows into Brush Creek at the downstream Site boundary. The land
adjacent to the streams and wetlands is primarily maintained cattle pasture and forest.
The Site is within a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) identified in the New River Basin Restoration
Priority (RBRP) plan (NCDENR, 2009). The Site is also located within the Little River & Brush Creek Local
Watershed Plan (LWP). The LWP identified the following stressors to watershed function: unforested
buffers that are heavily grazed, livestock access to the streams, heavily eroded stream banks, land -
disturbing activities on steep slopes, and storm water runoff in and around the Town of Sparta. The Site
was identified in the LWP as a stream and wetland restoration opportunity with the potential to
improve water quality, habitat, and hydrology within the Brush Creek watershed (site identifiers LPC1-
04, LPC1-W10). LPC1-04 is the second highest ranked stream project of sixty-five identified in the
watershed. In addition to being a high priority site, the Site is located in close proximity to other
established restoration projects with protected conservation easements.
The project goals from the mitigation plan (Wildlands, 2014) were established with careful consideration
of RBRP goals and objectives to address stressors identified in the LWP. The established project goals
include:
• Restore unforested buffers;
• Remove livestock from buffers;
• Remove livestock from streams;
• Repair heavily eroded stream banks and improve stream bank stability;
• Reforest steep landscape around streams; and
• Enhance wetland vegetation.
The Site construction and as -built survey were completed in 2016. Planting and baseline monitoring
activities occurred between December 2015 and May 2016. Minimal adjustments made during
construction are detailed in Section 4.1. Baseline (MYO) profiles and cross-section dimensions closely
match the design parameters. Cross-section widths and pool depths occasionally exceed design
parameters within a normal range of variability for natural streams. The Site has been built as designed
and is expected to meet the upcoming monitoring year's success criteria.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL

LITTLE PINE III STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1:
PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES........................................................1-1
1.1 Project
Location and Setting......................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Project
Goals and Objectives.....................................................................................................1-1
1.3 Project
Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach..................................................................1-2
1.3.1
Project Structure................................................................................................................1-2
1.3.2
Restoration Type and Approach........................................................................................1-3
1.4 Project
History, Contacts, and Attribute Data...........................................................................1-3
Section 2:
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS..........................................................................................
2-1
2.1 Stream........................................................................................................................................2-1
2.1.1
Dimension..........................................................................................................................2-1
2.1.2
Pattern and Profile.............................................................................................................2-1
2.1.3
Photo Documentation........................................................................................................2-1
2.1.4
Substrate............................................................................................................................2-1
2.1.5
Bankfull Documentation....................................................................................................2-2
2.1.6
Visual Assessments............................................................................................................2-2
2.2 Vegetation
..................................................................................................................................2-2
2.3 Wetlands....................................................................................................................................2-2
2.4 Schedule
and Reporting.............................................................................................................2-2
Section 3:
MONITORING PLAN........................................................................................................
3-1
3.1 Stream........................................................................................................................................3-1
3.1.1
Dimension..........................................................................................................................3-1
3.1.2
Pattern and Profile.............................................................................................................3-1
3.1.3
Substrate............................................................................................................................3-1
3.1.4
Photo Reference Points.....................................................................................................3-1
3.1.5
Hydrology Documentation.................................................................................................3-2
3.1.6
Visual Assessment..............................................................................................................3-2
3.2 Vegetation
..................................................................................................................................3-2
3.3 Wetlands....................................................................................................................................3-2
Section 4:
AS -BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE)...................................................................................
4-1
4.1 Record
Drawings........................................................................................................................4-1
4.1.1
Little Pine Creek Reach 1....................................................................................................4-1
4.1.2
Little Pine Creek Reach 2a..................................................................................................4-1
4.1.3
Little Pine Creek Reach 2b.................................................................................................4-1
4.1.4
UT1.....................................................................................................................................4-1
4.1.5
UT2.....................................................................................................................................4-1
4.1.6
UT2a...................................................................................................................................4-2
4.1.7
UT2b...................................................................................................................................4-2
4.2 Baseline
Data Assessment.........................................................................................................4-2
4.2.1
Morphological State of the Channel..................................................................................4-2
4.2.2
Vegetation..........................................................................................................................4-2
4.2.3
Wetlands............................................................................................................................4-2
Section 5:
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................5-1
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL

APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component/Asset Map
Figure 3.0— 3.3
Monitoring Plan View
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Project Information and Attributes
Table 5
Monitoring Component Summary
Appendix 2 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 6 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 7 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Cross -Section Plots
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Counts
Stream Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8 Planted and Total Stem Counts
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix 4 Record Drawings
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL

Section 1: PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Project Location and Setting
The Site is located in eastern Alleghany County, NC as shown in Figure 1. The Site is approximately eight
miles east of the Town of Sparta, NC and approximately four miles south of the Virginia border. (Figure
1). The land required for construction, management, and stewardship of the mitigation project
includeded portions of 5 parcels resulting in X acres of conservation easement
The Site is located in the New River Basin; eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 05050001 and the 14 -digit
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 05050001030030 (Figure 1). Located in the Blue Ridge Belt of the Blue Ridge
Province (USGS, 1998), the project watershed includes primarily managed herbaceous, mixed upland
hardwoods, and other forested land. The drainage area for the Site is 2,784 acres.
The North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR) assigns best usage classifications to State Waters
that reflect water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Little Pine Creek (DWR Index No. 10-
9-10-5) is the main tributary of the project and is classified as Class C waters. Class C waters are
protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture, and other uses. Little Pine Creek also has a supplemental classification as Trout Waters (Tr).
Trout waters are protected to sustain and allow for trout propagation and survival and include
tributaries to stocked trout streams. Trout are not currently stocked in Little Pine Creek. Brush Creek,
which is located downstream of the Site, is hatchery supported.
The Site is located within a TLW in the New River RBRP plan (NCDENR, 2009), and is identified in the
Little River and Brush Creek LWP Project Atlas (NCDENR, 2007). The Little River and Brush Creek LWP
identified the following stressors in the watershed: unforested buffers that are heavily grazed, livestock
access to streams, heavily eroded stream banks, land -disturbing activities on steep slopes, and storm
water runoff in and around the town of Sparta. The LWP Project Atlas identified the Little Pine Creek III
Stream and Wetland Restoration Project (LPC1-04, LPC1-W10) as a stream and wetland restoration
opportunity with the potential to improve water quality, habitat, and hydrology within the Brush Creek
watershed.
Prior to construction activities, livestock had full access to most of the Site streams and used them as a
water source. The riparian buffers in areas proposed for restoration were primarily herbaceous with a
few sparse trees. Deposition of fine sediment, severe bank erosion, and trampling of banks, impacted
the in -stream habitat. Channel widening and incision indicated instability. Table 4 in Appendix 1 and
Table 6 in Appendix 2 present the pre -restoration conditions in detail.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
This Site is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits within the New River Basin. While many of
these benefits are limited to the Little Pine III project area, others, such as pollutant removal, reduced
sediment loading, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have farther -reaching effects. Expected
improvements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined below as project goals and
objectives. These project goals were established with careful consideration of goals and objectives that
were described in the RBRP and to address stressors identified in the LWP.
The project specific goals of the Site address stressors identified in the LWP and include the following:
• Restore unforested buffers;
• Remove livestock from buffers;
• Remove livestock from streams;
• Repair heavily eroded stream banks and improve stream bank stability;
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 1-1

• Reforest steep landscape around streams; and
• Enhance wetland vegetation.
Secondary goals include the following:
• Remove harmful nutrients from creek flow;
• Reduce pollution of creek by excess sediment;
• Improve in -stream habitat; and
• Improve aesthetics.
The project objectives have been defined as follows:
• Restore 26.3 acres of forested riparian buffer;
• Fence off livestock from 57.32 acres of buffer and 14,736 LF of existing streams;
• Stream bank erosion which contributes sediment load to the creek will be greatly reduced, if not
eliminated, in the project area. Eroding stream banks will be stabilized by increased woody root
mass in banks, reducing channel incision, and by using natural channel design techniques,
grading, and planting to reduce bank angles and bank height;
• Steep, unforested landscape within the conservation easement will be reforested;
• Eight of the nine onsite wetlands will be enhanced with supplemental plantings;
• Flood flows will be filtered through restored floodplain areas, where flood flow will spread
through native vegetation. Vegetation takes up excess nutrients;
• Storm flow containing grit and fine sediment will be filtered through restored floodplain areas,
where flow will spread through native vegetation. The spreading of flood flows will reduce
velocity allowing sediment to settle out;
• In -stream structures will promote aeration of water;
• In -stream structures will be constructed to improve habitat diversity and trap detritus. Wood
structures will be incorporated into the stream as part of the restoration design. Such structures
may include log drops and rock structures that incorporate woody debris; and
• Site aesthetics will be enhanced by planting native plant species, treating invasive species, and
stabilizing eroding and unstable areas throughout the project.
1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
The final mitigation plan was submitted and accepted by the DMS in March of 2014. Construction
activities were completed in September 2015 by North State Environmental, Inc. Kee Surveying Inc.
completed the as -built survey in April 2016 and Wildlands completed the baseline monitoring activities
in May 2016. Planting was completed by Bruton Environmental, Inc. in December 2015. Final monitoring
activities and close out will commence in December 2020. Minimal adjustments were made during
construction and field adjustments made during construction are described in further detail in section
4.1. Please refer to Appendix 1 for detailed project activity, history, contact information, and
watershed/site background information.
1.3.1 Project Structure
The Site is expected to provide 6,973 SMUs, and 1.40 WMUs. These Site components and mitigation
credits reflect assets developed in the final Interagency Review Team (IRT) -approved project mitigation
plan and subsequently permitted. Please refer to the Project Component Map (Figure 2) for the stream
and wetland features and to Table 1 for the project component and mitigation credit information for the
Site.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 1-2

1.3.2 Restoration Type and Approach
The project includes stream restoration, enhancement I and II (EI and Ell), and preservation as well as
wetland enhancement and preservation. The specific proposed stream and wetland types are described
below.
The stream restoration portion of the Site includes four reaches; three reaches on Little Pine Creek and
one reach on UT2b. The restoration portion of Little Pine enters the Site from a farm field east of the site
and flows southwest. The approach changes to EI 504 LF upstream of the Big Oak Road crossing, which
marks the downstream Site boundary. UT2b originates in a wetland onsite and flows west until its
confluence with UT2. The stream restoration design was developed based on reference conditions,
representing streams within the Blue Ridge Belt region with similar drainage areas, valley slopes,
morphology, and bed material. The restoration reaches were designed as threshold channels. This
design approach was determined to be appropriate due to the low bedload supply, and sediment supply
is not expected to change. The channels were not intended to be fully alluvial and are not expected to
migrate laterally over time. Grade control structures and constructed riffles were used to address
potential degradation and shear stress. The design streams were restored to the appropriate type based
on the surrounding landscape, climate, and natural vegetation communities and with thorough
consideration to the existing watershed conditions and their trajectory.
The Ell portion of the Site includes several reaches; the downstream portion of Little Pine Creek Reach
2b, all of UT1, and portions of UT2a and UT2b. Ell consisted of cattle exclusion, invasive species removal,
planting supplemental riparian vegetation to encourage bank stabilization and establish a forested
buffer, and occasional spot bank stabilization or grade control. Ell activities also occurred in the buffer
surrounding where an EI approach was used in the channel. In portions of UT2 Reach 1 upper and UT2
Reach 2 lower, localized bed and bank instabilities were sources of impairment prior to restoration
activities. To address the impairment, an EI approach was used, which involved construction of a series
of step -pools with logs, and short, steep, coarse riffles with grade control to allow UT2 to drop its
channel elevation while maintaining stability. The EI approach was used in proportion to the level of
impairment in existing conditions. Where UT2 Reach 1 enters the mature forest and exhibits good bed
and bank stability, only cattle exclusion was implemented. Below the UT2a confluence, the existing
condition of the UT2 was incised and laterally unstable. This is impairment was addressed by restoring
proper dimension, pattern, and profile to the stream in the downstream portion of UT2 Reach 2.
The preservation portion of the Site includes portions of UT2a within the wood line, UT3, and UT4. The
preservation reaches are preserved as is because they are stable and flow through mature forest.
Fencing is installed to ensure livestock exclusion.
The wetland portion of the Site includes nine distinct wetland zones. The eight riparian wetland
enhancement zones include Wetland AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, and HH. The enhancement activities
included supplemental planting and fencing to remove livestock. Wetland JJ is preservation only.
1.4 Project History, Contacts, and Attribute Data
The Site was restored by Wildlands through a design -bid -build contract with DMS. Tables 2, 3, and 4 in
Appendix 1 provide detailed information regarding the project schedule, project contacts, and project
baseline information and attributes.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 1-3

Section 2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The stream and wetland performance criteria for the Site follow approved performance criteria
presented in the Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project Mitigation Plan (2014).
This Site is a post -instrument project (instituted after 7/28/2010), but instituted prior to the seven-year
monitoring guidance. Therefore, the Site will be evaluated for five -years post -construction. Annual
monitoring will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished Site. The stream restoration/EI
reaches (Little Pine Creek Reaches 1, 2a, and 2b, UT2, and UT2b downstream) were assigned specific
performance criteria for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation. Wetland enhancement areas
were not assigned specific performance criteria for wetland hydrology. An outline of the performance
criteria components follows. Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the five-year post -
construction monitoring.
2.1 Stream
2.1.1 Dimension
Riffle cross-sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Per DMS guidance, bank height ratios
shall not exceed 1.2 and entrenchment ratios shall be at least 2.2 for restored C and E channels to be
considered stable. Riffle cross-sections should fall within the parameters defined for channels of the
appropriate Rosgen stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be evaluated to assess
whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability include a vertically
incising thalweg or eroding channel banks. Changes in the channel that indicate a movement toward
stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -to -depth ratio in meandering channels or
an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken if channel changes indicate a movement
toward stability.
2.1.2 Pattern and Profile
Longitudinal profile data for the stream restoration reaches should show that the bedform features are
remaining stable. The riffles should be steeper and shallower than the pools, while the pools should be
deep with nearly flat water surface slopes. The relative percentage of riffles and pools should not
change significantly from the design parameters. Adjustments in length and slope of run and glide
features are expected and will not be considered a sign of instability. The longitudinal profile should
show that the bank height ratio remains very near to 1.0 for the majority of the restoration reaches.
2.1.3 Photo Documentation
Photographs should illustrate the Site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross-
section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal
photos should indicate the absence of persistent bars within the channel or vertical incision. Grade
control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane arms is
preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
2.1.4 Substrate
Substrate materials in the restoration and EI reaches should indicate a progression towards or the
maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the pool features.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 2-1

2.1.5 Bankfull Documentation
Two bankfull flow events must be documented on the restoration and EI reaches within the five-year
monitoring period. The two bankfull events must occur in separate years. Stream monitoring will
continue until success criteria in the form of two bankfull events in separate years have been
documented. Bankfull events will be documented using crest gages, photographs, and visual
assessments such as debris lines.
2.1.6 Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above.
2.2 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the planted
riparian and wetland corridor at the end of the required monitoring period in monitoring year five
(MY5). The interim measure of vegetative success for the Site will be the survival of at least 320 planted
stems per acre at the end of the third monitoring year (MY3). The extent of invasive species coverage
will also be monitored and controlled as necessary throughout the required monitoring period.
2.3 Wetlands
Performance standards are not defined for the wetland enhancement areas. Hydrologic data will be
collected will not be used to evaluate success criteria for the Site.
2.4 Schedule and Reporting
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to DMS. Based
on the DMS Annual Monitoring Template (April 2015), the monitoring reports will include the following:
• Project background which includes project objectives, project structure, restoration type and
approach, location and setting, history and background;
• Project Asset Map of major project elements;
• Photographs showing views of the restored Site taken from fixed point stations;
• Current Condition Plan View Map with monitoring features and current problem areas noted
such as stability and easement encroachment based on the cross-section surveys and annual
visual assessments;
• Vegetative data as described above including the identification of any invasion by undesirable
plant species;
• Groundwater gage plots;
• A description of damage by animals or vandalism;
• Maintenance issues and recommended remediation measures will be detailed and documented;
and
• Wildlife observations.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 2-2

Section 3: MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring will consist of collecting morphological, vegetative, and hydrological data to assess
the project success based on the restoration goals and. Project success will be assessed by measuring
channel dimension, substrate composition, vegetation, surface water hydrology, and groundwater
hydrology and by analyzing photographs and performing visual assessments. Identified high priority
problem areas, such as unstable stream banks, bed instability, aggradation/degradation, or poor
vegetation establishment will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The problem areas will be visually
noted and reported to DMS staff in the annual report. Refer to Table 5 in Appendix 1 for the monitoring
component summary.
3.1 Stream
Geomorphic assessments follow guidelines outlined in the Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994), methodologies utilized in the Rosgen
stream assessment and classification documents (Rosgen, 1994 and 1996), and in the Stream
Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). Please refer to Figure 3 in Appendix
1 for monitoring locations discussed below.
3.1.1 Dimension
In order to monitor the channel dimension, 18 permanent cross-sections were installed along the
stream restoration reach. Each cross-section is permanently marked with rebar installed in concrete and
1/2 inch PVC pipes. Cross-section surveys shall measure points at all breaks in slope, including top of
bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg. Cross-sections will be surveyed annually for the five year
monitoring period. Photographs will be taken annually of the cross-sections looking upstream and
downstream.
3.1.2 Pattern and Profile
Longitudinal profile surveys will be conducted during the five-year monitoring period along (Little Pine
Reaches 1, 2a, and 2b; UT2; and UT2b.). Stream pattern will be assessed visually as described below in
Section 3.1.6.
3.1.3 Substrate
Reachwide pebble counts will be conducted for classification purposes on each of the restoration and EI
reaches (Little Pine Reaches 1, 2a, and 2b; UT2; and UT2b.). Wetted riffle pebble counts were also
conducted at permanent riffle cross-sections on Little Pine Reaches 1 (XS3), 2a (XS6), and 2b (XS9); UT2
(XS12, XS14, and XS17); and on UT2b (XS11). The pebble counts will be conducted annually for five years
following construction and compared with data from previous years.
3.1.4 Photo Reference Points
Photographs will be used to monitor restoration and enhancement of stream and wetland areas as well
as vegetation plots. A total of 42 permanent photographic reference points were established at the tail
of riffles within the project stream and wetland areas after construction. Permanent markers were
established so that the same locations and view directions on the site are monitored each year.
Reference photos were also taken for each of the vegetation plots and cross-sections. Photographs will
be taken annually during the annual stream and vegetation surveys to visually document stability for
five years following construction. The photographer will make every effort to maintain the same area in
each photo over time.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 3-1

3.1.5 Hydrology Documentation
Bankfull events will be documented using crest gages, photographs, and visual assessments such as
debris lines. Three crest gages were installed within surveyed riffle cross-sections; one on Little Pine
Reach 2a (XS4), one on UT2 (XS17), and one on UT2b (XS11). The gages will be checked at each site visit
to determine if a bankfull event has occurred. Photographs will be used to document the occurrence of
debris lines and sediment deposition.
3.1.6 Visual Assessment
Visual assessments will be performed in the field along all stream areas on an annual basis during the
five-year monitoring period. Problem areas will be noted such as channel instability (i.e. lateral and/or
vertical instability, in -stream structure failure/instability and/or piping, headcuts), vegetated buffer
health (i.e. low stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species or encroachment), beaver activity, or
livestock access. Areas of concern will be mapped, photographed, and described through a written
description in the annual report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during each subsequent visual
assessment.
3.2 Vegetation
Planted woody vegetation will be monitored in accordance with the guidelines and procedures
developed by the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2006) to monitor and
assess the planted woody vegetation. A total of 21 vegetation plots were established on the Site.
Vegetation plots were randomly established within the planted stream and wetland restoration areas to
capture the heterogeneity of the designed vegetative communities. All of the plots were established as
10 meter by 10 meter squares or S meter by 20 meter rectangles. The vegetation plot corners have been
marked and are recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference
photographs at the origin looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner were taken during
the baseline monitoring in May 2016. Subsequent annual assessments following baseline survey will
capture the same reference photograph locations.
Species composition, density and survival rates will be evaluated on an annual basis by plot and for the
entire Site. Individual plot data will be provided and will include diameter, height, density, vigor, damage
(if any), and percent survival. Planted woody stems will be marked annually as needed based off of a
known origin so they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from
the difference between the baseline year's living planted stems and the current year's living planted
stems.
Please refer to Figure 3 in Appendix 1 for the vegetation monitoring locations.
3.3 Wetlands
One groundwater monitoring gage was established within enhancement wetland FF using a logging
hydrology pressure transducer. The gage was set to record the ground water level two times per day.
The groundwater gage will be downloaded during annual site visits. Please refer to Figure 3 in Appendix
1 for the groundwater gage monitoring location.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 3-2

Section 4: AS -BUILT CONDITION (BASELINE)
The Site construction and as -built surveys were completed in April 2016. The survey included developing
an as -built topographic surface, locating the channel boundaries, and structures. For comparison
purposes, during the baseline assessments, reaches were divided into assessment reaches in the same
way that they were established for design parameters: Little Pine Creek Reaches 1, 2a and 2b, UT2, and
UT2b.
4.1 Record Drawings
A sealed half-size record drawing is located in Appendix 4 that includes redlines for any significant field
adjustments made during construction that were different from the design plans. Stream adjustments
along Little Pine Creek Reaches 1 and 2a were associated with existing vegetation and erosion
prevention. Stream adjustments made along Little Pine Creek Reach 2b during construction were minor
profile adjustments and adding additional grade control structures. Repair work was conducted in
March 2016 on Little Pine Creek Reach 1, Reach 2a, Reach 2b, and UT2 to stabilize erosion resulting from
several large storm events. The approved planting plan was not followed; a separate planting contract
was used. This report provides planted species observed in the vegetation plots. Specific changes are
detailed below.
4.1.1 Little Pine Creek Reach 1
• Station 100+00 - 101+00 Armored head of riffle, stone toe geolift, and brush mattress;
• Station 111+50 Class I/B stone toe, left and right bank; and
• Station 113+00 Ephemeral pool outlet channel stabilized with rock, seed, mulch, and matting.
4.1.2 Little Pine Creek Reach 2a
• Station 116+25 Ephemeral pool outlet channel stabilized with stone;
• Station 118+00 Boulder toe added right bank; and
• Station 122+75 Swale tie in from gully down to Little Pine left floodplain, outlet stabilization on
left bank.
4.1.3 Little Pine Creek Reach 2b
• Station 124+00 Boulder toe added to tail of riffle;
• Station 124+75 Log sill and one boulder added;
• Station 126+00-126+50 Three boulders added below log sills in riffle;
• Station 127+20-127+75 Right bank protection changed from rootwads to brush toe;
• Station 128+00 Boulder sill replaced log sill; and
• Station 129+00 Log sill removed.
4.1.4 UTI
• Station 202+30 Rock "A" vane replaced with two boulder sills.
4.1.5 UT2
• Station 301+00 Angled log drop eliminated (3 log sills), bank grading removed;
• Station 327+00 log sill added;
• Station 337+75 and 338+25 Two boulder sills added;
• Station 342+00 boulder added below log sill; and
• Station 342+50-342+61 Tie in angle adjusted.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 4-1

4.1.6 UT2a
• Station 401+80 Log sill removed.
4.1.7 UT2b
• Station 502+00 and 502+25 Log sills relocated; and
• Station 504+75 Log sill added.
4.2 Baseline Data Assessment
Baseline monitoring (MYO) was conducted between April and May 2016. The first annual monitoring
assessment (MY1) will be completed in the fall of 2016. The streams and wetlands will be monitored for
a total of five years, with the final monitoring activities to be conducted in 2020. The mitigation close-
out for the Site is planned for 2021.
4.2.1 Morphological State of the Channel
Morphological data for the as -built profile was collected between April and May 2016. Please refer to
Appendix 2 for summary data tables, morphological plots, and stream photographs.
Profile
The MYO profiles closely match the profile design parameters. On the design profiles, riffles were
depicted as straight lines with consistent slopes. However, at some locations the riffle profiles within the
as -built survey are not consistent in slope due to the installation of structures and woody debris within
the streambed. The water surface slope was used to calculate all riffle slopes. Maximum riffle slopes and
bankfull slopes vary from design parameters due to a field adjustment during construction. Additionally,
maximum pool depths typically exceed design parameters and are expected to trend towards the design
depths as a result of natural deposition over time. These variations in riffle slope and pool depths do not
constitute a problem or indicate a need for remedial actions and will be assessed visually during the
annual assessments.
Dimension
The MYO dimension numbers closely match the design parameters within acceptable ranges of
variation. Variations in baseline parameters are reflected in the cross-sections as a larger maximum pool
depth. We anticipate that over time pools may accumulate with sediment and organic matter. This
accumulation of sediment within pools would not be seen as an indicator of instability. Maximum depth
in riffles are occasionally exceeded due to micropools forming through lateral scour near boulders, but
this is not expected to adversely impact the stability of the channel.
Pattern
The MYO pattern metrics fell within acceptable ranges of the design parameters for all three reaches.
Pattern data will be evaluated in MY5 if there are any indicators through the profile or dimension
assessments that significant geomorphic adjustments have occurred.
Bankfull Events
Bankfull events recorded following completion of construction will be reported in the MY1 report.
4.2.2 Vegetation
The MYO average planted density is 549 stems per acre, which exceeds the interim measure of
vegetative success of at least 320 planted stems per acre at the end of the third monitoring year.
Summary data and photographs of each plot can be found in Appendix 3.
4.2.3 Wetlands
Groundwater gage data will be reported in the annual monitoring report.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 4-2

Section 5: REFERENCES
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.0. Retrieved from http://deq.nc.gov/document/cvs-eep-protocol-v42-lev1-2
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Surface Water Classifications. Retrieved
from http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-
standards/classifications
NCDENR. 2009. New River Basin Restoration Priorities. Retrieved from
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/new-river-basin
NCDENR. 2007. Little River & Brush Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP) Project Atlas. Retrieved from
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/new-river-basin
Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1998. North Carolina Geology.
https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-carolina-geological-
survey/
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (2014). Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project Final Mitigation
Plan. NCEEP, Raleigh, NC.
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report -FINAL 5-1

APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures

Alk
a t i ".
3 ,
litr'� �Ai L ■
820r,:
t -
NORTH CARO 1.1 '_- _m _�_ �'IRGINI
05050001030015 ( —'�
,.��•o.o,N`
rr 1
t Op
-TO
t
�. 40101
0505,0001030020
03040101080`
lk�wv
WILDLANDS ,`
ENGINEERING
0 0.5 1 Mile
I I I I I
Alleghany County, NC

Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map
WLittle Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
W I L D L A N D S , 0 I ' I 700 Feet DMS Project No. 94903
ENGINEERING I t
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Alleghany County, NC

%�O
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Figure 3.0 Monitoring Plan View Map (Key)
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
rk� DMS Project No. 94903
0 200 400 Feet Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
1 1 1 1 I Alleghany County, NC

WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0
'6
33 4� 32
CG3
. . . . . . ad
I A
3.
S-1
.4,
f
fi
322+50
7
Stream Restoration
•
323x
A,
Stream Enhancement 11
Stream Preservation
Non -Project Streams
Wetland Enhancement
Wetland Preservation
32
x
O
Bankfull
0, Crest Gage (CG)
4Groundwater Gage (GWG)
Photo Point
Cross Section (XS)
Vegetation Monitoring Plot
Internal Easement Crossing
0 Waterers
0 Well
Water Lines
24'
3,'6 pp
UT
2b
'6
33 4� 32
CG3
. . . . . . ad
I A
3.
S-1
.4,
f
I' I
Figure 3.1 Monitoring Plan View Map (Sheet 1 of 2)
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
0 100 200 Feet Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
1 1 1 1 1 Alleghany County, NC
Conservation Easement
7
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
A,
Stream Enhancement 11
Stream Preservation
Non -Project Streams
Wetland Enhancement
Wetland Preservation
Reach Break
Bankfull
0, Crest Gage (CG)
4Groundwater Gage (GWG)
Photo Point
Cross Section (XS)
Vegetation Monitoring Plot
Internal Easement Crossing
0 Waterers
0 Well
Water Lines
I' I
Figure 3.1 Monitoring Plan View Map (Sheet 1 of 2)
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
0 100 200 Feet Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
1 1 1 1 1 Alleghany County, NC

—'�'- Conservation Easement
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
Stream Preservation
Non -Project Streams
JWetland Enhancement
Wetland Preservation
Reach Break
- - - - Bankfull
Crest Gage (CG)
$t Groundwater Gage (GWG)
"F Photo Point
Cross Section (XS)
Vegetation Monitoring Plot
Overhead Electric Easement
Internal Easement Crossing
O Waterers
Well
Water Lines
10
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
N
�• 17 Y
13
O
Vk
1 5
•.•. 1
93
O 1
1.
ms's -L•_tt I y�'�.l�t�r�R�4��"•�+f .. _ - <D. _ , -, .
J �
'"af K "Aas r rr I a
1
0
Figure 3.2 Monitoring Plan View Map (Sheet 2 of 2)
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
0 100 200 Feet Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
1 1 1 I 1
Alleghany County, NC

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
'Restoration footage based off of the surveyed as -built thalweg alignment is greater than design centerline alignment, resulting in credited length greater than that reported in the Mitigation Plan.
'Unique ratio for UT2 was discussed infield with IRT members and recorded 8/15/2012 in meeting notes.
COMPONENT SUMMATION
Restoration Level
Stream (LF)
Riparian Wetland Non- Buffer (square feet) Upland
acres Riparian acres
Restoration
3221
Enhancement)
4474
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Riparian Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous Nutrient Offset
Preservation
3224
Type R
RE
R RE
R RE
Totals 6,328.60
645
N/A 1.40
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
PROJECT•
•
Existing
Restoratn (R) or Restoration
io
As-Builtcation Stationing/
Restoration
Credits'
Reach ID
Footage/
Approach
FAs-ootaBuilt
ge/
Footage/
z
Mitigation Ratio
Notes'
Acreage7
quivalent (RE
E)
Lo
Acreage'
Acreage'
(SMU/WMU)
STREAMS
Little Pine Reach 1
Pl/P2
Restoration (R)
100+00 to 114+44
1,444
1,417
1:1
1,417.00
Excludes one 27 foot wide ford crossing.
Little Pine Reach 2a
Pi
Restoration (R)
114+44 to 125+27
1,083
1,058
1:1
1,058.00
Excludes one 25 foot wide ford crossing.
Pl/P2
Restoration (R)
125+27 to 130+20
493
493
1:1
493.00
4,016
Little Pine Reach 21b
Excludes one 31 foot wide ford crossing, Includes
Planting, fencing
Enhancement II (R)
130+20 to 135+60
540
509
2.5:1
197.00
50% reduction for 33 ft overhead electric easement
crossing.
Planting, fencing
Enhancement II (R)
197+26 to 202+24
498
463
2.5:1
185.20
Excludes one 35 foot wide culvert crossing.
UTI
540
Planting, fencing, channel creation
Enhancement II (R)
202+24 to 206+26
402
402
2.5:1
160.80
UT2 Reach 1
5,270
P1/P2/P4, preservation
Enhancement I (R)
297+18-343+18
4,600
4,474
2:1
2,237.00
Excludes four constructed culvert crossings; 32, 24,
32, and 38 feet wide respectively.
UT2 Reach 2
Planting, fencing
Enhancement II (R)
401+78 to 403+34 &
215
215
n/a
n/a
Easement Break 403+34 - 403+75
403+75 to 404+34
UT2a
2,921
Preservation
Preservation (RE)
405+15 to 426+58
2,143
2,143
5:1
428.60
Planting, fencing
Enhancement II (R)
426+58 to 432+09
551
519
2.5:1
207.60
Excludes one 32 foot wide constructed culvert
crossing.
Planting, fencing
Enhancement II (R)
500+00 to 503+00
300
300
2.5:1
120.00
UT21b
553
P2
Restoration (R)
503+00 to 505+53
253
253
1:1
253.00
UT3
400
Preservation
Preservation (RE)
602+44 to 606+44
400
384
5:1
76.80
Excludes one 16 foot wide constructed ford
crossing.
UT4
1,036
Preservation
Preservation (RE)
701+26 to 708+23
697
697
5:1
139.40
WETLANDS
Wetland AA
0.38
Planting, fencing
Enhancement (RE)
UT2 floodplain
0.38
2:1
0.19
Wetland BB
0.16
Planting, fencing
Enhancement (RE)
UT2 floodplain
0.16
2:1
0.08
Wetland CC
0.26
Grade control, planting, fencing
Enhancement (RE)
UT26 headwaters
0.26
2:1
0.13
Wetland DO
0.12
Planting, fencing
Enhancement (RE)
North of UT2/UT2a
0.12
2:1
0.06
Wetland EE
0.28
Planting fencing
Enhancement (RE)
UT2 floodplain
0.28
2:1
0.140
Wetland FF
0.76
Outlet stabilization, planting, fencing
Enhancement (RE)
North of UTl/Little
0.76
2:1
0.38
Pine
Wetland GG
0.33
Planting fencing
Enhancement (RE)
Little Pine
0.33
2:1
0.17
Wetland HH
0.42
Planting, grade control
Enhancement (RE)
South of UT4/ Little
0.42
2:1
0.21
Pine
Wetland
0.19
Preservation
Preservation (RE)
UT4 floodplain
0.19
5:1
0.04
'Restoration footage based off of the surveyed as -built thalweg alignment is greater than design centerline alignment, resulting in credited length greater than that reported in the Mitigation Plan.
'Unique ratio for UT2 was discussed infield with IRT members and recorded 8/15/2012 in meeting notes.
COMPONENT SUMMATION
Restoration Level
Stream (LF)
Riparian Wetland Non- Buffer (square feet) Upland
acres Riparian acres
Restoration
3221
Enhancement)
4474
Enhancement II
2193
Enhancement
2.71
Preservation
3224
0.19
'Restoration footage based off of the surveyed as -built thalweg alignment is greater than design centerline alignment, resulting in credited length greater than that reported in the Mitigation Plan.
'Unique ratio for UT2 was discussed infield with IRT members and recorded 8/15/2012 in meeting notes.

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Activity or Report
Data
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
March 2013
March 2014
Final Design - Construction Plans
N/A
September 2014
Construction
N/A
September 2015
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area'
N/A
July - September 2015
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments'
N/A
July - September 2015
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments
N/A
December 2015
Repair Work
N/A
March 2016
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
May 2016
July 2016
Year 1 Monitoring
Fall 2016
December 2016
Year 2 Monitoring
2017
November 2017
Year 3 Monitoring
2018
November 2018
Year 4 Monitoring
2019
November 2019
Year 5 Monitoring
2020
November 2020
'Seed and mulch was added as each section of construction was completed.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Designer
1430 South Mint Street, Ste 104
Aaron Early, PE, CFM
Charlotte, NC 28205
704.332.7754
North State Environmental, Inc.
Construction Contractor
2889 Lowery Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Planting Contractor
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
North State Environmental, Inc.
Seeding Contractor
2889 Lowery Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource, LLC
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Bare Roots
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Live Stakes
Foggy Mountain Nursery
Plugs
Mellow Marsh Farms
Monitoring Performers
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Kirsten Gimbert
Monitoring, POC
704.332.7754, ext. 110

Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
PROJECT•' •
ProjectName
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration
County
Alleghany County
Project Area (acres)
157,32
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
36° 30' 29.16" N, 81. 0' 6.12"W
PROJECT• SUMMARY INFORMATION
Physiographic Province
Blue Ridge Belt of the Blue Ridge Province
River Basin
New
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
05050001
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
05050001030030
D W R Sub -basin
05-07-03
Project Drainiage Area (acres)
2,784
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
Managed Herbaceous (74%), Mixed Upland Hardwoods (20%), Mixed
CGIA Land Use Classification
Hardwoods/Conifers (5%), Southern Yellow Pine (<S%), Mountain Conifers (<1%)
REACH SUMMARY INFORMATION
Parameters
LP Reach 1 LP Reach 2a LPZ Reach b UT1 UTZ Reach 1 UTZ Reach 2 UT2 Reach 3
UT2a UT2b
UT3 UT4
Length of Reach (linear feet) -Post-Restoration
1,350 1,025 969 892 4,447
2,888 541
384 1,036
Drainage Area (acres)
2,496 2,752 2,784 28 75 185 196
89 19
23 33
NCDWR Stream Identification Score - Pre -Restoration
45.5 45.5 45.5 22.25 36 36 41.5
42 28/37.5
38.5 31.5
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C, Tr
Morphological Desription (stream type) - Pre -Restoration
C4 C/E4 C4 N/A 1 A4 E4b E4C4b
F46
N/A N/A
Evolutionary Trend(Simon's Model- Pre -Restoration
IV/V III/IV IV/V N/A' N/A' N/A' N/A'
V N A°
N A' N A'
Alluvial land, wet (Nikwasi); Ashe stony fine sandy loam (25-45% slopes); Chester loam (10-25% slopes); Chester clay loam (25-45% slopes), eroded
Underlying Mapped Soils
(Evard); Codorus complex (Arkaqua); Tate loam (6-10% slopes); Watauga loam (6-45% slopes).
Drainage Class
Well -drained
Soil Hydric Status
A/D (Nikwasi); B (Ashe stony fine sandy loam, Chester loam, Tate loam, Watauga loam); B/D (Codorus complex);
Slope - Pre -Restoration
0.0043 0.0059 1 0.0087 N/A' 0.047 1 0.036 1 0.028
1 0.044 1 0.064
1 N A' N/A'
FEMA Classification
AE'
Native Vegetation Community
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest, Rich Cove
Percent Composition Exotic Invasive Vegetation -Post-Restoration 0%
REGULATORY• • •
Supporting
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Documentation
USACE Nationwide Permit
Watersofthe United States -Section 404
Yes
Yes
No.27 and DWQ401
Water Quality Certification
Waters of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
No. 3885. Action ID# 14-
0041
Division of Land Quality (Dam Safety)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
LPIII Categorical Exclusion
(CE)Approved 7/6/2012
No historic resources were
found to be impacted
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
(letter from SHPO dated
5/3/2012)
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area
Management Act (LAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
No impact application was
LPIII Final Mitigation Plan
prepared for local review.
(3/4/2014) and LPIII
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes'
No post -project activities
Categorical Exclusion (CE)
required.
Approved 7/6/2012
LPIII Final Mitigation Plan
(3/4/2014) and LPIII
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Yes
Yes
Categorical Exclusion (CE)
Approved 7/6/2012
1: Restored length includes only streams within the conservation easement and excludes constructed ford and culvert crossing lengths within the easement.
2: UT1 is enhancement II only, and UT3 and UT4 are preservation only. Geomorphic surveys were not performed for these streams in existing conditions.
3: The downstream 400 LF of Little Pine Creek near Big Oak Road
is within a FEMA Zone AE Floodplain on Firm panel 4010. The Zone AE floodplain is due to the backwater of Brush Creek; Little Pine Creek is not a FEMA studied stream.
4: Streams do not fit into Simon Evolutionary Sequence.

Table S. Monitoring Component Summary
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring year 0 - 2016
Quantity/ Length by Reach
Parameter
Monitoring Feature
Little Pine Reach 1
Little Pine Reach
a
Little Pine Reach
Zb
UT1
UTZ UT2a
UT2b
UT3
UT4
Wetlands
Frequency
Riffle Cross Section
2
2
2
N/A
4 N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
Annual
Pool Cross Section
1
1
1
N/A
3 N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pattern
Pattern
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Profile
Longitudinal Profile
y
N/A
y N/A
y
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Substrate
Reach Wide (RW) / Riffle
(RF) 100 Pebble Count
RW -1, RF -1
RW -1, RF -1
RW4, RF4
N/A
RW -1, RF -3 N/A
RW -1, RF -1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Stream Hydrology
Crest Gage
1
N/A
1 N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
Annual
Wetland Hydrology
Groundwater Gages
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
Annual
Vegetation'
CVS Level 2
21
Annual
Visual Assessment
All Streams
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
Annual
Exotic and nuisance
vegetation
Project Boundary
Reference Photos
Photographs
42
Annual

APPENDIX 2. Morphological Summary Data and Plots

Table 6a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Reach 2a. Reach 2b
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
(--): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
1 Excludes 16 It wide ford crossing
Little Pine Reach 2b: Calculations only include reaches with a P1 or P2 approach
Parameter
Gage
Little
Pine Reach 1
Little
Pine Reach
2a
Little
Pine Reach
2b
Meadow Fork
Little
Pine Reach 1
Little Pine Reach 2a
Little Pine Reach 2b
Little Pine Reach 1
Little
Pine Reach 2a
Little
Pine Reach 2b2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
25.8
33.4
24.9
29.0
21.4
30.0
30.0
31.0
30.3
33.5
29.1
30.7
28.7
31.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
133
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.7
1.8
2.1
1.8
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.9
2.0
2.1
Bankfull Max Depth
3.3
3.3
3.7
2.2
3.1
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.7
3.2
2.6
3.9
3.1
3.4
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area ftZ
N/A
45.5
47.5
53.3
53.3
44.0
54.5
53.0
54.9
52.2
53.5
46.6
56.9
58.8
64.2
Width/Depth Ratio
1.4
23.9
11.6
1
16.1
10.2
1
16.5
17.0
1
17.5
17.1
21.4
1 16.6
18.1
14.0
15.9
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
1
>2.2
>2.2
1
>2.2
>2.2
1
>2.2
4.4
6
1 6.5
6.9
6.3
7
Bank Height Ratio
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
10.2
1.3
18.4
---
I
---
---
I
---
50.7
87.6
47.4
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
28.4
80.5
37.8
68.3
30.44
132.29
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.012
0.019
0.0095
0.031
0.028
0.045
0.0239
0.007
0.0125
0.0098
0.0175
0.0155
0.0278
0.0040
0.2752
0.0101
0.0274
0.0055
0.0236
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
44.5
96.5
38.7
108.9
40.92
99.41
Pool Max Depth (ft)
N/A
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
3.5
5.8
4.7
5.8
2.6
5.4
PoolSpacing(ft)
38
85
55
227
65
229
--
75
270
75
270
78
279
71
191
132
206
88
190
Pool Volume(ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
63
82
77
94
57
---
45
210
45
210
47
217
45
154
48
108
89
Radius of Curvature (ft)
25
59
39
58
34
70
---
60
210
60
120
62
124
60
96
63
77
82
1
124
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
N/A
1.0
1.8
1.6
2.3
1.3
2.4
---
2.0
4.0
2.0
4.0
2.0
4.0
2.0
2.9
2.2
2.5
2.9
3.9
Meander Length (ft)
86
140
110
186
100
134
---
210
360
210
360
217
372
207
313
288
337
334
329
Meander Width Ratio
2.4
2.5
3.1
3.8
2.0
---
1.5
7.0
1.5
7.0
1.5
7.0
1.5
4.6
1.6
3.5
3.1
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
SC/4.5/10.2/61.2/143.4/>2048
SC/0.4/1.3/77.8/180.0/362
SC/0.5/18.4/79.2/143.4/256
---
0.22/0.48/2.0/88.2/146.7/362
0.22/1.0/37.9/111.8/160.7/25E
0.38/21.6/47.4/122.3/208.8/362
Reach Shear Stress Com etenc Ib ftz
N/A
0.85
0.66
2.43
0.56
0.75
1.20
0.46
0.51
0.69
0.74
1.21
1.23
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
134
122
289
99
123
174
Stream Power Ca acit W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
3.9
4.3
4.4
4.4
3.9
4.3
4.4
3.9
4.3
4.4
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
Rosgen Classification
C4
E/C5
C4
E4
C4
C5
C4
C4
C4
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
4.2
1
4.6
4.0
4.4
5.1
3.8
4.0
4.1
3.6
1
3.8
4.1
1
4.3
3.6
1
3.7
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
205
215
225
224
205
215
225
205
215
225
Q-NFF regression (2 -yr)
---
---
---
Q- NC Mountain Regional Curve (cfs)
284
306
308
Q-USGS extrapolation (1.2 -yr)
N/A
177
191
193
Q -Mannings
199
1
211
213
235
---
---
---
188
204
199
231
219
232
Valley Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1,184
876
476
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
4,016
---
1,3501
1,0251
4812
1,3501
1,0251
481
Sinuosity
1.2
1.7
1.1
--
1.14
1.17
1.01
1.14
1.17
1.01
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0048
0.0058
0.0033
0.0057
0.0049
0.0058
0.0100
0.0050
0.0070
0.0111
0.0049
0.0072
0.0118
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
i
0.0057
0.0087
0.0089
---
0.0057
0.0082
0.0089
0.0051
0.0074
0.0101
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
(--): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
1 Excludes 16 It wide ford crossing
Little Pine Reach 2b: Calculations only include reaches with a P1 or P2 approach

Table 6b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2, UT2b
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
FS: Fine Sand 0.125-0.250mm diameter particles
( --- ): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
'entire length of UT2
2 UT2b: Calculations only include reach with a P2 approach
PRE -RESTORATION CONDITION••DESIGN
-BUILT/BASELINE
Parameter
Gage
UT2 Reach 1
UT2 Reach 2/3
UT2b
UT2a Reference
UT2 Reach 1 Lower
UT2 Reach 2
UT2b
UT2 Reach 1 Lower
UT2 Reach 2
UT2b2
Min
Max
Reach 2 Reach 3
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
4.9
9.7
6.1 7.0
8.3
12.6
9.0
11.6
5.9
8.1 8.9 12.8
6.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
5.4
29.9
49.3 41.0
10.6
31.0
98
17
195
15
30
28.4 21.5 >200
15.9
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.9
1.2
1.4 1.2
0.4
1.4
0.49
0.65
0.35
0.6 0.5 0.9
0.5
Bankfull Max Depth
1.4
2.3 1.9
0.6
2.0
0.7
0.95
0.55
1.0 1.10 2.10
0.9
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area ft2
N/A
5.9
8.6
8.7 8.5
3.1
18.1
4.4
7.6
2.1
5.1 4.2 12.0
3.7
Width/Depth Ratio
4.1
11.0
4.2 5.7
22.6
8.7
18.5
17.7
16.8
13.0 13.6 20.1
12.2
Entrenchment Ratio
1.1
3.1
8.1 5.9
1.3
2.4
10.9
1.5
1
16.8
2.5
T
5.1
3.5 2.0 22.4
2.4
Bank Height Ratio
2.6
3.2
1.0 1.2
5.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
10.7
15
16.0
---
---
---
---
56.9 44 53
43
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
10.7 25.0 16.8 29.3
4.4
23.0
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.012
0.083
0.0327-0.063 0.0092-0.068
0.0178 0.081
0.0404 0.0517
0.0512 0.0681
0.026
0.046
0.0436
0.0750
0.0360 0.0853 0.0262 0.0575
0.0448
0.0659
Pool Length (ft)
---
-
-
5.0 22.3 13.3 46.3
3.1
14.3
Pool Max Depth (ft)
N/A
---
---
---
2.2 2.5
---
---
---
1.9 5.0 1.6 3.2
0.6
2.1
Pool Spacing (ft)
11.6
40.5
14-68 22-63
8 34
78
6.5 41.5
19
95
5
21
7 34 24 98
3
33
Pool Volume (ft')
---
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
49-52 120
N/A
---
---
45
68
---
--- 61 66
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
10-48 8-27
N/A
---
---
29
39
---
--- 19 63
---
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
N/A
---
1.6-7.9 1.1-3.9
N/A
---
---
2.5
3.4
---
--- 2.1 4.9
---
Meander Length (ft)
---
64-188 43-141
N/A
---
---
88
135
---
--- 105 135
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
8.0-8.5 17.1
N/A
---
---
3.9
5.9
---
--- 7 5
---
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
5C/5.9/10.7/21.5/36.7/90.0 SC/8.0/15/55.6/84.6/180.0
SC/11/16/52.6/128/180
---
0.25/11.0/27.6/96.0/143.4/256.0
0.78/28.5/41.6/85.0/123.3/180.0
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib ft2
N/A
1.53
0.73
0.75
1.49
0.96
1.38
1.95 0.83 1 1.69
1.98
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
208
121
123
208
148
193
Stream Power (Capacity) W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
0.12
0.29 0.31
0.030
0.12
0.12
0.31
0.03
0.12 0.31
0.03
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1% <1%
<1%
Rosgen Classification
A4
E4b
E4
F4b
A/134/1
134a
C4b
134a
134a C4b
134a
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
2.3
3.4
4.0
1 4.1
3.2
---
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.1 2.7 F 4.3
5.1
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
20
35
10
20
20
35
10
20 35
10
Q-NFF regression (2 -yr)
---
---
---
Q- NC Mountain Regional Curve (cfs)
21
44
7
Q-USGS extrapolation (1.2 -yr)
N/A
10
21
3
Q -Mannings
35
43
8
---
---
---
21 11.2 51.0
18.7
Valley Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
3,988
206
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
5,270
553
---
4,4471
2412
4,4471
241
Sinuosity
1.1
1.3 2.1
1.1
---
1.05
1.20
1.04
1.05 1.2
1.04
Water Surface Slo a ft ft 2
0.0436
0.0290 0.0136
0.0406
0.0433
0.0501
0.0239
0.0639
0.0560 0.0231
0.0616
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0476
0.0363 0.028
0.0667
---
0.0525 10.0280
0.0667
0.0563 0.0237
0.0536
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
FS: Fine Sand 0.125-0.250mm diameter particles
( --- ): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
'entire length of UT2
2 UT2b: Calculations only include reach with a P2 approach

Table 7a. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross -Section
1, Little Pine Reach 1 (Riffle) Cross -Section
2, Little Pine Reach 1(Pool) Cross -Section 3, Little Pine Reach 1 (Riffle)
TM. TWURITOM "I.M.
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
Bross -Section
4, Little Pine Reach 2a (Riffle)Cross-Section
5, Little Pine Reach 2a (Riffle) Cross -Section 6, Little Pine Reach 2a (Pool)
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft')
�_____�_____®_____
Bankfull
Width/De.Width/Depth RatioBankfull
Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
cross -Section
7, Little Pine Reach 2b (Pool) Cross -Section
8, Little Pine Reach 2b (Riffle)Cross-Section 9, Little Pine Reach 2b (Riffle)

Table 7b. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross -Section
10, UT2b (Pool) Cross
-Section 11, UT2b (Riffle) Cross -Section 12, UT2 Reach 1 Lower (Riffle'
Cross -Section
13, UT2 Reach 1 Lower (Pool) Cross
-Section 14, UT2 Reach 2 (Riffle) Cross -Section 15, UT2 Reach 2 (Pool)
Dimension and Substrate
Cross -Section
16, UT2 Reach 2 (Riffle) Cross
-Section 17, UT2 Reach 2 (Riffle) Cross -Section 18, UT2 Reach 2 (Pool)
',based onfixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 1(STA 100+00 -113+66) and Reach 2a (113+66-124+07)
2545
2540
2530
2525
10000 10050 10100 10150 10200 10250 10300 10350 10400 10450 10500 10550 10600 10650 10700 10750 10800 10850 10900 10950 11000
Station (feet)
— TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) ♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
2540
2535
2530
c
0
v
2525
2520
11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300 11350 11400 11450 11500 11550 11600 11650 11700 11750 1
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-04/2016) -- WSF (MYO-04/2016) A LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) A RBKF,
[
End Little Pine Reach 1
Begin Little Pine Reach 2a
AA 4L
n 1
- 1
A
--
--_________
x 1
x 1
__________
__
_______
__________
___ _ A
A r A•A
A AAA
1
•
1
1
A ♦♦
A A
•
At M►•
lA+A�
4kAAAA•AA
I
1
I
1
•
AL AA•
A
1
1
__
A.•A
-----
•AA
•
A A r•
to
AA t ♦
AA AA ♦
1
•AA 4 •
1
1
--------
----------
----------
•• •� 9
AAA a •
-
- - -
- 1----
----
I
1
1
1
1
1
2525
10000 10050 10100 10150 10200 10250 10300 10350 10400 10450 10500 10550 10600 10650 10700 10750 10800 10850 10900 10950 11000
Station (feet)
— TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) ♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
2540
2535
2530
c
0
v
2525
2520
11000 11050 11100 11150 11200 11250 11300 11350 11400 11450 11500 11550 11600 11650 11700 11750 1
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-04/2016) -- WSF (MYO-04/2016) A LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) A RBKF,
[
End Little Pine Reach 1
Begin Little Pine Reach 2a
AA 4L
AAA'kA
AA AAA
A
--
--_________
__________
__________
__________
__
_______
__________
___ _ A
A r A•A
A AAA

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 2a (113+66-124+07) and Reach 2b (124+07-128+88)
2530
_ r
2525
2520
0
2515
2510
12000 12050 12100 12150 12200 12250 12300 12350 12400 12450 12500 12550 12600 12650 12700 12750 12800 12850 12900 12950 13000
Station (feet)
-TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) . RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
End Reach 2a I
X
'
;
End Reach 2b Restoration
Begin Reach 2b
'
;
1
Begin Reach 2b Enhancement II
. A .
. •�•
kA
A •
I
1
1
1
� A
A 1W
' AAA 4
1
I
-• ---
ll
t
•
•
!• •
•. 11
A,
1
1
1
1
1
. • A
•
1
-----
-------'--
-------------
•
AAA 1.
•
• •'i
1
1
-
---------
-------
-
1
1
2 I
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
1
2510
12000 12050 12100 12150 12200 12250 12300 12350 12400 12450 12500 12550 12600 12650 12700 12750 12800 12850 12900 12950 13000
Station (feet)
-TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) . RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 1- Little Pine Reach 1
103+99 Riffle
53.5
2545
30.3
width (ft)
1.8
mean depth (ft)
2.7
max depth (ft)
32.1
2540
1.7
hydraulic radius (ft)
17.1
width -depth ratio
132.9
W flood prone area (ft)
4.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
2535
0
—
v
w
2530
2525
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull—Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
53.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
30.3
width (ft)
1.8
mean depth (ft)
2.7
max depth (ft)
32.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.7
hydraulic radius (ft)
17.1
width -depth ratio
132.9
W flood prone area (ft)
4.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 2- Little Pine Reach 1
108+73 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
2545
width (ft)
2.2
mean depth (ft)
4.3
max depth (ft)
32.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.1
hydraulic radius (ft)
2540
Ilk
2535
0
>
v
w
2530
2525
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
tMYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
68.0
x -section area (ft.sq.)
30.6
width (ft)
2.2
mean depth (ft)
4.3
max depth (ft)
32.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.1
hydraulic radius (ft)
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
W--Vmft.
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 3- Little Pine Reach 1
109+26 Riffle
2545
2540
x -section area (ft.sq.)
33.5
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
3.2
max depth (ft)
34.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.5
2535
0
21.4
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.0
entrenchment ratio
0.8
low bank height ratio
v
w
2530
"
2525
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Width (ft)
+MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
52.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
33.5
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
3.2
max depth (ft)
34.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
21.4
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.0
entrenchment ratio
0.8
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 4 - Little Pine Reach 2a
118+14 Riffle
46.6
2535
29.1
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
2.6
max depth (ft)
30.4
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
18.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.9
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
2530
2525
0
v
w
2520
2515
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Width (ft)
+MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
46.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
29.1
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
2.6
max depth (ft)
30.4
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
18.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.9
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 5- Little Pine Reach 2a
121+50 Riffle
56.9
2535
30.7
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.9
max depth (ft)
34.3
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.7
hydraulic radius (ft)
2530
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.5
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
i I
2525
0
v
w
2520
2515
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull—FIoodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
56.9
x -section area (ft.sq.)
30.7
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.9
max depth (ft)
34.3
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.7
hydraulic radius (ft)
16.6
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.5
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 6- Little Pine Reach 2a
2535
2530
2525
0
v
w
2520
2515
0
122+32 Pool
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
93.4
x -section area (ft.sq.)
35.4
width (ft)
2.6
mean depth (ft)
5.7
max depth (ft)
38.5
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.4
hydraulic radius (ft)
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 7 - Little Pine Reach 2b
Bankfull Dimensions
103.7
125+35 Pool
35.3
width (ft)
2530
mean depth (ft)
5.4
max depth (ft)
37.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
2525
2520
0
v
w
2515
2510
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
103.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
35.3
width (ft)
2.9
mean depth (ft)
5.4
max depth (ft)
37.6
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 8 - Little Pine Reach 2b
126+94 Riffle
2530
2525
2520
0
v
w
2515
2510
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
tMYO(5/2016) —Bankfull —Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
58.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
28.7
width (ft)
2.1
mean depth (ft)
3.4
max depth (ft)
30.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.0
hydraulic radius (ft)
14.0
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
7.0
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 9 - Little Pine Reach 2b
127+80 Riffle
64.2
2530
31.9
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
33.5
2525
1.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
15.9
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.3
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
2520
0
v
w
2515
2510
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
—s—MYO(5/2016) —Bankfull —Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
64.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
31.9
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
33.5
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
15.9
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
6.3
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Particle Count
Riffle Pool Total
each Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
0.22
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
2.0
D80. =
88.2
D95 =
0
D100 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
6
6
6
6
Fine
0.125
0.250
3
9
12
12
18
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
17
18
18
36
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
9
11
11
47
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
3
3
3
50
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
5o
Particle Class Size (mm)
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
5o
Fine
4.0
5.6
50
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
1
51
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
1
1
52
Medium
11.0
16.0
1
1
2
2
54
Coarse
16.0
22.6
54
Coarse
22.6
32
3
3
3
57
Very Coarse
32
45
8
8
8
65
Very Coarse
45
64
3
3
3
68
Small
64
90
14
3
17
17
85
Small
90
128
8
8
8
93
Large
128
180
5
5
5
98
Large
180
256
1
1
1
99
................................................
Small
256
362
1
1
1
100
Small
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Little Pine Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
80
2° 70
j 60
3 50
E
U= 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
0 ,I I I I _ I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
� MYO-05/2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.22
D35 =
0.48
D50 =
2.0
D80. =
88.2
D95 =
146.7
D100 =
362.0
Little Pine Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
80
2° 70
j 60
3 50
E
U= 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
0 ,I I I I _ I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
� MYO-05/2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
90
80
70
m
60
`w
a 50
-
M 40
u
m 30
20
c 10
0
oo�tiotiy5 otih oy ti ti ti� a 5b yti �� 6 3ti ah 6o- CO yti� y�0 �y0 3�ti �titi 1Otib ti��$ �0�0
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYO-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Cross Section 3
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
8.42
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
3
3
3
3
D95 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
6
9
Medium
0.25
0.50
3
3
12
80
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
14
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
16
a
�
a
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
a
H
16
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
16
Fine
4.0
5.6
16
Fine
5.6
8.0
m
3
30
16
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
1
17
Medium
11.0
16.0
6
6
23
Coarse
16.0
22.6
3
3
26
Coarse
22.6
32
10
10
36
Very Coarse
32
45
5
5
41
Particle Class Size (mm)
Very Coarse
45
64
28
28
68
Small
64
90
14
14
82
Small
90
128
11
11
93
Large
128
180
2
2
95
Large
180
256
1
1
96
Small
256
362
1
1
97
S mail
Medium
Large /Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
2
1
2
1
99
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
101
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
70
60
50
E
�? 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
Little Pine Reach 1, Cross Section 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i I I I I E I I 1 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—*— MY0-05/2016
Cross Section 3
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
8.42
Di5 =
31.28
D50 =
50.7
D84 =
95.5
D95 =
178.5
D100 =
1024.0
100
90
80
70
60
50
E
�? 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
Little Pine Reach 1, Cross Section 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i I I I I E I I 1 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—*— MY0-05/2016
Little Pine Reach 1, Cross Section 3
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
C
70
a
�
a
60
a
H
50
u
40
m
3
30
v
20
10
_
0
�ti by by oy
y ti ti� a e6 s 1y tie 0 3ti �h 6a �o yw �o hb �ti titi ti� ae
1 yo ti v ti a 5 ,tio �O
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYO 05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 2a, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Particle Count
Riffle Pool Total
each Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
0.22
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
2
5
7
7
7
7
D100 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
3
8
11
11
18
Medium
0.25
0.50
6
9
15
15
33
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
1
2
2
35
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
1
5
6
6
41
v
a 50
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
41
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
41
30
Fine
4.0
5.6
41
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
1
42
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
1
1
43
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
2
2
45
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
• MYO-05/2016
45
Coarse
22.6
32
1
1
2
2
47
Very Coarse
32
45
5
1
6
6
53
Very Coarse
45
64
4
5
9
9
62
Small
64
90
11
3
14
14
76
Small
90
128
8
5
13
13
89
Large
128
180
7
2
9
9
98
Large
180
256
1
1
2
2
100
Small
256
362
100
Small
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
50
1 50 1
100 1
100 1
100
100
90
80
70
60
3 50
E
v 40
30
u
`w 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2a, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
� MYO-05/2016
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.22
D35 =
1.00
D50 =
37.9
D80. =
111.8
D95 =
160.7
D100 =
256.0
100
90
80
70
60
3 50
E
v 40
30
u
`w 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2a, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
� MYO-05/2016
Little Pine Reach 2a, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
u
60
v
a 50
40
v
m
30
20
c
10
0
b'L �h �h Oy
1 ti ,L0 b y(o 0 titi ti0 ti� 1�1 0 01 CO
Particle Class Size (mm)
• MYO-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 2a, Cross Section 6
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
46.34
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
87.6
D84 =
0
0
D95 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
90
0
Medium
0.25
0.50
80
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
2
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
N
50
2
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
u
Fine
4.0
5.6
m
2
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
3
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
2
5
10
Medium
11.0
16.0
5
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
2
1 2
7
Coarse
22.6
32
3
3
10
Very Coarse
32
45
5
5
15
Very Coarse
45
64
12
12
27
Small
64
90
2S
25
52
Small
90
128
25
25
77
Large
128
180
14
14
91
Large
180
256
3
3
94
Small
256
362
1
1
95
Sma 11
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
3
2
3
2
98
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
a 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2a, Cross Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 ,I I I 161 ''!r I , + , , ''* ter-r^'rJ T
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/—b
Cross Section 6
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
46.34
Di5 =
71.38
D50 =
87.6
D84 =
151.8
D95 =
362.0
D100 =1
1024.0
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
a 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2a, Cross Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 ,I I I 161 ''!r I , + , , ''* ter-r^'rJ T
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/—b
Little Pine Reach 2a, Cross Section 6
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
V
60
d
a
N
50
N
40
u
m
30
20
10
0
000tiotiyh otih oy
ti ti ti� a e� a, titi tib �ti� 3ti ay 6a o0 1,yw 1�0 �y� ��ti ytiti yoyo<�o�e, ��o
Particle Class Size (mm)
. novo-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 2b, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Particle Count
Riffle Pool Total
each Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
0.38
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
1
3
4
4
4
4
Di00 =
Fine
0.12S
0.250
8
8
8
12
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
5
7
7
19
Coarse
0.5
1.0
S
S
S
24
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
24
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
v
24
30
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
2
2
26
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
2
2
28
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
1
29
Medium
8.0
11.0
�'L �h �h Oy
1
1
1
30
Medium
11.0
16.0
1
1
1
31
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
2
3
5
S
36
Coarse
22.6
32
1
3
4
4
40
Very Coarse
32
45
3
6
9
9
49
Very Coarse
45
64
6
4
10
10 1
S8
Small
64
90
8
9
17
17
75
Small
90
128
S
5
10
10
8S
Large
128
180
4
3
7
7
92
Large
180
256
5
2
7
7
99
Small
256
362
1
1
1
100
:::::::Large/Very
Small
Medium
Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048 1
1 1
1
1
100
Totall
40
1 61 1
101 1
100 1
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
DI6 =
0.38
Das =
21.61
D50 =
47.4
D80. =
122.9
D95 =
208.8
Di00 =
362.0
Little Pine Reach 2b, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
u
60
v
a
50
40
v
m
30
20
10
c
0
�'L �h �h Oy
1 'L ,ti'b P y(o 0 titi ti0 ti� 3ti ph 6b �O ,1'b �O h0 0ti titi n� p �O
tP
Particle Class Size (mm)
. nova -05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Little Pine Reach 2b, Cross Section 9
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
12.08
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
1
D95 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
90
1
Medium
0.25
0.50
3
3
4
Coarse
0.5
1.0
3
3
7
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
V
60
7
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
N
50
7
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
8
u
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
9
Fine
5.6
8.0
3
3
12
Medium
8.0
11.0
3
3
15
Medium
11.0
16.0
4
4
19
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
3
1 3
22
Coarse
22.6
32
4
4
26
Very Coarse
32
45
14
14
40
Very Coarse
45
64
17
17
57
Small
64
90
15
15
72
Small
90
128
12
12
84
Large
128
180
10
10
94
Large
180
256
5
5
99
Small
256
362
1
1
100
Hl
Sma 11
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
a 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2b, Cross Section 9
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0,
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/—b
Cross Section 9
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
12.08
Di5 =
39.84
D50 =
55.4
D84 =
128.0
D95 =
193.1
D100 =
362.0
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
a 20
a
10
Little Pine Reach 2b, Cross Section 9
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0,
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/—b
Little Pine Reach 2b, Cross Section 9
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
V
60
d
a
N
50
N
40
u
m
30
20
10
0
000tiotiyh otih oy
ti ti ti� a e� � titi y6 �ti� 3ti ah 6a o0 1,yw 1�0 �y� ��ti ytiti yoyo<�o�e, ��o
Particle Class Size (mm)
.novo-05/2016

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2b (STA 503+00 - 505+41)
2584
2579
w
C
0
w 2574
2569
50250
2575
2570
v
a
c
0
> 2565
2560
50400
50265 50280 50295 50310
50325 50340
50355 50370
50385 50400 50415 50430 50445
Station (feet)
- TW (MYO-04/2016)
WSF (MYO-04/2016)
LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016)
♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
♦
-
°
Begin
UT26 Restoration
_
2575
2570
v
a
c
0
> 2565
2560
50400
50265 50280 50295 50310
50325 50340
50355 50370
50385 50400 50415 50430 50445
Station (feet)
- TW (MYO-04/2016)
WSF (MYO-04/2016)
LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016)
♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
50415 50430 50445 50460 50475 50490 50505 50520 50535 50550 50565 50580 50595
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-04/2016) WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) ♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 10 - UT2b
2576
x -section area (ft.sq.)
2573
width (ft)
1.0
2571
1.7
max depth (ft)
c
0
2569
v
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8
w
2567
6.1
width -depth ratio
2565
0
504+23 Pool
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
5.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
5.9
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.7
max depth (ft)
7.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
6.1
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
100

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 11- UT2b
2572
2570
2568
c
0
2566 —
v
w
2564 —
2562
0
504+89 Riffle
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
3.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.7
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
7.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
12.2
width -depth ratio
15.9
W flood prone area (ft)
2.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
100

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2b, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Particle Count
Riffle Pool Total
each Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
0.78
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
1
D80. =
1
1
1
1
Di00 =
Fine
0.12S
0.250
4
4
4
5
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
5
7
7
12
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
4
6
6
18
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
1
60
1
1
19
v
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
a
50
19
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
40
19
Fine
4.0
5.6
m
19
Fine
5.6
8.0
19
20
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
1
1
20
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
2
4
4
24
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
4
4
4
28
Coarse
22.6
32
7
3
10
10
38
ti titi$ 5� ti1 1� ti� 3ti a`0 �k 0o y� �o h6 eti titi yo- ��
Very Coarse
32
45
13
2
15
15
54
Very Coarse
45
64
15
1
16
16 1
70
Small
64
90
13
4
17
17
87
Small
90
128
S
4
9
9
96
Large
128
180
4
4
4
100
Large
180
256
100
1111111
Small
256
362
100
1111111
1111111
Small
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
69
1 30 1
99 1
100 1
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.78
D35 =
28.48
D50 =
41.6
D80. =
85.0
D95 =
123.3
Di00 =
180.0
UT2b, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
u
60
v
a
50
40
v
m
30
20
c
10
0
eti tih by oy
00 01 O
ti titi$ 5� ti1 1� ti� 3ti a`0 �k 0o y� �o h6 eti titi yo- ��
Particle Class Size (mm)
. MYO-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2b, Cross Section 11
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
15.03
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
1
1
1
D95 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
90
1
Fine
0.125
0.250
1
80
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
1
2
Coarse
0.5
1.0
3
3
5
a
�
a
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
a
H
5
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
5
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
5
Fine
4.0
5.6
m
3
30
5
Fine
5.6
8.0
2
2
7
Medium
8.0
11.0
4
4
11
Medium
11.0
16.0
6
6
17
Coarse
16.0
22.6
8
8
25
Coarse
22.6
32
12
12
37
Particle Class Size (mm)
Very Coarse
32
45
15
15
52
Very Coarse
45
64
23
23
75
Small
64
90
14
14
89
Small
90
128
8
8
97
Large
128
180
3
3
100
Large
180
256
100
................................................
Small
256
362
100
S mail
Medium
Large/Very Large
36 2
512
1024
5 12
1024
2048
1 00
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
70
60
50
E
�? 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
0 +--
0.01
UT2b, Cross Section 11
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-*- MY0-05/2016
Cross Section 11
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
15.03
Di5 =
30.20
D50 =
43.0
D84 =
79.7
D95 =
117.2
Dino =
180.0
100
90
80
70
60
50
E
�? 40
y 30
u
a 20
10
0 +--
0.01
UT2b, Cross Section 11
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-*- MY0-05/2016
UT2b, Cross Section 11
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
C
70
a
�
a
60
a
H
50
u
40
m
3
30
v
20
10
_
0
�'L by by Oh
00 oti o
'ti ti ti� b y6 41 til tie 6 ,5'L Rh 6a �O ,yw pO tiy6 .yA a0 A�
titi. ti v 5 do ,yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYo-05/2016

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2 Reach 1 Upper (STA 297+18 - 310+50)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2 Reach 1 Upper (STA 297+18 - 310+50)
2700
2695
N
2685
30765
2695
2690
c
0
d 2685
W
2680
30870
30780 30795 30810 30825 30840 30855 30870 30885 30900 30915 30930 30945 30960
Station (feet)
TW (MY0-04/2016) ----- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
30885 30900 30915 30930 30945 30960 30975 30990 31005 31020 31035 31050 31065
Station (feet)
-- TW (MYO-04/2016) WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MY0.04/2016) m RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2 Reach 1 Lower (STA 325+67 - 330+00)
2586
2581
W
C
0
w 2576
W
2571
32550
2575
2570
w
c
0
m 2565
2560
32750
32565 32580 32595 32610 32625 32640 32655 32670 32685 32700 32715 32730 32745
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) • RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
1
1
•
1
1 X
-----------
-----
1
1
1
32765 32780 32795 32810 32825 32840 32855 32870 32885 32900 32915 32930 32945
Station (feet)
-- TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) • RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2 Reach 2 (STA 330+00 - 342+61)
2555
2550
a
a
c
0
a 2545
2540
33400 33415 33430 33445 33460
- TW (MYO-04/2016)
33475 33490 33505 33520 33535 33550 33565 33580 33595
Station (feet)
--- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) ♦ RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No.94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2 Reach 2 (STA 330+00 - 342+61)
2545
2540
a
v
c
0
a 2535
2530
33600
2540
2535
m
m
c
0
m 2530
2525
34000
33630 33660 33690 33720 33750 33780 33810 33840
Station (feet)
— TW (MYO-04/2016)------- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016)
33870 33900 33930 33960 33990
RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)
34030 34060 34090 34120 34150 34180 34210 34240 34270 34300 34330 34360 34390
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-04/2016) --- WSF (MYO-04/2016) LBKF/LTOB (MYO-04/2016) RBKF/RTOB (MYO-04/2016)

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 12 - UT2
2580
2578
2576
x
c
0
2574 —
v
w
2572 —
2570
0
327+46 Riffle
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
—4 MYo (5/2016) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
5.1
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.1
width (ft)
0.6
mean depth (ft)
1.0
max depth (ft)
9.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
13.0
width -depth ratio
28.4
W flood prone area (ft)
3.5
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
100

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 13 - UT2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
9.8
2580
1.3
2578
2.2
max depth (ft)
2576
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2
c
0
7.5
width -depth ratio
v
2574
w
2572
2570
0
327+59 Pool
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
12.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
9.8
width (ft)
1.3
mean depth (ft)
2.2
max depth (ft)
11.0
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2
hydraulic radius (ft)
7.5
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
100

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 14 - UT2
255s
2553
2551
x
c
0
2549
v ~
w
2547
2545
-50
334+33 Riffle
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
5.9
x -section area (ft.sq.)
10.8
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
1.1
max depth (ft)
12.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
20.1
width -depth ratio
21.5
W flood prone area (ft)
2.0
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
50

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 15 - UT2
337+54 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
2544
width (ft)
1.5
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
14.2
wetted perimeter (ft)
2542
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.0
width -depth ratio
2540
c
2538
v
w
2536
2534
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
18.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
12.2
width (ft)
1.5
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
14.2
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.3
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 16 - UT2
338+73 Riffle
x -section area (ft.sq.)
2540
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
1.1
2538
10.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4
hydraulic radius (ft)
19.2
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
22.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
2536
c
0
2534
v
w
2532
2530
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull—FIoodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
4.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.9
width (ft)
0.5
mean depth (ft)
1.1
max depth (ft)
10.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4
hydraulic radius (ft)
19.2
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
22.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 17 - UT2
341+08 Riffle
2536
2534
x -section area (ft.sq.)
12.8
width (ft)
0.9
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
13.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
13.6
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
15.7
entrenchment ratio
2532
0
low bank height ratio
v
w
2530
2528
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
—4 MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull—FIoodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
12.0
x -section area (ft.sq.)
12.8
width (ft)
0.9
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
13.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
13.6
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
15.7
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross Section Plots
Little Pine III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Cross Section 18 - UT2
341+51 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
2535
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
19.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
23.6
width -depth ratio
2533
2531
c
2529
v
w
2527
2525
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
—4—MYO (5/2016) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
15.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
19.3
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
2.0
max depth (ft)
19.8
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
23.6
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 5/2016
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Particle Count
Riffle Pool Total
each Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
0.25
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
D100 =
Fine
0.12S
0.250
4
10
14
14
16
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
4
6
6
22
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
4
4
26
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
u
60
26
v
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
a
50
26
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
1
27
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
1
28
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
1
29
20
Medium
8.0
11.0
3
3
6
6
35
c
Medium
11.0
16.0
S
2
7
7
42
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
3
1
4
4
46
Particle Class Size (mm)
Coarse
22.6
32
6
1
7
7
53
Very Coarse
32
45
7
1
8
8
61
Very Coarse
45
64
10
2
12
12
73
Small
64
90
8
1
9
9
82
Small
90
128
11
11
11
93
Large
128
180
S
1
6
6
99
Large
180
256
1
1
1
100
1111111
Small
256
362
100
1111111
1111111
:::::::Large/Very
Small
Medium
Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
1 1
1
1
100
Totall
70
1 30 1
100 1
100 1
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.25
D35 =
11.00
D50 =
27.6
D80. =
96.0
D95 =
143.4
D100 =
256.0
UT2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
u
60
v
a
50
40
v
m
30
20
10
c
0
eti tih by oy
ti ti tiw o- 5� titi ti� ti� 3ti a`0 �o- 0o y� �o h6 eti yo-
'L 3 5 ,yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
. MYO-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2, Cross Section 12
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
14.84
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
56.9
D84 =
0
0
D95 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
Medium
0.25
0.50
4
4
4
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
8
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
V
8
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
8
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
9
50
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
10
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
2
12
m
Medium
11.0
16.0
5
5
17
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
9
1 9
26
Coarse
22.6
32
16
16
42
Very Coarse
32
45
2
2
44
0
Very Coarse
45
64
9
9
53
Particle Class Size (mm)
Small
64
90
17
17
70
Small
90
128
15
15
85
Large
128
180
12
12
97
Large
180
256
2
2
99
Small
256
362
1
1
100
Sma 11
Medium
Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i I I I 1 61 ''!r
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
Cross Section 12
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
14.84
Di5 =
27.48
D50 =
56.9
D84 =
125.0
D95 =
170.1
D100 =
362.0
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i I I I 1 61 ''!r
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
UT2, Cross Section 12
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
V
60
d
a
N
50
N
40
u
m
30
20
10
0
000tiotiyh otih oy
ti ti ti� a e� � titi y6 �ti� 3ti ah 6a o0 1,yw 1�0 �y� ��ti ytiti yoyo<�o�e, ��o
Particle Class Size (mm)
.novo-0s/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2, Cross Section 14
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
7.54
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
44.0
D84 =
0
D95 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
Fine
0.125
0.250
3
3
4
Medium
0.25
0.50
4
4
8
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
1
9
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
1
1
10
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
10
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
11
50
Fine
4.0
5.6
N
40
11
Fine
5.6
8.0
6
6
17
m
Medium
8.0
11.0
5
5
22
Medium
11.0
16.0
4
4
26
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
2
1 2
28
Coarse
22.6
32
8
8
36
Very Coarse
32
45
15
15
51
0
Very Coarse
45
64
9
9
60
Particle Class Size (mm)
Small
64
90
19
19
79
Small
90
128
11
11
90
Large
128
180
7
7
97
Large
180
256
2
2
99
Small
256
362
1
1
100
Sma II
Medium
:Large/Very Large
2 36
512
1024
512
1024
2048
100
100
100
Bedrock
2048 1
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 14
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0�'
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
Cross Section 14
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
7.54
Di5 =
30.64
D50 =
44.0
D84 =
105.6
D95 =
163.3
D100 =
362.0
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 14
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0�'
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
UT2, Cross Section 14
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
V
60
d
a
N
50
N
40
u
m
30
20
10
0
000tiotiyh otih oy
ti ti ti� a e� � titi y6 �ti� 3ti ah 6a o0 1,yw 1�0 �y� ��ti ytiti yoyo<�o�e, ��o
Particle Class Size (mm)
.novo-05/2016

Reachwide and Cross Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
UT2, Cross Section 17
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
1.74
Silt/Clay
Very fine
0.000
0.062
0.062
0.125
4
4
4
4
D95 =
Fine
0.125
0.250
4
Medium
0.25
0.50
4
4
8
Coarse
0.5
1.0
4
4
12
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
5
5
17
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
V
17
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
17
Fine
4.0
5.6
2
2
19
50
Fine
5.6
8.0
4
4
23
Medium
8.0
11.0
5
5
28
m
Medium
11.0
16.0
6
6
34
Coarse
16.0
22.6 1
2
1 2
36
Coarse
22.6
32
5
5
41
Very Coarse
32
45
5
5
46
Very Coarse
45
64
8
8
54
Small
64
90
14
14
68
Small
90
128
16
16
84
Large
128
180
8
8
92
Large
180
256
3
3
95
Small
256
362
4
4
99
................................................Bedrock
Sma II
Medium
i
:Large/Very Large
362
512
1024
512
1024
2048
1
1
100
100
100
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
1 100
100
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 17
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
o ,
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
Cross Section 17
Channel materials (mm)
D1fi=
1.74
Di5 =
19.02
D50 =
53.7
D84 =
128.0
D95 =
256.0
D100 =
512.0
100
90
80
ae 70
60
m 50
3
E
u 40
C 30
u
iu 20
a
10
UT2, Cross Section 17
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
o ,
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -05/2016
UT2, Cross Section 17
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
V
60
d
a
N
50
N
40
u
m
30
20
10
0
otih oy
ti ti ti� a e� titi y6 �ti� 3ti ah o� �O 11b 1�0 hyo ytiti yO�b pbO p�b
'ba,oo�tiotiyh
Particle Class Size (mm)
.novo-05/2016

Stream Photographs

Photo Point 4 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 4 — looking downstream (05/16/2016) 1
I Photo Point 5 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 5 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 6 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 6 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)

r
A
Photo Point 7 - looking upstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 7 - looking downstream (05/16/2016)
pool"
r '
Photo Point 8 - looking upstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 8 - looking downstream (05/16/2016)
s
„-k
. i
Photo Point 9 - looking upstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 9 - looking downstream (05/16/2016)

Photo Point 10 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 10 — looking downstream (05/16/2016) 1
Photo Point 11— looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 11— looking downstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 12 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1Photo Point 12 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)

Photo Point 13 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 13 — looking downstream (05/16/2016) 1
Photo Point 14 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 14 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)
Photo Point 15 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 15 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)

Photo Point 16 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1 Photo Point 16 — looking downstream (05/16/2016) 1
Photo Point 18 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1Photo Point 18 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)

i
�7_ � $ �
'� � •��
1 �.h
ter,- ..
.
46
S
yl -
er
Ib•

Photo Point 22 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) Photo Point 22 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)
Photo Point 23 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 23 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)
Photo Point 24 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1Photo Point 24 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)

Photo Point 25 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 25 — looking downstream (05/31/2016) 1
Photo Point 26 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 26 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)
Photo Point 27 — looking upstream (05/16/2016) 1Photo Point 27 — looking downstream (05/16/2016)

Photo Point 31— looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 31— looking downstream (05/31/2016) 1
Photo Point 32 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 32 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)
Photo Point 33 — looking upstream UT2 (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 33 — looking upstream UT2b (05/31/2016)

Photo Point 33 — looking downstream UT2 (05/31/2016) 1
Photo Point 34 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 34 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)
Photo Point 35 — looking upstream (05/31/2016) 1 Photo Point 35 — looking downstream (05/31/2016)

'.�. y'
' �"�
��
} I
,�, �
�� � �1�1 / ��
�� C I`LL FS /� A' � y -��4 � i.
1 � 9 r 1.
R }
� � kyS 1 � 1 � �i 7� �'h �I� _
��� � t � � ` ' � � i I
n� � i � �yy°fir � �I�I � �' �, . �y,.
.i �' vC' ��'Y � � ��- of
...
'd4� �-""`v 'mow.....
„_ " `"
k .�"..
l
��� S'�� a.�,. , d . .c �l ,. Ysi.k� ' .. � tui � b '�
'..'T
`
s .�

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Current Plot Data (MYO 2016)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Vegetation Plot 1
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 2
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 3
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 4
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 5
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 6
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 7
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red maple
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
Betula nigra
River birch
Tree
1
1
1
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
Cercis canodensis
Eastern redbud
Shrub Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
5
5
5
8
8
8
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus rubra
Red oak
Tree
Ulmus americana
American elm
JTree
10
10
10
4
4
4
8
8
8
3
3
3
2
2
2
Stem count
15
15
15
14
14
14
17
17
17
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
15
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
5
5
5
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
Stems per ACRE
607
607
607
567
567
567
688
688
688
607
607
607
'567
567 1
567
SO
567
567
607
607 1
607
Color For Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% or greater
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Current Plot Data (MYO 2016)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Vegetation Plot 8
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 9
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 10
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 11
Pnol-S P -all T
Vegetation Plot 12
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 13
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 14
Pnol-S P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red maple
Tree
7
1 7
7
3
3
3
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
1
7
7
7
Betula nigra
River birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
5
5
5
4
4
4
Cercis canadensis
Eastern redbud
Shrub Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
Tree
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Platonus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Quercus rubra
Ied oak
Tree
1
1
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
JTree
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
5
5
5
Stem count
15
15
15
13
13
13
12
12
12
14
14
14
13
13
13
10
10
10
14
14
14
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
4
4
4
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
4
4
4
5
5
5
Stems per ACRE
607
607
607
526
526
526
486
486
486
567
567
567
526
526
526
405
405
405
567
567
567
Color For Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% or greater
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 94903
Monitoring Year 0 - 2016
Current Plot Data (MYO 2016)
Annual Summary
Scientific Name
Common Name
Vegetation Plot 15
Species Type PnoLS PF--alIT T
Vegetation Plot 16
PnoLS P -all T
Vegetation Plot 17
Vegetation Plot 18
Vegetation Plot 19
Vegetation Plot 20
Vegetation Plot 21
M (2016)
Pnol-S P -all T Pnol-S P -all T PnoLS P -all
T no P -all T Pno P -all T PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red maple
Tree
5
5
5
4
4
4
50
50
50
Betula nigra
River birch
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
5
5
5
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
47
47
47
Cercis canadensis
Eastern redbud
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
5
5
5
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
46
46
46
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
Tree
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
4
4
4
6
6
6
3
3
3
58
58
58
Plotonus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
8
8
8
1
1
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
30
30
30
Quercus rubra
Red oak
Tree
1
1
1
Ulmus americana
JAmerican elm
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
1
1
1
53
53
53
Stem count
14
14
14
12
1 12
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
9
9
9
15
15
15
14
14
14
285285
285
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
21
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.52
Species count
4
1 4 1
4
5
5
5
3
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
7
7
7
Stems per ACRE
567
1 567 1
567
486
486
486
526
526
526
526
526
526
364
364
364
607
1 607
607
567
567
567
549
549
549
Color For Density
Exceeds requirements by 10% or greater
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Vegetation Photographs

Vegetation Plot 7 - (05/03/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 8 - (05/03/2016) 1
Vegetation Plot 9 - (05/03/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 10 - (05/03/2016) 1
Vegetation Plot 11- (05/03/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 12 - (05/03/2016)

Vegetation Plot 13 — (05/16/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 14 — (05/16/2016) 1
Vegetation Plot 15 — (05/16/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 16 — (05/16/2016) 1
Vegetation Plot 17 — (05/03/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 18 — (05/03/2016)

Vegetation Plot 19 — (05/16/2016) 1 Vegetation Plot 20 — (05/16/2016) 1
Vegetation Plot 21— (05/16/2016)

APPENDIX 4. Record Drawings

II �'t t I AzID'n- Stream o'c Wetland Ase=J'Du1'1t
Alleghany County, North Carolina
iN"+_,,,T,,CDEQ Divisiona 0 0 0 , 4 0 -
of Mitigation Services
Vicinity leap
Not t® Scale
BEFORE YOU DIQI
CALL 1-800-632-4949
N.C. ONE—CALL CENTER
ms THE LAW!
St--�CO Project
u- a-M••-�
RECORD DRAWINGS
ISSUED AUGUST 5, 2016
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
AND
ACCURACY
I PHILLIP B. KEE , CERTIFY THAT THE GROUND TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEY PORTION OF THIS PROJECT WAS COMPLETED UNDER MY
DIRECT SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE UNDER MY
DIRECT SUPERVISION, THAT THE RECORD DRAWINGS WERE PREPARED
BY WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC FROM DIGITAL FILES PROVIDED BY
KEE MAPPING AND SURVEYING, PA AS SHOWN ON AN AS -BUILT SURVEY
FOR "THE STATE OF NC, DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES", JOB
#1509144 -AB, DATED APRIL 11, 2016; THAT THIS SURVEY WAS
PERFORMED AT THE 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL TO MEET THE FEDERAL
GEOGRAPHIC DATA COMMITTEE STANDARDS; THAT THIS SURVEY WAS
PERFORMED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEY TO THE ACCURACY OF CLASS A HORIZONTAL AND CLASS C
VERTICAL WHERE APPLICABLE; THAT THE ORIGINAL DATA WAS OBTAIN
BETWEEN THE DATES OF 10/28/15-11/06/15,03/29/16 ; THAT THE
CONTOURS SHOWN AS BROKEN LINES MAY NOT MEET THE STATED
STANDARD AND ALL COORDINATES ARE BASED ON NAD 83 (NSRS 2011)
AND ALL ELEVATIONS ARE BASE ON NAVD 88; THAT THIS MAP MEETS
THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS AS STATED IN TITLE
21, CHAPTER 56, SECTION .1606; THAT THIS MAP WAS NOT PREPARED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH G.S. 47-30, AS AMENDED AND DOES NOT
REPRESENT AN OFFICIAL BOUNDARY SURVEY.
WITNESS MY ORIGINAL SIGNATURE, REGISTRATION NUMBER, AND SEAL
THIS THE fl" DAY OF &j U!Cr , 20J.�
11
OFFICIAL SEAL
��Ot=OFESSJp •;y%
g SEAL r;
:r L-4641 =
Ar•
••♦ S(,JFt`I�••
LIP S.
PHILLIP Ef. KEE, PLS L-4647
Title Sheet
General Notes and Symbols
Project Overview
Stream Plain and Profiles
]plant ]List
Project Directory
Survey��n v
]dee Mapping and Surveying
111 Central Avenue
Asheville, STC 28801
Brad Kee, PLS
828®645-8275
Wildlands Engineering, line
License No. F-0831
1430 South Mint Street
Suite 1®4
Charlotte, NC 28203
Aaron Earley, PE
704-332-7754
®.1
®.2
®.3
2.1-2.2®
3.®
Owner:
NCDEQ
Division ®f Mitigation Services
5 Ravenser®ft Dr, Suite 102
Asheville, STC 28801
DMS Project Manager:
]Furry Tsomides
828-545-7057
Disturbed Area:
2® Acres
]Lacs N36030926.7399
Long: W81000918.4799
U0
141'
0
P4
A
Ni
S
e WEy
IR
it
•eE4
a0
00
U)
Atilt
141'
0
P4
A
Ni
S
e WEy
IR
it
•eE4
a0
00
o
z
a�
AAO

Channel ConWuuion Nuclear all Reaches
1) Contractor shall not disturb more active stream channel than an be stabilized by the end of the day. A 24hourpump- around is required if
in stream construction is not completed and stabilized by the end of the work tlay.
2) No material from the off-line Design stream channel excavation many be backfilled into the adjacent existing stream channel until the
evel,U-slacced Design stream section is completed, stabilized, and the stream flow has been diverted inch it not even if that section of
.to/ ex6In, sVeam is being pumped.
3) Clearing and grubbing sctsities shall not extend more than 150 linear feet ahead of in stream work.
The Little Pine Creek In Restoration construction will follow the construction sequence protocol as described below, unless otherwise noted.
Initial Site Prevention
lI Contact North Carolina 'ONE CALL Center(1.SW.63249491 before any exnvation.
2) Contact Land Quality (336-771-5000)beforeany work begins on the project and notify them of the start date.
3) Install temporary cattle redusion fencing as outined in the specifications.
4) Prepare stabilized construction entrances and temporary construction easement areas as indicated on the Plan Set,
5) Mobilize equipment, mai prepare staging, disposal, and material stoQplk areas) as anownon plans.
6) Setup erosion numml measures as outlined In the Plan Set. Erosion and sediment control measures shall be intoned by the Contractor to
prated the Design stream channel from signifiwntrunoff prior to permanent smaginaion Sip fends should be Installed where appropriate
at the designated ditmeal area as well. Contradar is responsible for inspection and maintenance of erasion control measures tM1mugM1 the
duration of construction.
]) Install temporary stream crossings.
8) Install and maintain an onsite rain gauge and log book to record the rainfall amounts and dates. Complete the sett inspection as required
by OENRe
p rm
Little Pine Creek Channel Construglon Notes
9 Construction shall generally begin t the upstream extent of the rdbut utile Pine Creek Reach 1 Station 100,00 and progress
stn Y 6 P p I ( I post
downtram to std. 124,07.
IN As work progressey mmove and stockpile the top 3 Inches of soil from the active grading area, Stockpiled topsoil shall be kept separate far
nsile replacement prior to floodplain seeding.
11)Installthe pump around system prior to beginning excavation within the existing live channel bed The pump around system needs to be
employed only when workk that, conducted And, the active channel. Contradar shall stage his work to minimize the duration of pump
around operations.
12) Intel impervious dikes at upstream and downstream ends of pump around locations. The pump around operation shall be performed
between these locations as decandd in plan details.
13) Remove all conductive and reanvevegeution prior to beginning the dmnnelcanstruction.
14) Contractor should attempt to construct the channel offline where feasible. Rod, conditions permit more than one oMine section may be
constructed concurrently, however ofnine sections shall be tied online sequentiallyfmm downstream W upstream.
15) The Contractor shell not disturb more active stream channel than an be stabilized with seed, mulch, and matting by the end of the Ory.
Excess cutmaterial may be stockpiled within the established stockpile area of hauled directly m the appropriately permitted disposal site.
16) Construct the Design stream channel to the grade specified in the cords sedians and profile. Transfer coarse material from abandoned
channel riffles to new channel riffles. Backfill abandoned channel sections wind stockpiled soil. Nonnameand invasive SoMmoion(US
privet, multl0ora rose, and Japanese honeysuckle) shall be removed from the existing channel priorto backfilling,
1]) Install structures (log vane, j hook and vane, I hook log vane, fifes, etc,) and inbankbimnRneedng such as brush mattress or brush the
after channel grading is completed.
18) Seed (with approming a seed mix) and straw mulch areas where the coir fiber maMng is to be installed.
19) Install coir Fiber matting.
Ing Body work Oyll be constructed and stabilized prior to work on Little Pine Reach 20 to protect downstream work unless DlM1erande
approved by the Designer.
211 When channel construction is completed remove the temporary stream rroduarg sUucwas and install the permanent ford crossings per the
plans and spedfiations.
22)Prepare floodplain for seeding by applying stockpiled topsoil to the Boulder between bank rl elevation and the grading limits, nppine,
andraking/ smoothing. Seed and mulch. Any areas within the conservation easement that have not been graded shall have fescue
fire
hbiciae treatment and will not be ripped orseeded.
23) Plant live stakes and herbaceous plugs on stream banks according to planting details and specifications.
— — — — — — Existing Property Line
10+00
— ) — - — - — Design Thalweg
— Ni w— w— w— Existing Irrigation Line
100------- Existing Major Contour (5' Interval)
-------------- Existing Minor Contour
ONE Existing Overhead Electric
0 Existing Power Pole
— — — — — — — — Existing Easement
Existing Fence
0 0 Existing Tree
r i i
Existing Wetlands
Existing Farm Road
J Existing Rock
PROJECT NOTES:
Topographic survey was performed by Kee Mapping and Survey on June 11,
2012. Additional survey completed February 22, 2013. Datum is NAD
83INSR20018 NAVD 1988.
Deviations from the desgn are shown In red
VR Channel Construction Notes
24) Construction shall generally begin at the upetream project boundary (DO Station 297+18)and progress downstream towards the Little Mine
influence. VRB shall be constructed before work begins on uR below Station ST.. Uri sM1all be constructed prior to work
beginning below UT2 Station 333,00, Little Pine Creek mmomiclu n shall be complete up to Station 11788 and the log vane at station
11645 w that the ronfluenre may be constructed appropriately.
25)Establish Pump System far areas of mnstruc.an where Design channel intersects existing channel frequently, Contractor shall stage his
workto minimize the duration of pomp around operations.
26) Install impervious dikes at upstream and downstream ends of pump around loarlons. The pump around operation sM1all be performed
between these locations as described in plan details.
27I UT2 will be constructed ham the upstream end, working downstream, along the existing stream channel. As work progresses, remove and
stockpile the top 3 inches of soil Dom the active grading area. Stockpiled topsoil shall be kept separate for anshe replacement prior to
floodplain seeding.
28) Remove all non-nafi a andinvasive vegetation prior to beginning the channel construction.
29)Clear and grub only the portion of stream channel that can be completed, stabilized, and matted within the same day.
30)Construct the Design stream channel to the grade specified in the cross regions and profile. Stockpile any material suitable for fill or topsoil
where indicated on the plan sheen.
31) Excavate and stockpile any remaining drove had material found in the old channel separatery, from the excavated soil. Bed material shall
be Incorporated into &a riffles Of the newly constructed channel.
32) Install structures (log va qj hook rock vane, j hook log wine, Mai etc) and in -bank biaeogineenng such as brush mattress or brush Ice in
the dry after grading is completed.
33)Seed (with appropriate seed mixt and straw mulch areas where the coir fiber matting is to be insulted.
34) Install hair fiber matting
dexposed to es area stabilized remove im ervious dikes install Aannei lu and turn water into iM1e new
35 Once disturbed areas an s p p 8.
Ip
channel.
sled coil. Non-native and invasive vegetation Ire, rove multiflora rase and Japanese
36 Backfill abandoned a removed from with stockpiled ¢ ( p-
1 P
honeysuckle) shall be removed from the existing channel prior to batkfillln&
3]) Seed, mat, and mulch backfill sections before proceeding to the next area.
38)Install permanent alvert crossings as shown on plans before moving W the next construction area.
39)Prepare noodplaln for seeding by applVinB stockpiled twwil between bankNil elevation and the grading limits, ripping, and raking/
cathing Seed and mulch. Any areas within the conservation easement that have remaining ground cover of fescue that has not been
graded shall have fescue herbicide tmatment and will not be ripped orseeded,
40) Plant live stakes and herbaceous plugs on stream banks according 0 planting details and specifications.
URA Channel Construction Nate
41) Construction at the upstream most end Sta, all to San detract can rently with downstream work (Std. 425+58 to Sta.
4 zddN) if needed; howeveq construction shall generally begin at the upstream boundary of each work area and progress downstream.
42) Establish Pump System for areas of mnstruNan in the active channel, Contractor shell stage Ms work to minimize the duration of pump
and enuom.
43) Intop
all Impervious dikes at upstream and downstream ends of pump around locations. The pump around operation shall be performed
between these locations as described in plan details.
441 As work progresses, remove and stockpile the top 3lnches of soil from the active grading area. Stockpiled topsoil shall be kept separate for
mile replacement prior lofloodrain seeding.
45)Remove all no mauve and invasive vegetation prim to beginning the channel construction.
46) Oscar and grub only the portion of stream channel that can be completed, stabilized, and maned within the same day.
47) Construct the Design stream channel tothe grade specified In the crass sections and profile. Stockpile any material suitable for fill or topsoil
where indicated on the plan Mi
48) Excavate and stockpile any remaining made bed material bund in the old channel separately from the excavated soil. Bed material shall
be incorporated into the sees of Me newly constructed channel.
49) Install structures (log vane, j hook rack vane, j hook lag vane, rifer,etc) and in -bank hicengineering such as brush mattress or brush mein
the dry after grading is completed.
50) Seed (with appropriate seed mix) and straw mulch areas where the doir fiber marling is to be installed.
51) Install coir fiber matting.
CECE— Conservation Easement
— ra— Conservation Easement Crossing
10-00
— — As -Built Thalweg Alignment
........ — • • •.... — Design Bankfuli
0 Design Major Contour IS' Interval)
-LOD on
Design Minor Contour
Design Silt Fence
Design Temporary Construction Easement
Design Limits of Disturbance
Design Tree Removal
GROUND STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS OF DWO CONSTRUCITON
GENERAL PERMIT
CR -CR Constructed Riffle
STABILIZATION
STABILIZATION TIME
SITE AREA DESCRIPTION
TIMEFRAME
FRAME EXCEPTIONS
PERIMETER DIKES, SWALES,
TDAYS
NONE
DITCHES AND SLOPES
�ffa
Design Root Wad
HIGH QUALITY WATER
See Detail), Sheet 5.3
g
(HOW)ZONES
TDAYS
NONE
Sae Detail 2, Sheet 5.3
FOR SLOPES <10' IN
Mattress
actress
Design Brush Ma
LENGTH AND NOT
SLOPES STEEPER THAN 31
T DAYS
STEEPER THAN 2:1, 14
DAYS ALLOWED
T DAYS FOR SLOPES, 50'
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER
14 DAYS
IN LENGTH
NONE (EXCEPT FOR
ALL OTHER AREAS WITH
14 DAYS
PERIMETERS AND HOW
SLOPES FLATTER THAN 4:1
ZONES)
Design Log Sill
See Detail 2, Sheet 8.2
Design Boulder Sill
See Detail 3, Sheet 5.4
Design Log J -Hook
0PZ==Z::3 See Detail 4, Sheet 5 3
52) Once disturbed areas and exposed slopes area stabilized; remove impervious dikes and turn water into the new channel.
53)Bi.I any abandoned channel sections with stackplled SAIL Non -naive and invasive vegetation lire. privet multiflora rasq and Japanese
honeysuckle) shall be removed from theexistin, channel prior to bacMllleg.
54) Seetl, mat, and mulch backfill sections before proceeding to the next area.
55) Install permanent culvert crossing as shown on plans.
56)Prepare floodplain far seeding by applying stockpiled topsoil between bankfull elevation and the grading limits, ripping, and raking/
nothing. Seed and mulch. Any areas within the conservation easement that have remaining ground rover of fescue that has not been
graded shall have fescue herbicide treatment and will not be ripped orseeaed.
57I Plant live stakes and herbaceous plugs on cram banks according to planting details and spinfications.
IR213 Channel Constmnlon Noted
561 Begin construction on UIIB by installing the two lag sills at the wetland headcun near SEA 501 Care should he taken to avoid
disturbance in the existing wetland to the greatest extent possible. After sills are installed, Immediately stabilize the eveisnd area as
specified in the planting plans and these speclfiCatlns.
59) Construction shall generally progress at the upstream end of active channel work(Ster 501 and proome downstream towards the UR
c NUenCe(Sow 5a5e411.
60) Establish Pump System for areas of construction in the active channel. Contractor shall stage his work to minimize the duration of pump
around operations.
61)Install impervious dikes at upsveam and downstream ends of pump amund locations. The pump arauntl operation shall he performed
between these locations as described in plan details.
62) As work progresses, remove and stockpile IM1e top 3 inches of sail from the agivegrari ng area. Stockpiled topsoil shall he kept separate for
onsc ereplacement prior to Floodplain seeding.
63) Remove all nor native and ovasivevegeution prior to beginningthe channel construction.
a an he completed, stabilized and malted again the same do
4 a and rub cant the ortion of stream channel that Y
6 Clear p
I 8 Y P
s coon and mfile.5toc Stockpile an material suitable for fill or 'pro![
65 [ansimctihe Desi n stream channel to the rides specified in iM1e coos sections n Np Y P
1 g e
p P
where ie and stockpile
on the pinim ins
66I Exavde and stockpile any remaining coarse bed material found In the old channel separately ham the excavated soil, eetl material shall
be incorporated into the rifflemf the newly mndruaetl channel.
6]) Install structures (log vane, j hook rack vardi hook log vane, riffles, etc) and in -bank hicengineering such as brush mattress or brush the in
the By after grading is tomplered.
68)Seed (with appropriate seed mix) and straw mukM1 areaswhere the our fiber matting law be installed.
69) Install coir fiber matting.
7D) Once disturbed areas and exposed slopes area stabilized; remove impervious dikes and turn water intone new channel.
]1) Backfill any abandoned channel sections with stockpiled soil. Nan -native and invasive vegetation (i.e. privet, multiflora ros, and Japanese
honeysuckle) shall be removed from the existing channel pnorter backfilling.
]2) Seed, mat, and mulch backfill sections before pmtteding to the next area.
731 lnstall permanent cuicandreassing as shown on plans.
74)Prepare floodplain for seeding by applying stockpiled tapsoil between bankfull elevation and the grading limits, ripping, and raking/
nothing. Sued and mulch Any areas within the conservation easement that have remaining ground cover of fescue that has not been
Waded shall have fescue herbicide treatment and will not he ripped or seeded.
]i) Plant have stakes and herbaceous plugs on stream banks according implanting details and specifications.
Canstrvdian DWwbil dgbwz
]6) Remove temporary stream crossings.
D) nice Contractor shall ensure that the site is free of trash and leftover materials prior to demobilization of equipment ham the site.
79)Complete the removal of any additional stockpiled material from the site.
79I Demobilize grading equipment from the site.
99) All rock and other stockpiled materials must be removed from the limits of disturbance and conservation easement. All areas outside the
cargereartual eent shall be returned to pre project conditions or better.
8115eed, mulch,andt iuhlllze staging areas, stockpile arear, haul roads, and construction entrances. pasture seed mix is to be applied to
areas of disturbance outside of the conservation easement
82) Coordinate removal ofaryremaining temporeO lDle exclusion fencing with the Designer.
no(9
Design Rock nAn Vane
CR -CR Constructed Riffle
See Detail 1, Sheet 5.4
J
Design Rock J -Hook
Q. ®
(�®
See Detail 4, Sheet 5.4
Design Angled Log Drop
See Detail 3, Sheet 5.2
�ffa
Design Root Wad
vl�
See Detail), Sheet 5.3
g
Design Stone Toe Geolift
r
Design Brush Toe
Sae Detail 2, Sheet 5.3
Mattress
actress
Design Brush Ma
See Detail s,Sheet
Vernal Pool
no(9
Design Temporary Crossing
CR -CR Constructed Riffle
00
J
Design Temporary Crossing
See Detail X, Sheet 5 6
L`��\"�/`/`
• •
g
r
"i—_J
CR -WR Woody RifBe
CRJR Jazz Riff)
Chunky Riffle
- Rock and Roll RifBe
Design Construction Entrance
See Detail 1, Sheet 5.5
Design Permanent Ford Crossing
See Detail 1, Sheet 5.6
Design Permanent Culvert Crossing
See Detail 3, Sheet 5R
Design Constructed Rife
Varies per details on Sheet 5.1
and Sheet 5.2.
0W
3
ti
F`1
r®3
r�
k!
b
was
bad
b
L�
4dPal
W
A
Design Temporary Crossing
Be Detail 2, ShBet56
J
Design Temporary Crossing
See Detail X, Sheet 5 6
Design Permanent Culvert Crossing
See Detail 3, Sheet 5R
Design Constructed Rife
Varies per details on Sheet 5.1
and Sheet 5.2.
0W
3
ti
F`1
r®3
r�
k!
b
was
bad
b
L�
4dPal
W
A

tOM00
LITTLE PINE CREEK
STA: 100+00
REACH 1 BEGIN WORK
AS -BUILT
LITTLE PINE CREEK
STA: 100+00
REACH 1 BEGIN WORK
0
100+50
tot+oo
101+50
102+00
m
r INSTALL ROCK J -HOOK
SEE DEjAA. 4 m
r r
.. 25QOF'a .1"STONETOEc
GEOLIR
INSTALL BRUSH
2540 n
zDN�-�u
m�
~W_ _
2535
nm^'rrprr
� � h
N3Jo
rioonmm�„3
2530
2528
^
Design � \ Design
I 1
p ore ted onto design profile for comparison purposes
rrs and as-0uill alignments shown for dompanson
r
i
ria
TAULLOGSILL
E DETAIL
Is
^
Design � \ Design
I 1
p ore ted onto design profile for comparison purposes
rrs and as-0uill alignments shown for dompanson
r
i

2540
2535
2530
2525
104.)0
105.00
1p5.50
106.00
106.50
10»00
2540
n
QZ #4
Z Z
Z
Of
3 -J
m2535
Q
h
2530
♦80
(
I
c
p' Y
b
6'
I
}
9
DESIGN
NN
Q
�. . �: �• O. W
BANNFULL.
$
g
N
w--
i eW
W
W
vmi
*
S'>
m
�� to m N
m N
W ~ W
N W
m
JQ
m
N
W� •n
W NI
>�'
F
m
FQ W—'
N J
m
F W
t
m.
>
`
f
N
o
j
W
m+
o
r
W
J•
p
"
.. . �.
N
..'
W
�.... �.•
. �.
•�. .. (.
•
N
i
b
�b
NN
�
v
AS -BUILT GRADE
DESIGN
GRADE
I
I
i
__
.....•.,
mmnn
109.50109
105.00
1p5.50
106.00
106.50
10»00
2540
n
QZ #4
Z Z
Z
Of
3 -J
m2535
Q
h
2530
♦80
p' Y
b
6'
2525
9
As-b.ilt g
Design al
p' Y
6'
p• p'
40
60'
mwmo:.r.o
�
p
Y
b
�b
�
v
As-b.ilt g
Design al

zsaa
2535
2530
2525
2522
11
z�r=.
Hti2=J �E
L
i
m
mom
I
M,qlw.
mom
N
■N�N�■NN■NNN
■
N
�N■NN
NN■�N
intplt
and► �.�ur
`�.
����_
�
\ .
e ant*�a�"
Y f•�"
•
✓F+ �!JiA >,<���#`'2v
ova##.
#Yi �:a �
�L"
�
, Y
• � � i /� �. /
• /
'�� * *f+�s t+'� �<�'�
�* � � y �!aalvi#.T*�
f!1 T
5
�� �1r \�# i<����'F*
'
�
� •�
4
f•1�#*•
�„ "'fit
(`-I��`<L_i�i%` � # #
i
�T__
�'•
-
."ro
Rip..;'
Ji�
�
s M
♦e� t*j:%
i
# #
y
z�r=.
Hti2=J �E
L
i
m

2535
2530
2525
1535
530
2525
2520 � ( � � r � r 2520 �
114+s0
nsw9
r
�®
JY_.
117-00
117+50
ne=00
qa -
zzridN
aaLzaaa
tit, E
i
J
W
h
119+a0
P
Q
r
W
ya
'J
IU
0 2 4V
6
�4
�
s�
rvw�Kw
�
b
a• zo• ao
so'
u
IAs
3
8
-built grades projected onto design profile for companson purposes
o
PL7
�
r�
IDesign
z
b
s�k'eJ
gg
b-0
�
b
Mu
i
P
Q
W
ya
'J
IU
�4
u
IAs
3
8
-built grades projected onto design profile for companson purposes
o
alignments and as-twilt alignments shorn for comparison:
IDesign
z
s�k'eJ
gg

2530
2525
25M
b
1 - f- f •p�/�y�
2515
t 2515 I
119"0119+50 120+00 120+50 121-00 121+50 122+00 122.50 123+00 123+50 124+00 124+30 0
t 11 _ _ ____ _-_ a�
1 '
� o
1, SGAtE TIE IN '+
FROM GULLY
l Ic
I l+ oun.ET STA9Il1unON 1F
` im ADDED , m
STA'. 124+7 '
DIA 125+227 W
INSTALL PERMANENT END REACH 2A 1 J Z
,y FOROCROSSING BEGIN REACH 2Bi
SEEOETAIL i LITTLE PINE CREEK FV-
\
CR R
1 v
UPON PROJECTCOMPLETIONTO REMAIN I
HAUL ROAD TO REMAIN. s
REGOE WITH 2
SL%CROSS
SLOPE 0WN6TREAM. I 1
BOULDER TOE ACD NS -
j SI
i
EXISTING FARM ROADC��
•I
II • `I
F �"
J)
n
I
W
03
c!
vH
c
+mt
»�
0' 2' 4' 6'
r
GE IGN W NKFULL
o
li
�-1
wmzartul
¢ ly
i
ry
_
ZZ
i
io
-
" w
l
(U
M
"
I
�
•N
n
"
W.
r...r ...
_
ry w a
•
6�525
. �..
m
..
> Y
>
1 `
STA=119+59
ELEV=
2524.23
i
As euiiT
E—_
� '
i
I
e
i
2520
I
1
I
DESIGN GRADE
I
I
b
1 - f- f •p�/�y�
2515
t 2515 I
119"0119+50 120+00 120+50 121-00 121+50 122+00 122.50 123+00 123+50 124+00 124+30 0
t 11 _ _ ____ _-_ a�
1 '
� o
1, SGAtE TIE IN '+
FROM GULLY
l Ic
I l+ oun.ET STA9Il1unON 1F
` im ADDED , m
STA'. 124+7 '
DIA 125+227 W
INSTALL PERMANENT END REACH 2A 1 J Z
,y FOROCROSSING BEGIN REACH 2Bi
SEEOETAIL i LITTLE PINE CREEK FV-
\
CR R
1 v
UPON PROJECTCOMPLETIONTO REMAIN I
HAUL ROAD TO REMAIN. s
REGOE WITH 2
SL%CROSS
SLOPE 0WN6TREAM. I 1
BOULDER TOE ACD NS -
j SI
i
EXISTING FARM ROADC��
•I
II • `I
F �"
J)
n
I
W
03
I x x4
4 e `o
As -built grades projected onto design profile for cOmpanson purposes
Design alignments and as4bUill alignments sham for comparison 3 o T
2R �cn
c!
vH
c
+mt
0' 2' 4' 6'
a' 1. 40' 90'
�-1
wmzartul
b
i
io
(U
b
I x x4
4 e `o
As -built grades projected onto design profile for cOmpanson purposes
Design alignments and as4bUill alignments sham for comparison 3 o T
2R �cn

2530
2530
Q)
DESIGN
SAN stir
U.
2525
2525
CC�'le
dim
....
..
..
-2o
I
"14
- --
is
2520
......
�2
�2
2520
V
�Iy11U1�
.
.... .....
IV,
...
......
...
A%—
— —
— —
FS
-BUILT
GRADE
ESIGN
GRACE
1
2515
2515 -
7z
2512
2512
CIS
124.30 124 125+00
125+50
126.00
126+51)
127+01) 127+50
128.00
128+50
12e,00 129-20
U
0. 4 6
�el
Or 20' 40- 60
INSTALL BRUSH TOE (WIP)
0
SEE DETAIL
LOGSALLANK) -------
Bi)UUCER ED
------
LOG SILL REAKY'llED
-7
--------- ---
--
SOULOERS ADDEJ
-------_.29,00
CR
L;K
...
RWT WADS HE
WITH BRUSH TOE
�UJEJRSILL
REPLACED
LOG SILL
If
a
3 b, i it onto design profile for
grai-S projected
r
comparison
E
V.
purposes
Design alignments and ai .1,ginni
shown for pension
u

u25
2520
]515
2510
2503
129+20 129+50
130+00
150+50
131+50
132+00
132+50
133+50
2525
!n
� ¢
Z
�w ..�s=
2520 •,,- `
w
h
2515
0'
4'
6'
2510
NEaTicul
I
o•
z 1. 40
ss'
�
II
�owzanul
�
C�
b
2508
134+00134+10
I
I
�
�
II
b
b
I
o
Q)
cis
c'
Qj
I
�
I
5
..LITTLE PINE
CREEK
STA: 134+13
STA: 135+47
REACH 2B
in, CONSTRUCTION
iow crloao-z5zss
e
z
and as-bullt aligOmenls y
son
i cc �C

Ic
'�w.�.4•-�r ar
1 1
2595
2595
DITCH GRAIN
N
25902596
r r r r
i U YLL ADD %
> m
r
2585
2585
1D' 1s'
o
m
VE F_XIS INGF MROAD
2580
2580
I _
¢
. 9%
295
2575
.0
a_
2570<_
,2570
-m
11w
I
.111
49
i
zsas
ax
T
2565
ILm+'I
1I
mmmNw
]'
w
2500
>
DEIGN PRFIL
2569
1 .4
n \
mNnNJ
_
X,ILTROFIL
•
wto
2555
>R'
t
2556
FF/L/
EADD�ED
>
n
w
N
>
_a
25502550
.
w
$FN,
in
6mw%
2545
in
INSTALL PERMANENT FORD CROSSING
SEE DETAIL
(TYR254$
Piw
.
ma
1
5 6
-
to
MOV[G
2560
.0%
2546
UPSIRFAl4
i
.0% I
¢
F N m
y
N W w m m m
2535
--I
m a -
1 a> ^ w W
m
a
2535
N IJI n
m
2530
w F $ n n m
w
2539
-
N W m
r w m n
ri W N W
-
2525
w -f N-�R
2525
EMOVE DEBRIS FROM GULLY
'
_
I>N-m
N v
W NJ mN_Yim
_W
a
T
N
2520
2520
-
-II
W
_a
m
N W m
W
2515
2515
INSTALL BOULDER SILL (TYP)
-- -- - -
`
SEE DETAIL
_
SOULDERSILLADDED.
2510
2510
fiozwa e92+50
8O1
e03«56 004+00 8O4w0 805+00
801+50
\
As -built grades projected onto design profile for
\
comparison purposes.
Design alignments and asbuilt alignments
shown for comparison.

2535
2530
2525
2520
2515
202,00
202,50
yFFT
203+00
r 276
r r \
r r r r
r r r r r
r r r r r r
r r r r r r
r r r r r r
r r r r r r r
RCCK'A' VANE REPLACED
WITH (2) SODLEER SILLS
INSTALL ROCK 'A' VANE
r r r r SEE DETAIL e
5A
r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r
r rrrrr 26z.6u zozw2 ,- �, ,.
r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r '`mss
r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r
r rrrrr r r r ,�
r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
203,50
204,00
204,50
205,00
205,50
2535
2530
2525
2520
2515
206,00 206,42
0• 4• 6' 12• 40• 60•
rv�++.�i mwxzwuu
As4ouiH goides projecte1 onto GesiBn profile
comparison purposes.
i
2.
r
r

2720
2715
nm
2705
30
n—�'-3V
�30�
r r r 300 /
r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r
r /r
r r
r
l r 1
i�
2720
2715
2710
2705
70
0• 4' 1. 12' 0 20' 40' 60'
mnrM.0 wow�o.ru1
ao�ao�
"LED LAG
a r r .-
52
�fJI Irrrr
CR -GH
LOG StLLs REMOVED
2715 _ CR -CH _
CRLH /
•7 i � - , I �,� r r r r r� r r S
CR -CH
C
---�
c \BINK GRADING�!
T' REMOVED 304400—
r r r r r r r r r r r
COORDINATE BANK GRADING WITH
ENGINEER IN FIELD.
r r o
� <E
�LE�Cc
!� IQ
F
LLI
As�i
S
CP
In Graces projected onto design Orotil,
comp. :.,
u \ V
comparison purpososes.
Design alignments and as built alignments
shown for comparison -
aa=_ _-
a2v.___
W
i
r

2705
2700
2695
2090
2585
306170 305+00
305+50
sae.00
'p I37
9
'I
r
r r r r r r
Ar
r r�r r r r r r r r r r r 1111
r rAo" �m r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
r. r r r
,� ,� r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r r r
r r r r r r r r r
/ +
+—
� CE �
os
FI ��ce
W E
s—Ms—CE—CE—CE—CES
�I
Q
�I
307+00
307+50
300+00
308+50
309+00
8705
2709
3595
31190
2005
309+50309+110
12' 0' 20' de' 60'
ryetiwl Md�Ldrtai
comparison purposes.
Design alignments and as -built alignments
immerr tar..p.,.n
E
UJ z
Q
r

2895
m,
m�
N wQ wF w'
- w wi—'m
r Wim >
2695
m r w
m
2690
l \
2690
2605
I
2685
STA =399+01
-
ELEV=2885.td
2880
STA =309+)9
ELEV= 2685.90
STA=310+56
ELEV= 2682.22
2680
STA=309+)4
ELEV='288539
STA=310+2)
ELEV= 2003.19
STA=3ID+td
-
ale =309+)2
ELEV=2886.30' ELEV=2fi84.50
2675
STA =308+09
ELEV= 2005.01,
268
—.1
I
I
I
6]0
2010
2865
2885
309d 0 310+00
310+50
311+50
312+00
312+5D
313+00
313+50
314+00
314+50
0' 4' 0' 12' 0' 20' 40' 60'
luEnntwY M��ul
3J �
3J �
3J �
3J
\3J�
3p \
aJ
� 30
� 3J
313+00'313+00
' INSTP L LOG J -HOOK \\ 312+00
EE
Z SDETAIL 4 p.�{✓'� 1�\
JI 5.3 �11+00�_�
1 –
12
pY2
R -CH /
INSTALLR
ANGL
ED
LOG DROP (TYP)
EE DETAIL 3 \
CR -CH
CR -GH 5.P ' cE
315+0
� cE
� cE
GE (F
C \
R
As -built grades projected onto design profile
wmparison purposes.
Design alignments and as -built alignments
shown(.,,omp.nson
A$ -
Q�YU�M
raZcod3 i
J^
Is

2590
2585
2580
2575
2510
2585
2560
324+30 324+50
325+00 325+50 326w0 326+50 321+00 321+50 328+00
qa
¢z pv=_
2590
H E
E
w� r_
3.
2585
r—a '?
Is
2500
P
.q
N W Q W� m
u,
w
w n
^
n
2515it
N
2510
NNn
°
�a
25135
0
=320+42
1A._
C�
STA 328+49
PV=2%7.09—
561.00
TA 328169
TA=328+69
0
ELEV=2566.10 STA 328+92T
2560
ELEV= 256510
328+50 328+00 329+20
0' 4' 8' 12' 0' 20'
40 60'
a�aan
_I,d Ey
rvm.�a
UT2�
b
� b
�S p0
( 32` 5
24+00
i
Aebuilt grades proje
comparison purpose',
Design alignments ai
shown for compsriso
Y T AQP

2510
1
.`n
2570
I
a
w n„
I
2565
n
2565
;
i r
m
— r
I
t � —
i 1 t
21M1
2550
,
i
I
I
I
2555
2655
1
2550
,
I
2550
I
2545
1
2545
329+20 329+50 33WO
330+50 331-00 331+50
332.00
332+50 333-00 333 50 334~00334+10
0' 4 6' 12' 0' 20' 60
rvwrirxl gwuzcxeul
/,0
INSTALL PERMANENT
CULVERTCROSSING
\
334i0p'�-
2
�� 2580•-r
sEEOETAILe
_ 5.8
_____ _
.. ` � 33460
T2
�rn
�
� v~i
STA. 330+00
STA: 330+33 UT2
END REACH 1
BEGIN REACH 2
;20—
—
r r
UT2'
r r r
aa3+I'
r
r r r r r r
�VA(1
r ``Y�
r r \W
r r
r r UT2A `V
'
VO
r r
As-0uill grades projected onto design prole for
ison .
comparpurposes
T
r
r r r �A 5 De51gn ahgnmenls and as -built alignments
shown for comparison

��� al ry AIS mm�? rvlm
334+10 334+50
335+00
335+50
338+00
338150
r r r r r r r r r
G DROP
E DET`
337+00 337+50 338+00 338+50 339+00
0' 4' 8' 12' 0' 20' 40 60'
ryercrul
f
+
Asa /
�II
FA
z
Asbuiltmratles projected onto design profile (c: `jj
comparison purposes. B = ^E
Design alignments and asbuilt alignment.
shown for comparison
M.
N w r F W
NW
y W m
N
N an
,4
n
?555
'w
¢ �
>
m
"' rt
ITm
m
1
2555
w._
in�
1
w
a
W
?550
m
m
50
1-
F
>� 1 >.
m
^ m
6
ry
11 It
r
_
n
..
�•
...
545
N W
>
f
2545
:•_•2,
DESIGNBANKFULL
N
wT
BTA=334+J3
!
�i
_
_
w.
ELEV=254540
ELEV=2545.00
STA = 334+00
y—
'•�.,
1
540
STA 334+52
ELEV = 2543.90
1
•••• ••••
1
ELEV=_2544.8_0__
__ __ !
_
_ _' _
__
_
'� _
•••
%._L
�
2 540
ASBUILT GRADESTA-3/
1 •:••�•
ELEV= 2539A4
'10.44
.._.
____ _�._....�... ..
.... _.._..—
DESIG GFA E
_-. -
STA 337.
STA=33]+
-
-
2Yy •'••
ELEV=2538A4
ELEV=253229 +
-
•�~•
535
_
•�•
%
2535
!
1
y
1
�
EV- 230150
ELEV= 2534.08
T
1530
I
2530
334+10 334+50
335+00
335+50
338+00
338150
r r r r r r r r r
G DROP
E DET`
337+00 337+50 338+00 338+50 339+00
0' 4' 8' 12' 0' 20' 40 60'
ryercrul
f
+
Asa /
�II
FA
z
Asbuiltmratles projected onto design profile (c: `jj
comparison purposes. B = ^E
Design alignments and asbuilt alignment.
shown for comparison
M.

111.
2540
2535
2530
2525
2520
339M0 339,50
As -built grades prof
comparison purpose
340,00
340,50
341-00
341«50
342,00
342,50 34251
0' 4' 3' 12' 0' 20' 40' 60'
M���utl wOTir��ul
Design alignments and as -bunt alignments
shown for oompanson.
w
r
N
�
06=101010=1
1
���N■■N�
Im
I
mmIN
IN
lal■N
N■■NNI
N
�
INNNNNN
m
__
��N■
I�NNN
NMMMM
MININNI■N■■N■■NNI
INNINNI■N■■N■■NNI
MINE
MIXIMME
imm��imom M.� SNNMMINK �!"N
NNNNNNNNNNNi�N�INN�a�7
=IRN1MM
�7�'E�I�NI■N■N■■■NNI
NNNNNNNNNNNNNYNNNN/IN
.
INNIlM!■IliiN9■'.!!•■NNI
NNNNNNNNNNNI/N�NN
,.�=�N!■!!✓!N■■NNNI
NNNNNNNNNNt�vNNNNN
/NNNr■��y6YNN�ii
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
�NNNNN■�NNNrNNI
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNNI
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNNNNNI
mmmN�N
�NNNNNNNNNNN NNmmNNNNNN
NNNNNNNN—�--NNN NNNNNNNNNNNI
NNNN�
NN
NNNNNNNNMM
339M0 339,50
As -built grades prof
comparison purpose
340,00
340,50
341-00
341«50
342,00
342,50 34251
0' 4' 3' 12' 0' 20' 40' 60'
M���utl wOTir��ul
Design alignments and as -bunt alignments
shown for oompanson.
w
r

5
2735
2735
-'
.
2730
2730
27252725
m
,
a,
—�—
2720-
2720
2715
i
3719
2710
2710
-
I
�
2705
_�
2705
I
_
I
_
2700
2700
I
I
I
2995
2995
2690
2690
400.00
400.50
401+00 401+50
402-00
402-50
403+00
603+50
404.00
404+50
405-00
0'
4- 9' 12' 0•
rymtKgy
20' 40' 60'
tul
30
�
� 39
BEGIN E2S'
UT2A
LOG SILL REMOVED
P"'
_,
402app / '/�
`,
INSTALL BRUSH 0�
MATTRESS (TYP)ET
SEE DUAL
3
•' " } /
STA: 404+34
x
.
= /
e:
use�WN LOGSAND
403+00
• `.(_
0,
t
END E2
@.
.�
ONSITE BOULDERS TO �\
BUILD ANGLED LOG
-1p
_
UT2A
q-'-`@
'
DROP (TYP)
SEE DETAILe
40A.W
-®
"
((
IL
E
@`
@�
_-----------
®"
401.00
4 0
/
CLEAR WOODY DEBRIS
FROM CHANNEL.
i•
@�
.4/
r '
/
40'+W
S
/J
f
� \
1
5

2580
a75
2570
2565
2560
2555
425.58
425+00 426+50 427+00 427+59 426+00 428+50 429+00
BEGIN WORK
UT2A
STA:425+58
\
2575
2570
2565
2560
2555
429+50 490+00
0' 4' 8' 4' 0' 20 40' 60'
I
4%
'J
0
a(
F- IN
W
21 _J
F-
�I
zllll
y n p V
As -built projected onto design profile for
z
songrades
purposes
comparison purposes
E
¢
Design alignments and as- built alignments
z
shown for comparison.

2570
2565
2560
2555
2550
2545
430.00
I r
°y r
3prp° r r
430+50 431x00
431+50
2565
2560
2555
2550
2545
43200432*10
im UT2
CTA
0• 4' b• 12• 0• 20• 40• 60'
r
As -Will grades projected onto design profile
wmparison purposes.
Design alignments and as -built alignments
shown for wmparison
J
W
h
U
0
U
�Lv

'/4'/',/4 g, 'l,/'l,,X Ty/,,4,'X(n%'l, /'�,Ail,,4 '/'/,,M1 'X/r /, ,/,h �'/'/h/' ,h/p ,h;n/ hry',/,'/' � 1, �!', '•/'�g
Y'I/,/,'l''l•l,'l'//'!,'l'/l•1%till/l'l,'l'1,1/,//l',/•/l,Xl'!•I/l,l,!'Xl,/,1/l
1' !' q l,p'1' q, �', 'l• l' rl' p, 'l' 7, AXI 'l• l 'X p, 'l' 'b 'l, q, 'X„'/, ,/ 'l, ,l, X ,/, !•I,
,l, 'l', 'l, ,/ 'b ,!, lr, ,p 'l',X /, ,/, •l' 'h X 'X 'l',/, 9' ,h % 7, X p, l9 7, q, '!� 9, �!'„'X l
.. l• n. d. l .. ,r. ,F . 9 ., n. hi ,b / .,.
/ r /
RIPARIAN BUFFER PLANTING ZONE
APPROVED DATE
'echos
Common Name
Max. Spacing
pacing
tliv.
SpacIning
Min. Caliper SiroWm
#
S.suviftmsyeqykous
Sassafras
12 n
6-12 it
0.25'40'
5%
❑noderxhon NN
Tulip Poplar
12 A
&12 M1
0.25'-1.0'
15%
Ouemus Pinus
Chestnut Oak
12 it
&1211
025'10'
5%
Passed. ."cohn's
SywmOre
1211
S-1211
025'-1.0'
20%
Saftsmn,5ya
RserBnsi
12 it
&1211
025'10'
10%
Comes flwka
F 'ng Dogwootl
12 fl
&12 A
0.25'-1.0'
10%
Axons iocbandm
Yellow ckeye
1211
&1211
0.25'-1.!'
5%
F,aftusamencena
MR. Asti,
1211
6-12 it
D.25'-1.0'
20%
Querousrubrs
Northern Red Oak
1211
&1211
D.25'-1.0'
10%
100%
SLOPE BUF PLANING ZONE
Species
Co.... Name
yea S g
Intim"
Spacing
Min. Caliper Stratum
#
Pmdus serotina
Black Cheoy
1211
6-12 it
035'-10
10%
LirpderMmn fulipilra
Tulip Poplar
1211
It
0.25'-1.0'
20%
Cos. Pinus
Chestnut Oak
12 it
&12
D,25' -1.P
10%
Quemusromnea
Si Oak
1211
6-12n
025'-1.0'
10%
Darya glebe,
Pignut Hickory
12 it
e-12 A
0. '.1.0'
15%
Cornus floods
Flowering Dogwood
12 it
6-1211
0.25'- . '
10%
Aesmlus associates
Yellow Buckeye
1211
6­12ft
0.25'-10'
S%
presides americana
Mite Ash
1211
6-12 it
0.25'40'
10%
Quadsa rubra
Nodhem Red Oak
12 it
6-12 ft
0.25-10'
10%
'/4'/',/4 g, 'l,/'l,,X Ty/,,4,'X(n%'l, /'�,Ail,,4 '/'/,,M1 'X/r /, ,/,h �'/'/h/' ,h/p ,h;n/ hry',/,'/' � 1, �!', '•/'�g
Y'I/,/,'l''l•l,'l'//'!,'l'/l•1%till/l'l,'l'1,1/,//l',/•/l,Xl'!•I/l,l,!'Xl,/,1/l
1' !' q l,p'1' q, �', 'l• l' rl' p, 'l' 7, AXI 'l• l 'X p, 'l' 'b 'l, q, 'X„'/, ,/ 'l, ,l, X ,/, !•I,
,l, 'l', 'l, ,/ 'b ,!, lr, ,p 'l',X /, ,/, •l' 'h X 'X 'l',/, 9' ,h % 7, X p, l9 7, q, '!� 9, �!'„'X l
.. l• n. d. l .. ,r. ,F . 9 ., n. hi ,b / .,.
/ r /
WETLAND PLANTING ZONE A
APPROVED DATE
TYPE
Species
Common Name
Max. Spacing
SpacIntliinv. g
Min. Cali"
Stratum
N
Nysse sy0mace
Black Gum
12 it
a -12a
a. 40'
40
10%
Plalanus occkemalis
Sycamore
1211
a-1211
0.25'-10'
Aug 15—Dec 30
30%
Betula nays.
River Birds
1211
6-12 it
0.25'-1.0'
Straw MNch
20%
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
12R
S- It
0.25'-1.0'
i
15%
Alnes senedula
Tag Met
1211
6-12 ft
0.25'-L0'
5%
Acernegundo
Box Ellet
12 it
&1211
0.25'-1.0'
10%
Gadere benzoin
Spicebush
12
5-1211
0.25'-1.0'
10%
100%
W
NO PLANTING ZONE
Love Stakes or Plugs
Species
Com nName
Max.Spad,
Indio.
Spacing
Min. St.
Stratum
#Plans
Comes am"mvm
ilky Dogwood
3 I
1 311
1 O S' 10' cal.
25%
Salixnlp2
Black Willow
3fl
3M1
O S'-10' cul.
10%
Sahxsemes
Silky Aslow
311
T
OS'10'w1.
40%
Sambioosngmsspoan.d sl
EMemerry
311
3M1
a5'-1Pcal,
5%
Junius egos
Common Rush
511
5ft
1'-2' plug
NA
Trznspladed or Toblings
pecfee
Common Name
Max.S pacing
Intliv.
Spacing
Min. 3iza
Stratum
'Plants
Akusearrulah
Tag Abler
1 12 It
6­12ft
0.281.0'
2D%
'/4'/',/4 g, 'l,/'l,,X Ty/,,4,'X(n%'l, /'�,Ail,,4 '/'/,,M1 'X/r /, ,/,h �'/'/h/' ,h/p ,h;n/ hry',/,'/' � 1, �!', '•/'�g
Y'I/,/,'l''l•l,'l'//'!,'l'/l•1%till/l'l,'l'1,1/,//l',/•/l,Xl'!•I/l,l,!'Xl,/,1/l
1' !' q l,p'1' q, �', 'l• l' rl' p, 'l' 7, AXI 'l• l 'X p, 'l' 'b 'l, q, 'X„'/, ,/ 'l, ,l, X ,/, !•I,
,l, 'l', 'l, ,/ 'b ,!, lr, ,p 'l',X /, ,/, •l' 'h X 'X 'l',/, 9' ,h % 7, X p, l9 7, q, '!� 9, �!'„'X l
.. l• n. d. l .. ,r. ,F . 9 ., n. hi ,b / .,.
/ r /
TEMPORARY SEEDING
APPROVED DATE
TYPE
PLANTING RATE
(Ibsho m)
Jan 1 —May 1
Rye Grain (Sectile Cereals)
120
Ground Agricultural Limestone
2,000
10.10.10 FeNlizer
750
Straw kill
4,000
May 1—Aug 15
Garman Millet (Setaria halide)
40
Ground Agricultural Limestone
2,000
10-10.10 FertilIter
750
Straw Mulch
4,000
Aug 15—Dec 30
Rye Grain (Boccie Cereal.)
120
Grountl AgriculMral Limestone
2,000
10.10.10 Fertilizer
1,000
Straw MNch
6,000
'/4'/',/4 g, 'l,/'l,,X Ty/,,4,'X(n%'l, /'�,Ail,,4 '/'/,,M1 'X/r /, ,/,h �'/'/h/' ,h/p ,h;n/ hry',/,'/' � 1, �!', '•/'�g
Y'I/,/,'l''l•l,'l'//'!,'l'/l•1%till/l'l,'l'1,1/,//l',/•/l,Xl'!•I/l,l,!'Xl,/,1/l
1' !' q l,p'1' q, �', 'l• l' rl' p, 'l' 7, AXI 'l• l 'X p, 'l' 'b 'l, q, 'X„'/, ,/ 'l, ,l, X ,/, !•I,
,l, 'l', 'l, ,/ 'b ,!, lr, ,p 'l',X /, ,/, •l' 'h X 'X 'l',/, 9' ,h % 7, X p, l9 7, q, '!� 9, �!'„'X l
.. l• n. d. l .. ,r. ,F . 9 ., n. hi ,b / .,.
/ r /
PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED PLANTING ZONE '
STREAMBANK PLANTING ZONE
Species Name
Common Name
Live Stakes and Herbacous Plugs
Paulson dgidulum
Redlop Panicgrass
Species
Cornus amwnVn
Common Name Max. Spacing Intliv. Spacing
Silky Doti 3M1 3g
MIn.Sixe
0S. -IC -cal.
Stratum #Plants
25%
Sabx Nigra
Blade W Ilan 3 M1 30
0.5' I.G. cal
15%
Selx acmes
Silky aglow 3R 311
05'10'.1.
50%
Sions s Nye sip sanadedsts
EMerbmry 3R oft
05'10".1.
10%
Junmseflusys
Comnnn Rush 511 Sfl
V-2'plug
See Specs
PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED PLANTING ZONE '
Pere Llve Seed (20lbahtm)
Species Name
Common Name
Ibslacre
Paulson dgidulum
Redlop Panicgrass
3
Ag ande Me tens
Writer Bentgmss
3
Chasmanlblum Isolators
River Oate
2
Rudbeckia blue
Bleakeyed Susan
1
Coreopsis lanceolate
LanceleafCmeopsis
1
CarexvulPnot ea
Fox Cents
3
Panicum dandestioum
Deertongue
3
Blame Arta.
VkginM Wild Rye
2
Aaclapaa syriw
Common Milkweed
02
Bali motralle
Blue False indigo
02
Catania pulchella
Annual Gaillania
i
Ecbinscea purposes
Pale Purple Caneflower
O6
If the Real Panicgreass and Writer Uentgrass fall to adequately Benninote
and prevent erosion in the Mountain Region, other types ofgmsses listed in Table
0.1 t L of Me NC EaSC Design Manual shall0e used per Ne designers reaction,
RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE, SLOPE BUFFER ZONE, AND WETLAND PLANTING ZONE "A" PLANTS WILL BE
INSTALLED BY A THIRD PARTY CONTRACTOR. SEEDING OF THESE ZONES WITH PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED
MIX, STREAM BANK PLANTING, AND PASTURE SEEDING IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR
RESPONSIBLE FOR STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN GRADING. ALL SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS SHALL ALSO BE
PLANTED WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND NOTED SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE USED.
STREAM BANK PLANTING, PASTURE SEEDING, TEMPORARY SEEDING, AND PERMANENT SEEDING WERE
INSTALLED PER ORIGINAL PLAN DURING CONSTRUCTION. SEPARATE PLANTING CONTRACT USED FOR
RIPARIAN, SLOPE, AND WETLAND BARE ROOT PLATING - SPECIES VARY FROM DESIGN PLAN.
7%=a?83a
AO�Syx t
I-Zm U_u”. E
Hm F
V�
i
Le
R
PASTURE SEEDING
Pure LW a Seed (U ffin /anal
Species Name
Common Name
Ibseed,
Daey#s Radia a
I Orchard Gmas
40
ToMben repnds
IWhite Ladino Clover
2
RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE, SLOPE BUFFER ZONE, AND WETLAND PLANTING ZONE "A" PLANTS WILL BE
INSTALLED BY A THIRD PARTY CONTRACTOR. SEEDING OF THESE ZONES WITH PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED
MIX, STREAM BANK PLANTING, AND PASTURE SEEDING IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR
RESPONSIBLE FOR STREAM AND FLOODPLAIN GRADING. ALL SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS SHALL ALSO BE
PLANTED WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND NOTED SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE USED.
STREAM BANK PLANTING, PASTURE SEEDING, TEMPORARY SEEDING, AND PERMANENT SEEDING WERE
INSTALLED PER ORIGINAL PLAN DURING CONSTRUCTION. SEPARATE PLANTING CONTRACT USED FOR
RIPARIAN, SLOPE, AND WETLAND BARE ROOT PLATING - SPECIES VARY FROM DESIGN PLAN.
7%=a?83a
AO�Syx t
I-Zm U_u”. E
Hm F
V�
i
Le
R