20020492 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20090213

1
1
1
1
1
1
o a - DO 1
Louis Berger Wetland Mitigation
Bank -Year 5 Monitoring Report
Rowan County, North Carolina
Submitted to:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Prepared by:
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
February 2009

F to ? 3 2?0?
T?,?DS AND S NNAI?Cl' TER ?3FP3'?Gh1
?JE
' THE Louis Berger Group, INC.
1001 Wade Avenue, Suite 400, Raleigh, North Carolina 27605.3323
' 919.866.4400 (Phone) 919.755.3502 (Fax) www.louisberger.com

' February 11, 2008
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
' U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Ste 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
' Re: The Louis Berger Wetland Bank
Action ID. 200220840
' Monitoring Report: Year 5 (JR-5035)
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
' The Louis Berger Group, Inc. is pleased to submit the above-mentioned Monitoring Report for
Year 5. We have distributed copies directly to all MBRT members. We look forward to
receiving any comments and seeing you at our scheduled site visit on May 1, 2009.
' Should you have any comments or questions or require further information, please do not
hesitate to call me at 919-866-4421.
' Sincerely,
THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC.
Michael O'Rourke
Sr. Environmental Scientist
enclosure
cc: Ed Samanns

1
1
The Louis Berger Group, inc

' John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Enviroiunent and Natural Resources
' 1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27669-1617
[phone]
t Marla Chambers
Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
' 12275 Swift Rd.
Oakboro, NC 28129
' [e-mail]
phone (cell): 704-984-1070
Kathy Matthews
' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Wetlands Section
109 T.W. Alexander Dr.
Durham, NC 27711
' MAIL CODE: E143-04
[phone]
' [phone]
Marella Buncick
' US Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1038
[phone] x237

Beth Harmon
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
' Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
[phone]

i
i
1
1 Louis Berger Stream and Wetland litigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Alonnoring
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ ...1
2.0 MONITORING METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... ...3
2.1 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................... ...3
2.2 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................... ...3
2.2.1 Groundwater ................................................................................................. ...3
2.2.2 Surface Water ............................................................................................... ...4
2.3 Stream Monitoring .................................................................................................................. ...4
2.3.1 Physical Parameters ...................................................................................... ...4
2.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates .......................................................................................4
2.3.3 Riparian Vegetation ...................................................................................... ...5
3.0 MONITORING RESULTS ................................................................................................................... ..6
3.1 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................ ..6
3.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................ 14
3.2.1 Groundwater .................................................................................................. 14
3.2.2 Surface Water ................................................................................................ 16
3.3 Stream Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 19
3.3.1 Physical Parameters ....................................................................................... 19
3.3.1.1 Channel Geometry ............................................................................... 19
3.3.1.2 Longitudinal Profile ............................................................................. 27
3.3.1.3 Channel Bed Materials ......................................................................... 36
3.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates Sampling Results ................................................................... 37
3.3.3 Stream Monitoring Results Summary ...................................................................... 41
4.0 MAINTENANCE & MANAGEMENT ACTIONS ............................................................................. 42
5.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................... 43
6.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 45
TOC Page i
Louis Berger Stream and Welland A4iligation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 A4onnoring Report

' TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
i
LIST OF FIGURES
'
Figure 1 Homestead Site Location Map .............................................................. .............................. I
' Figure 2 Second Creek Site Location Map .......................................................... ..............................2
Figure 3 Vegetation Plot Locations - Homestead Site ........................................ ............................ I 1
' Figure 4
Fi
5 Vegetation Plot Locations - Second Creek Site ....................................
30
70 P
il
G
h
S
li
b
h ............................12
gure -
ercent
e
rap
,
a
s
ury, Nort
Carolina .............................. ............................17
Figure 6 Stream Gauge Data - Homestead Site..
.................................................
............................18
' Figure 7 Stream Gauge Data - Second Creek Site ................................................ ...........................18
Figure 8c - 8d Channel Geometry - Homestead Site .................................................... ...........................22
Figure 8e Channel Geometry - Homestead Site .................................................... ..........................23
Figure 9a - 9b Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site ................................................ ...........................24
Figure 9a - 9b Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site ................................................ ...........................24
Figure 9c - 9d Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site ................................................ ..........................25
' Figure 9e - 9f Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site ................................................... ..........................26
Figure l0a Longitudinal Profile of the Stream at the Homestead Site: 2004 - 2008 Comparison
(Station 0 to 1,000 ft.) ............................................................................ ...........................31
Figure IOb Longitudinal Profile of the Stream at the Homestead Site: 2004 - 2008 Comparison
(Station 1,000 to 2,400 ft.) ..................................................................... ...........................32
' Figure l la Longitudinal Profile of the Stream at the Second Creek Site: 2004 - 2008 Comparison
(Station 0 to 1,000 ft.) ............................................................................ ...........................33
Figure l 1 b Longitudinal Profile of the Stream at the Second Creek Site: 2004 - 2008 Comparison
' (Station 1,000 to 2,000 ft.) ..................................................................... ...........................34
Figure 1 lc Longitudinal Profile of the Stream at the Second Creek Site: 2004 - 2008 Comparison
(Station 2,000 to 3,100 ft.) ..................................................................... ...........................35
TOC Page ii
I Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
1
LIST OF TABLES
'
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF CIRCULAR PLOT MONITORING IN THE RIPARIAN BUFFER AREA
AT THE HOMESTEAD SITE ............................................................................................7
' TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF CIRCULAR PLOT MONITORING IN THE RIPARIAN BUFFER AREA
AT THE SECOND CREEK SITE ......................................................................................8
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF CIRCULAR PLOT TRANSECT MONITORING WITHIN THE
WETLAND AREA AT THE HOMESTEAD SITE (2008) ...............................................9
TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF CIRCULAR PLOT TRANSECT MONITORING WITHIN THE
' WETLAND AREA AT THE SECOND CREEK SITE (2008) ........................................10
TABLE 5: A DENSITY COMPARISON OF PLANTED AND VOLUNTEER SPECIES .....................13
' TABLE 6: HERBACEOUS COVER .........................................................................................................13
TABLE 7: GROUNDWATER DATA - HOMESTEAD SITE (HS) & SECOND CREEK SITE (SC) ...15
TABLE 8: COMPARISON OF THALWEG ELEVATION AT THE HOMESTEAD SITE ...................19
TABLE 9: COMPARISON OF THALWEG ELEVATION AT THE SECOND CREEK SITE, ..............20
' TABLE 10:
TABLE 11 STREAM CROSS SECTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS - HOMESTEAD SITE ................29
STREAM CROSS SECTIONAL CHARACTERISTIC
: S - SECOND CREEK SITE ........... 30
TABLE 12: HOMESTEAD CHANNEL BED MATERIAL SURVEY RESULTS .................................36
' TABLE I3: SECOND CREEK CHANNEL BED MATERIAL SURVEY RESULTS ............................37
TABLE 14: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY RESULTS .........................38
' TABLE 15: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY SUMMARY ......................40
1 APPENDICES
' Appendix A Site Photographs
Appendix B Plan Sheets
Appendix C Groundwater Well Data

TOC Page iii
Louis Berger Stream and (Wetland Rlitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document presents the methods and results of the fifth year (2008) monitoring program for the Louis
Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank, located in Rowan County, North Carolina. The monitoring
program was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Bank
Mitigation Banking Instrument approved and signed by the participating regulatory agencies on
November 19, 2003.
The bank consists of two sites, the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site. Both sites are located in
northwestern Rowan County, North Carolina, within the Yadkin River Basin. The Homestead Site is
located just east of the town of Cleveland. The site is 35 acres in size, and is located on the southern
floodplain of Third Creek.
The Second Creek Site is located just west of the town of Salisbury. The site is 49 acres in size, and is
located on the northern floodplain of Second Creek, approximately six miles west of the confluence of
Second Creek with the South Yadkin River.
The location of each site is shown in Figures 1 and 2
Page 1
I¦
' Source:
Base Map: USGS Topographic Maps, Cool Springs, NC 1969.
0 625 1,250 2,500
Feet
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Homestead Site
Site Location Map
Location: Rowan County, NC
Date: December 2008
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Figure
1001 Wade Ave. Ste. 400 1
Raleigh, NC 27605
II
' Source:
Base Map: USGS Topographic Map, Rowan Mills, INC Quadrangle, 1987.
' 0 625 1,250 2,500
Feet
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Second Creek Site
Site Location Map
Location: Rowan County, NC
Date: December 2008
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
1001 Wade Ave. Ste. 400
Raleigh, NC 27605 Figure

2
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Fear 5 Al
2.0 MONITORING METHODOLOGY
1
The fifth and last year monitoring methodology detailed in this section was employed in accordance with
the Mitigation Banking Instrument Monitoring and Maintenance Plan (The Louis Berger Group, 2003).
Monitoring performed at the Homestead and Second Creek Sites of the Louis Berger Wetland and Stream
Mitigation Bank included an assessment of vegetation establishment, wetland hydrology, physical and
biological stream conditions, and benthic sampling.
Six photo stations were established and monumented at the Homestead Site and six photo stations were
established and monumented the Second Creek Site, capturing a full representation of each site.
Photographs of each site are taken at these stations annually and compared to previous years.
Photographs taken at the photo stations in Year 5 are provided in Appendix A.
Plan views of the monitoring station locations at the Homestead and Second Creek Sites are provided in
Appendix B. The cross section locations, groundwater gauge locations, stream gauge locations, vegetation
monitoring plot locations, and photo station locations are depicted on these plans
2.1 VEGETATION
A stratified random sampling procedure was used to quantify woody stem density estimates and visual
estimates of percent cover of herbaceous species across both sites. Eleven transects consisting of 31
randomly selected circular plots were sampled at the Homestead Site and eight transects consisting of 38
randomly selected circular plots were sampled at the Second Creek Site. The plot center points were set
along transects. The total number of trees and shrubs species were counted and recorded and the percent
cover of herbaceous species was estimated within each circular plot. In consultation with the Mitigation
Bank Review Team (MBRT), the radius of each circular plot was increased from 10 feet to 20 feet
starting with Year 3 monitoring to increase the sample area.
The data collected was analyzed to determine an estimate of the woody stem density within each site.
This estimate was then compared to the performance standard for the first three years of 320 woody stem
species per acre. The fourth year of monitoring requires 288 woody stem species per acre to meet the
performance criteria. This fifth and final year requires a yield of 260 woody stem species per acre as
required by the Mitigation Banking Instrument.
2.2 HYDROLOGY
' 2.2.1 Groundwater
The groundwater hydrology of the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site was monitored during the
growing season in accordance with the Mitigation Banking Instrument through the use of shallow
monitoring wells with automatic data loggers. Groundwater data was collected from five monitoring
wells at the Homestead Site and six monitoring wells at the Second Creek Site. The data collected was
analyzed and evaluated against the performance criteria to detennine whether or not wetland hydrology
was successfully established. Groundwater data are presented in Appendix C. The performance criteria
defined for both sites required that the first 12 inches below ground surface demonstrate continuous
saturation for 5 to 12.5 percent of the growing season, which translates to between 1 I and 29 days under
Page 3
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
I normal weather conditions in Rowan County. The locations of the monitoring wells at the Homestead
Site and the Second Creek Site are depicted on the plan sheets located in Appendix B.
¦ 2.2.2 Surface Water
The surface water hydrology at the Homestead Site and at the Second Creek Site was monitored using
' stream gauges with automatic data loggers. One stream gauge was installed on each stream. The gauges
were established to compare the surface water level in the streams to the design bankfull stage. The
performance criteria prescribed in the Stream Mitigation Guidelines (USACE, 2003) requires that at least
' two bankfull events are documented during the five year monitoring period. If less than two bankfull
events occur during the first five years, the annual monitoring will be required to continue until the
second bankfull event is documented. The two documented bankfull events must occur during separate
' monitoring years.
' 2.3 STREAM MONITORING
Stream monitoring consisted of surveying the dimension, profile, and channel bed material of the stream,
' conducting a benthic survey, and assessing the riparian vegetation adjacent to the streams. The
monitoring conducted in Year 1 served as a baseline for comparison to the succeeding four years of
monitoring. A comparison of Year 1 thru Year 5 data is presented in the results section of this report.
' 2.3.1 Physical Parameters
Stream channel stability was assessed using Rosgen methodologies for measuring fluvial geomorphology.
The dimension and profile of the stream were measured to determine the level of lateral migration and
channel aggradation or degradation. The distribution of channel materials was also determined using the
Wolman (1954) method.
The Monitoring and Maintenance Plan requires that five monumented cross sections are established and
surveyed at the Homestead Site and six monumented cross sections are established and surveyed at the
Second Creek Site to monitor vertical bed stability. The cross section locations at the Homestead Site and
the Second Creek Site are depicted on the plan sheets located in Appendix B.
' Field measurements of channel geometry included surveying cross sections at representative locations to
adequately capture the range of channel form. At the Homestead Site, monumented cross sections were
established at two riffles and three pools. At the Second Creek Site, monumented cross sections were
' established at four riffles and two at pools. Elevations were surveyed at regular intervals along each cross
section to capture channel geometry, including all major slope breaks and bankfull elevations.
A longitudinal profile was surveyed at the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site to capture the bed
' slope and determine the level of aggradation or degradation. The bed elevation along the thalweg was
surveyed as well as the bankfull elevation.
2.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates
Qualitative benthic invertebrate collection was based upon the Bentbic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
Protocols published by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ, 2006). The protocol
recommends the Qual-4 collection method for small streams which have catchments of one square mile or
less (first or second order streams). The collection method requires one kick net sample, one sweep net
sample (using a D-frame net), one leaf-pack sample, and visual collection of samples.
Page 4
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
' The benthic survey was performed on October 6, 8, and 15, 2008. At each sample location, the kick net
was placed at the downstream end of the sample location and the bed was kicked up to release sediments
and organisms from the substrate. The sweep net sample was taken at the edge of the bank under
vegetation, and captured the upper sediment layer beneath the bank. Submerged grass and fallen leaves
were inspected for the leaf pack samples.
Once samples were taken, larger debris was rinsed, inspected and ultimately discarded. The remaining
sample was picked by removing all macroinvertebrates (with a limit of ten per taxa) from the remaining
sample. Collected samples were sent to a NCDWQ certified laboratory for sorting and identification.
Three samples were collected at the Homestead Site. The first sample (HS-01) was taken in a pool
downstream from Cross Section 2. The second sample (HS-02) was taken in a riffle. The third sample
(HS-03) was collected downstream of Cross Section 6 in a riffle. The sample locations are depicted on
' the plan sheets in Appendix B.
Three samples were also collected at the Second Creek Site. The first sample (SC-01) was collected not
far from the stream gauge in an upstream section within a pool. The second sample (SC-02) was taken
from a riffle in the mid-section of the stream. The third sample (SC-03) was collected in a pool
downstream of Cross Section 5. The sample locations are depicted on the plan sheets in Appendix B.
' 2.3.3 Riparian Vegetation
The riparian vegetation monitoring was performed at each cross section. Two circular plots with a 10-
foot radius were used, one on each stream bank. A total of ten circular plots were sampled at the
Homestead Site and twelve circular plots were sampled at the Second Creek Site. The total number of
' woody stem species were counted and recorded and the percent cover of herbaceous species was
estimated within each circular plot. The data collected was analyzed to determine the overall woody stem
density within the riparian zone.

Page 5
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 A4onitoring Report
3.0 MONITORING RESULTS
' 3.1 VEGETATION
Riparian buffer woody stem density averaged 3,177 stems per acre at the Homestead Site and 1,318 stems
' per acre at the Second Creek Site. Both sites surpass the target density of 260 stems per acre as required
for monitoring Year 5. Riparian vegetation plots were collected where cross sectional end points served
as plot center points. Tables 1 and 2 show the results of the riparian buffer area sampling.
' For wetland areas, the circular plot transect analysis resulted in an average woody stem density of 1,708
woody stems per acre within the Homestead Wetland Area and 1,872 woody stems per acre at the Second
Creek Wetland Area, both of which are significantly above the target density of 260 woody stems per acre
established in the performance standards for monitoring Year 5. Tables 3 and 4 show the wetland area
sampling results. A plan view of the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site illustrating the plot
results is provided in Figures 3 and 4.
Tables l and 3 provide a summary of the species observed at the Homestead Site, the frequency at which
they occur and the percent composition for both the riparian buffer area and the wetland area,
respectively. The dominant planted tree species, by percent composition, for the Homestead Site are
Quercus lyrata, Salix nigra, and Cornus amomum in the riparian buffer and Q. lyrata, Fraxinus
pennsylvanica, and S. nigra in the wetland area. The most dominant of volunteer tree species are Acer
rubrum and Liquidambar styraciua in both the riparian and wetland area. Both A. negundo and Populus
deltoides are also present at a high frequency but less than the aforementioned tree species. Species were
determined to be volunteers if they did not appear on the as-built planting plan (The Louis Berger Group,
2004). The dominant shrub in both zones is C. amomum.
Tables 2 and 4 provide a summary of the species observed at the Second Creek Site, the frequency at
which they occur, and the percent composition for both the riparian buffer Area and the wetland area,
' respectively. The dominant planted tree species for the Second Creek Site are Q. lyrata, F.
pennsylvanica, and S. nigra in the both the riparian buffer and in the wetland area. The most dominant of
volunteer tree species are A. rubrum and L. styracua in both the riparian and wetland area. Species
' were determined to be volunteers if they did not appear on the as-built planting plan (The Louis Berger
Group, 2004). The dominant shrub in both areas is C. amomum.
' Several of the species observed during the vegetation monitoring were not part of the as-built planting and
were therefore determined to be volunteer species. Volunteer species include A. negundo, A. rubrum,
Betula nigra, Cephalanthus occidentalis, Diospyros virginiana, L. styraciua„ Platanus occidentalus, P.
' deltoides, Sambucus canadensis, Ulmus alata, and U. americana. F. pennsylvanica and S. nigra were
planted on both sites and also occurs as volunteers. No specific distinction was made between planted
and volunteer individuals of these species during data gathering and all individuals were counted as
planted in Table 5. The estimated densities, based on percent composition, of planted species throughout
' both the riparian buffer areas and the wetland areas at both sites is shown in Table 5. Woody stems that
were in the as-built plantings but did not appear or occurred sparingly within the circular plots were Nyssa
aquatica, Carpinus caroliniana, Clethra alnifolia, Q. falcata, and Viburnum nudum.
' Page 6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
W
F-A
W
W
O
x
W
H
Q
W
?I
?I
Q?
MCI
Na
W
W
x
? O
N
z
O
FH
O
H
O
Q1?1
U
x
U
w
O
W
W
A
d
H
c
o
?.
y v 00 V-) ? ? V N v1 00 -1• N O M M N r- r
L O M 00 T r I-C r- --r 00 rn rn o0 00 E
y N ?o 0 0 ^ N - N O N M M N O O
?
U

? M
II
y
?
p O ? O O N 0 0 0 0 0 ?O O - 0 0 ?n O O ?
L Q

N
bq
CC
?n
O
N
N
V
\p
--
C?
,?
O?
N
N
M i

?
N
kn
v?

N Lr)
000 00
M

X ?
? N N N O? N
O M N d
i
O M
? N
a x ?,

N

00 .? N r- N O
N N

00 00

~ C71,
N

N
N
N
M
N
kr) N

v'? ?O N N ^' M M I? -- M N m 0000

a a a

s k y a n

C. a o ° v o ti " d o
s
s
;z

y

s

o

o

a

a

s

a
ILI

a

u
0D
CL
' F3
ti
' K
.v
Lt
S
S
d
0
J
W
E-y
W
W
U
z
0
W
W
H
H
?i
W
?TI
?TI
?Q
?i
FBI
N?
F?1
W
[? O
? N
O
?I
z
C`
h+l
I?
U
U
w
d
Vj
N
W
?Q
H
c ?

U I'D M O, 00
d O M 00 C \O ? ^ r- M M to cd
O N ?o M o0 . 00 N I- r-
y
a'
L N ?t O N O `? v? oo M oo O N to
/
? V)
U 00

u
II
y O V N 00 00 00 00 O O M M M O O
N O O O N O V-1 v') 00 M o0 O N kr)
? O O O O ^ ^ O O ^ O O O O ^ O O ?
v
GTr Ca
a>

O
N M 00

N N Q N
^ N ?c N ?c
kr)

x

? M M l? l?

? N N ^ I'D M
V ^ 00

N N N l? ?

w CrN
O

a"
?
N
N
M ?
?
M -
CIO
X ? O
N N 00

N ? N N M M ? ?

x

? N N N ? t`

? ?D M N ^ N ?
^ O
"' N

x kr)
6L N ? N ?

a a
a
o
?
ti x o
t
?
? ? ,? O N ? O ? ? O V O m ?-

S
?
'?
' ;z
?
v
v
v Z: Iz
S ;z
?
? ;z s ? v v ?

O
Z
00
v
t
C..
? O
N_
W
I?
A
d
w
F
W
O
x
w
F-'
H
d
Wd
C?
A
z
d
I?
H
W
3
W
x
z
x
H
Y?I
3
O
H
MCI
z
0
U
W
z
O
a
d
F?
U
a
U
W
N?O
F+1
d
M
W
M?
F+M
s
0
u
r
CS
v
0
u i
•v
L +"
d
O. p

N
O?
N
--
N

M
M
O?

7
,?
01
l?
[?
,--

<p
V1
ol
`?
7
O?
O

M
O
't

l?

o0

M

N

O
^'
rp
M
00

2

N
O
N
M
M
00
7

00

?!1
l? )
N
Q
, M

a0

?D r

[-

N
M

M O

M O

N

i^

[?
M

`

O r

N N

t` 1.0

h M

00 N

In

'

N

N M

t`

N (711

r
00

00
N

N
b!) ?n
O
N

C
CIO > O
Q
H
aR+ O E
'7
t`
•--
N
In
M
7
00
ID
M
h
O
N
O
00
-
N
7
vl
?c
N
[-
v1
t
'^
Cl
O
\0
--
d'
M
N
o 1 w N 7 N 01 L N M M ? M E N M N N N t^ M M N N M N o0 In
tullpmtunuangjA N o
0 0
O1/UJlaall/U SI11U]l ] M M N
O ?
UjU/U SntU/? ] N N
7
O p
slISUOI lUUJ snanquln
O p

llaMn xi]U
?
-.
N
N
L-
N
00
In
M
N
N
°
N r
O '^ o
M ?
ua?lu sn:Jaana
O
0 0

11Y71171/JIU/ SIIJa.Jna
N
oo
N
M
N
In
?n
N
_r
M N
'^ c
O
M
so/]aqd snJa,7na ° oo N o M 00
C
ri

srajsn/Ud snJaarla
N

N

^

N

N

a

o

°^° 0

npO;Yod snoxmi)
N
M N N
00
N
M
^
^
O
n
M
njUaA] S11Jaalla M M S 00 'IT M ^ t` 00 p 00 00 N M h .c N In 00 N i^ t ? DD
-7 ?
I ayl)f sn'malla 0 0
0 0
Uq/U savana oM o
0 0
DU11Odas SlUllad o
O 0
saploj]ap sl1]nd0d M N N ^
06

SI/IJjU,7p1JJ0 S7IUIIJUId
N

M 0
N
UtllJlulgalrl S11llId

O p
U.laftdi/11j Uoapuapolal7 00 N °
?1

r M

?
00
0
nII]&na IS ivgtuv1lmbt7 M N N N '"' M N M 7
oo 7 ?^ o0

1IJ/iIUA]ASUII,7d SilUl\Uaj
IC
N
,_..,
7
N
00
N
a,
N
Q
r-
,6
UUUluigald soaddS01(I
M
c
O
O p
UaaftuO]Ojs slluao,) M N o 0

0 0
ul nu 041117 S71 uao j N ° N M In M t? In M M In N ?D In N
N
U11OfJnaal]n Ua,711jd1j o 0
_
0 0
Si]njnaplJJO sln/jnU]Dl/dad M - N i^ - M N M
M
DUDIt 1/Oa17J .W1Uldal),)
N
M
o
_
O p
Ua31U U/111,78 ?D c
N O N
O p
nl/ofnul]og slav yJJn9 o
_
0 0
vju]naaas snu] ? N o, o
M 01 K? `p
O p
inlldglla aaJ N m N M N V M N M °
N U M O? O r- N
N M M
-- N
Opull9d aaJ
0
00
N
^

M
M
A°
o
(V rt

N
M
7
in
?p
[-
00
O? O
„+ .+
,,,? N
,,,r M
,? !f
? ?O n 00 O? O ..• N M !} ?O [? 00 a O .- G
O
„ „? N N N N N N N N N N M M >+
u C n
d
a R
e d
o O
a
c/) _
° o
o, w U
e
a
0
Y

O
C
r
O
s
C
q
?t
r
C
C
,d
3
C
c'
Ln
br,
cx?
zz?
0
00
O
O
N
W
H
x
W
a
AU
Z
O
U
W
?W
W
Q
Q
z
W
W
x
F?
H
x
H
r?
V
a
0
N
z
0
E-?
U
W
z
E"1
O
M?
a
U
r-a
U
w
O
W
MMM
h+E-?
d
L' r. y
? L
u
L a+
6J O
a o
n
h
i 00
00
7:,

-
'n
Q
00
O
N
r
?1
h
M
01
O

M
O
M
O
M
M
01
O

-7

'n

r-
--
00

O

M
?n
O
h
O
7

r-
M
^
In
O
O
O
M
-
M
O
In
Q
^
O1
I
Y
O
7
y

00
^
O
n
M

7

0

?
N
?n
o0
M
4
?
O
N
N
?
O
M
O
N
?n
?n
N
?n
d
' ?O
O u
N in
? - N N N v
'? DD M ,? .-.. r .-. .-. .* .- .? 7 N N •-• n F -
•- • •--• F- -
r1
,--
-
..
N
.-..
^
.-.
ro N
.
d t`
> 00
? Q II

u
H
w
a
M
-
00
z
r-

If)
O
?n
N
N
In
N
N
N
M
oc
00
?o
in
N
O
N W
O
M
in
I
'n
'n
0
0 O
'n
?n N t^1 M M N ?n M M - ?n M ^ N N M M N M 1? CY r'1 `7 1? M N M O
_ N
eC
O
F.
u/Opnu tunudnq!A r-
'r' 'n O ?1
O p
Dr/OJ1Ad111D .S111u((1 O V°
o
?n N N M M M - N N N IO C, in ?
O
VIVID SlItIllf)
r n M N - n N M N ,n
o ._
psudpounJ snJnqurn,
i N N 7 O N
0 0
Da `flu :qID o

00
IO
N
M
M
N
N
N
no
N
?
N
00
O,
z
O 0
D,
o t r'1 p ?
UAgnA S11.Jadl)a cn ?o
p N
0 0
1
1xI11) 111 SIv.I,?II
.
M
M
'7
D1
'n
M
N
N
M
N
rn e
O nj
So) f d it d .SI1JAd nZ) o
7 M N -} N 'n ?n M
'n
r? o ^
sygsnInd snaadna

Q1
AO
N
N
N
,n
M
in o
,n
in
o r\i
npoffvd snJadna o
r7 M \O 00 M N M ^ 00
O r.j
nJUAA? S11JAd11a o
c7 ^ 'n N ?O ^ ?n ^ N 7 M ?O ?D N M M N ^ 'n 'n ^
1
U1jOflallD) Uld./dna
n c
N O
O p
uJvaprf snJadna
o

O p
Oq/n snJaana
r o
^ o O
0 0
uunAad)p?J snAAd
M °
^ o c
0 0
sdptoydp snpldod
c? o
N -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0

S1?Dj1Id?1lJJO Sill/OJv?d - - - - - - - - -
N t? 'n M N N °?

O'IM1411111 uoApl/dpO !7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n
N rn O _.
O p
Dl1(`IJnaAJs ./ngluvjynhl7
N '7 t` N 00 O M 00 M 00
Ic in M '? - '7 ?p
In
r?
In
00 0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - M

nuDIIIIIIIa snaddrunf - - - - - -
rn o

0 0
OJ!unnjdsuudd sIn/Imug
00 M

ly M

N M

N

N
N

I

In

In

N

7

?

It

00 O oc

N
01
°,
M 'n `O
N p rr1
nadfiuolols s1111a03
o 0
- 0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - c o

un1111otul) sntwo - - - - - - - -

N
N
N
--
M
I
N
N
?n
--
M
7
-
?
N
M
M
N
N
M
N
M
-
N
N
rl
7 ^
t`
?.
M
DuDlr/Ilo.u)J sln/1dAnj
c
°\
N Q1 N .
.r
- - - - - - - - - - - - - O O

na9111 D1Alyd9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
'n M M nl N
- ? N C
.y'
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl O

DJ11JndAJS' S'lll/! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
N N l? - N °\
M M N
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - O _

1l/11Ag11A ddJ - - - - - - - - - - - - -

M '
n [
?

?
?'
00
M
cV

?

N

In

l-

C1

N

M

N

00

i

n

7 ?

n

N I

n

M

M

?

? c

pop

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Opt/11?d l/ ./dJ
rq 1 0 - M M M
N I
n
M
In
h
N
M
N
N
N
in ^
r-
?.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - O

N
M
T
In
?o
t`
00
(7\
; -
t` -
00 -
O, -
O -
•• -
N -
M
CI'
V)
r
M
O\ -
O - -
N -
M I -
t -
W) ?
c
r,
x
C
N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M O
? u

o
Li 0
U
a o
O
C

- ------------
-- ?\
? 89
1
,
' 687_
\\ \
f ?.
V ?, A i ?_ 1 A 684 - A
1, -
682
11 ? ?l
-
IT I'D
r'
4,?
\
r
co?
\ t \t!i
\
\
cti
t
-Ln
10

?qh
Y _
.- x
1 t l -
_ s
706
nr
% b
a?
U
0
E
co
O
CID
N
N
0
En
0
0
0
N
0)
Q)
00
O
Q N
Z
W
C7
LL)
-, El
U ?
U
x ?
ag

\\' V)
00- co
?U? Z m
U) w
A \?vv v?? ?A\ /? ?, 1Aji A Z WH H J w w
\ 1 ?. y Z
(n W ?
l'
i w
W
/ o
u
;1 1 - i Y`( ?s 0
stn Z O O o
?lit ?l???; p_ w
IM,
(D 05
1. U) w
Cl (DU
IOD CO) W 5
O 10 z
P, / k I I
} \` `\\ >> \ 1 \ ` 5`''1 5 ° (.,f1 11 111 ?O ? ?.,s,? = W w 3 rn
i i .... r
`\ ? ?1 `? ? ? % ? .mss ? . ? d. ?? Ili ? 1 ? ? J????e? ? / ? ?? ? i ,,i? ? ? ? - .? - ? ??•, ?? ? ? ? F- ° K
J` P
'7" m
FA J
)rod
t
r-
,
p,
?I?av
lid
hh/u
?'\?"'" - ? /// ,?/?? f?/?'?`/??Jf?+ '?? /r jl'i.lu? '1l1( _ 1/ / ? \?iI I j? I??,, I?I?•_11 ~??\ ?
1
/? yr!
CC"
r ll 1( r cc I I f 1 % ?/ ? I
78) ll` (f /f'r,/f! ! h ,?,/; T M
`/'?,l??j?i!jj?j / / c,? ? I ?I III I Cn e.
/ 11 l! 111 `? l l ( I It
/I/,/ ''ji /fr?% / / \i ?1 I I., U
l
/(?, f/ /llJr l ?' % ji Zr cu /' \?? Is I ! I ~ , a e
// 1 I / r' 11 A ?? t
> i s? s
11 /? I l; J ?-? ? I! J I r
//f ? j??? %ff?1/I /? ....??\, ?? ? / i1?'?' ?IJ ,I I i ? ?_.? ? '? ??I ? Ij rt `.__/
(,-. ( i ?1 +..1q1 I y
J r
' ?? %jf '( J f? l ?! It '1 ? ?.9. ??`y?.,.? .?? • ?'I .._\\ f.._, \ ? ? ? i : ''(I /'
Clj
It `i\??
\ \??;?\ V ! ?? V '? tz an
\, D \ l , \ \ \ I f/
I \
i'I?inA
U)
/ / 4k,' ?? \ , V U
?
U)
t \ I ?J (
Cf)
O
l ,D co
??/ ?? `J'am X? _ ??\,, \???` ; ,? ? •? ?? k ? f ; ' ! ,i, /i? ?.._._._ -??_.___ _J ,, I I J ;1 ? \n \?, N
_._? 4 p 1 A L
CY) V \ ?'
(n
1 ,
,
15 m
/ r
, \ \
/ v 1? Av 00
' :/ X O
O
------------
i ?A,`l
y`
r - \
xw.i,ci ui.u.u ?a n^r mwc uM?r??aajaoor?o?as ?o?viaoi?rtoww?!a x?vmAUOa ?,uvw,?io,:a :aaienm

Louis Berger Strewn and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
TABLE 5: A DENSITY COMPARISON OF PLANTED AND VOLUNTEER SPECIES

Stems Counted Homestead Second Creek
in Year 4 (2007) Riparian Area
Total # of Stems Wetland Area
Total # of Stems Riparian Area
Total # of Stems Wetland Area
Total # of Stems
Total 234 1527 114 2052
Planted 199 684 81 1001
Volunteer 35 843 33 1051
Year 5 % Planted 85 45 71 49
Year 4 % Planted 30 25 19 33
Year 3 % Planted 74 54 69 50
Year 2 % Planted 84 58 73 48
During the monitoring of the vegetation, a visual field inspection of both the Homestead Site and the
Second Creek Site was performed to record predominant herbaceous plant species. Table 6 represents the
observed species at each of the two sites and their relative abundance based on visual observations.
TABLE 6: HERBACEOUS COVER
Vegetation Species Homestead Second Creek Comments
Andro 0 on spp. x x Common
Asters . x x Abundant
Bidens frondosa x x Abundant
Carex spp. x x Common
Cam sis radicans x x Infrequent
Cy erus stri osus x x Infrequent
Echinochloa crus- alli x x Abundant
Erechtites hieraciifolia x x Infrequent
Eri eron canadensis x x Infrequent
Eupatorium capillifolium x x Infrequent
Impatiens canadensis x x Infrequent
Juncus effusus x x Abundant
Leersia or zoides x x Abundant
Ludwi is alterni olia x x Common
Les edeza cuneata x x Infrequent
Mikania scandens x x Infrequent
Panicum vir atum x x Common
Pilea umila x x Common
Poly onum s pp. x x Abundant
Rubus s pp. x x Abundant
Rumex cris us x x Infrequent
Scirpus spp. x x Infrequent
Setaria faberi x x Infrequent
Solanum carolinense x x Infrequent
Solidago s pp. x x Abundant
Typha lati olia x x Infrequent
UVul- I- I-- UN :Ol VIVUP. lilt,. LVVO.
Page 13
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
At both the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site, the herbaceous species that exhibited the greatest
abundance included Aster spp., Bidens frondosa, Echinochloa crusgalli, Juncus effuses, Leersia
ooryzoides, Polygonum spp., Rubus spp., and Solidago spp. The seed mixture per the as-built plans for
both the Homestead and Second Creek sites included: Lolium inutliflorum, Agrostis alba, Echinocloa spp.
Panicum virgatum, and Trifolium repens.
Visual monitoring showed that nearly 100 percent cover was achieved within the circular plots that were
monitored, as well as throughout each of the sites.
' 3.2 HYDROLOGY
' 3.2.1 Groundwater
Table 7 summarizes the results of groundwater monitoring conducted at the Homestead Site and at the
Second Creek Site. At both the Homestead and Second Creek Site, the monitoring results show
continuous saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for greater than 12.5 percent of the growing
season for all but two of the monitoring wells, which still met the wetland criteria with continuous
saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for more than 5 percent of the growing season. The data
provided meets the wetland hydrology performance criteria established in the Mitigation Banking
Instrument. Three wells did not exceed saturation for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season. HS-
01 was consecutively wet for 12.4 percent of the growing season and SC-02 dipped below the 12 inch
threshold by .02 feet or otherwise would have shown 13 percent consecutive saturation during the
growing season. Throughout the growing season, HS-05 measured between 5 and 11 consecutive days
(2% to 4%) of saturation followed by a reading or two that showed lack of saturation. It is believed that
the well may not have been measuring correctly. Based on previous performance in much dryer years and
observable trends in the wells it is very likely that an undetected problem with the well accounted for this
shortfall and that otherwise data would have shown readings that exceeded the annual criteria.
1

1
1

Page 14
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
TABLE 7: GROUNDWATER DATA - HOMESTEAD SITE (HS) & SECOND CREEK SITE (SC)

Well Monitoring
5%
5-8%
8-12.5%
> 12.5%
Actual % Number of
Consecutive
Days Dates Meeting
Success (Longest
Consecutive Period)
HS-01 X 12.4 30 Mar. 17 - Apr. 15

HS-02
X
26.6
64 Mar. 17 - May 19
and
Sept. 10 -Nov. 12
HS-03 X 26.6 64 Mar. 17 - May 19
HS-04 X 16.6 40 Mar. 17 -Apr. 25
HS-05 X 4.6 11 Sep. 26 - Oct. 6
SC-O1 X 35.3 85 Mar. 17 - June 9
SC-02 X (4.1) 7.9 19 (Mar. 17 - Mar. 26)
Mar. 29 - Apr. 16
SC-03 X 15.8 38 Mar. 17 - Apr. 23
SC-04 X 16.6 40 Mar. 17 -Apr. 25
SC-05 X 32.0 77 Aug. 28 - Nov. 12
SC-06 X 14.1 34 Sep. 11 - Oct. 14
Notes: calcutations based on 241-day growing period trom March 18 through November 13.
12.5 percent of the growing season is approximately 31 days.
Percentages shown represent the longest consecutive number of days (not cumulative).
Page 15

C

0

1
n
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
The precipitation data from water year 2008 was compared to the last 24 years of data to characterize the
precipitation recorded for this water year as compared to historical hydrologic conditions. Figure 5
presents the data from water year 2008 and the 30`x' and 70t" percentile of all precipitation data within the
period of record. Precipitation Data was obtained from NOAA's (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration) National Climate Data Center (NOAA, 2008). The results of the analysis indicate that
the precipitation recorded in 2008 (calendar and monitoring year) was generally normal. Of the eight
months within the growing season, May and June appeared drier than average.
Charts depicting the groundwater data for each individual well at the Homestead Site and the Second
Creek Site are located in Appendix C. These graphs display the groundwater elevation in feet and
precipitation in inches. The data collected shows that throughout the months of March to November the
sites demonstrated consecutive saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface needed to meet the
performance criteria standards. All of the wells with the exception of 3 achieved this success criteria; two
were one reading from achieving it and the third is suspected to have fallen short because of questionable
well data as opposed to hydrology. The third well has achieved success criteria in all of the previous
years including two which consisted of severe drought conditions.
3.2.2 Surface Water
Figure 6 illustrates the Homestead Site stream gauge data, which shows the water surface elevation in feet
as well as the precipitation in inches from January 1, 2008 through October 31, 2008. The constructed
bankfull elevation for the Homestead Site is 676.45 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum [NGVD]).
The stream surface water surpassed the bankfull stage during three storm events within the 2008
monitored period. These events occurred on April 5, 2008 (0.79 inches of precipitation); August 27, 2008
(5.40 inches of precipitation); and November 15, 2008 (1.80 inches of precipitation).
Figure 7 illustrates the Second Creek Site stream gauge data, which shows the water surface elevation in
feet as well as the precipitation in inches from January 1, 2008 through October 31, 2008. The constructed
bankfull elevation for the Second Creek Site is 653.45 feet (NGVD). The stream surface water surpassed
the bankfull stage during two storm events within the 2008 monitored period, occurring on August 27,
2008 and November 15, 2008.
Bankfull stream flow criteria have already been met. At least one stream flow exceeding bankfull stage
occurred during monitoring Years 1 and 2 at both sites. Bankfull stream flow criteria were also met in
Year 3 and 4 of monitoring as well as Year 5.
Page 16
y
0
a
1 ?
0
i
0
1
1
Q
s
s
' .a
r
1
s
i
a
ti
0
N
a
R R
Li C
•O
c U
d t
L y
U L
? O
o z
o,
M O
L
CC
U
O
z
L
U
L
a
0
0
M
tom.
D
GA
W
00
0
D
00
0
0
z
a
o
d
L
a o,
L
o
0
d
? U
o_
7 ?
h y
i M
Q I
00
O I
w
00
o 'R
R
O
N
0
L
Q
0
0
w
0
R
N
a; oo r ?o vi ? ri tai r, o
(•u?) ao?;e;?d??aad

1
1
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Figure 6 Stream Gauge Data - Homestead Site
Homestead Creek Stream Gauge
677.00
676.50
676.00
q
675.50
z
675.00
c
0
674.50
674.00
673.50
673.00
3.UU
2.50
2.00
c
1.50
a
1.00
0.50
0.00
N N N 00 N O? N W N N ?D N J N A N W
'' to ?O N O? -' In N O ,'? J ,'? to ?D N Q? ? W --00 O? O
w m` n m c` c c O o o d C7 C7
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 00 0 °° o°o o°0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0°0 0
co 0 0
w 00 Oc w 00 00 00
-Channel Bed Elevation (ft. NGVD) -Bankfull Elevation (ft. NGVD)
-Water Surface Elevation (ft. NGVD) -Precipitation (in.)
Figure 7 Stream Gauge Data - Second Creek Site
Second Creek Stream Gauge
b)4.UU
653.75
653.50
A
653.25
z
653.00
0
652.75
w
652.50
652.25
652.00
J. UV
2.50
2.00
c
1.50 R
a
1.00
0.50
0.00
.-. N N .-N W N T N W --- N ? N ? N V N A --N --W
.:., to ?O N T ... to 9 N O vi 'P N W -• Oo U O
m` m` a a w c` c` c` a Y O o Z d U C7
o° o c v m d o v? o? o--d? acv o v o
00 O O
o 0 00 ° o°o o °° ° 00 0o O o p°G o 0 00 w 0 00 0 w 0
-Channel Bed Elevation (ft. NGVD) -Bankfull Elevation (ft. NGVD)
-Water Surface Elevation (ft. NGVD) - Precipitation (in.)
Page 18
Loris Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report

L
1
1

u

1
3.3 STREAM MONITORING
3.3.1 Physical Parameters
3.3.1.1 Channel Geometry
Five monumented cross sections were surveyed at the Homestead Site and six monumented cross sections
were surveyed at the Second Creek Site to monitor vertical bed stability. Illustrations of the cross
sections are presented in Figures 8a through 8e for the Homestead Site and Figures 9a through 9f for the
Second Creek Site. In general, the channel geometry remained stable. Slight variations were detected at
the Homestead site; the pools deepened and widened slightly and the riffles narrowed slightly. Slight
variations detected at the Second Creek included a slight widening of the riffles on average and the
average pool depth increased slightly.
To quantifiably assess if the channel experienced degradation or aggradation, the measured thalweg
elevation at each cross section was compared. As represented in Table 8, the thalweg elevation at the
Homestead Site varied slightly from 2004 to 2008. The largest variation occurred at cross section 1
where the thalweg elevation rose approximately 0.47 feet. Overall, the thalweg elevation at the
Homestead Site remained essentially unchanged, with an average change of approximately 0.17 feet. The
average change in thalweg elevation at the Second Creek Site is slight resulting in an average difference
of 0.27 feet, with the largest variation occurring at cross section 2 with an increase of 0.55 feet (Table 9).
Due to the unconsolidated channel substrate (silt and sand) at the site, slight variations in thalweg
elevations may be attributed to the varied placement of the survey rod on the unconsolidated channel
bottom as the surveys were being conducted.
TABLE 8: COMPARISON OF THALWEG ELEVATION AT THE HOMESTEAD SITE
FROM 2004 THROUGH 2008
Thal we Elevation Difference in Elevation

Cross
Section
2004
ft.
2005
ft.
2006
ft.
2007
ft.
2008
ft. 2004-
2005
ft. 2005-
2006
ft. 2006-
2007
ft. 2007-
2008
ft.
Average
Difference 2004-
2008
ft.
1 674.25 674.69 674.44 674.75 674.72 0.44 -0.25 0.31 -0.03 0.12 0.47
2 674.45 674.57 674.67 674.68 674.66 0.12 0.10 0.01 -0.22 0.00 0.01
3 674.26 674.31 674.37 674.24 674.23 0.05 0.06 -0.13 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03
4 673.39 673.47 673.72 673.74 673.60 0.08 0.25 0.02 -0.14 0.05 0.21
5 672.64 672.59 672.60 672.94 672.85 -0.05 0.01 0.34 -0.09 0.05 0.21
Average difference = 0.13 0.03 0.11 -0.10 0.04 0.17
Page 19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitization Bank - DRAFT
Year 5 Monitoring Report
TABLE 9: COMPARISON OF THALWEG ELEVATION AT THE SECOND CREEK SITE
FROM 2004 THROUGH 2008
Thal we Elevation Difference in Elevation

Cross
Section
2004
ft.
2005
ft.
2006
ft.
2007
ft.
2008
ft. 2004-
2005
ft. 2005-
2006
ft. 2006-
2007
ft. 2007-
2008
ft.
Average
Difference 2004-
2008
ft.
1 650.88 650.76 650.88 650.76 651.04 -0.12 0.12 -0.12 0.28 0.04 0.16
2 649.03 649.14 649.01 649.15 649.58 0.11 -0.13 0.14 0.43 0.14 0.55
3 649.77 649.67 649.75 649.54 649.43 -0.10 0.08 -0.21 -0.11 -0.09 0.34
4 647.55 647.90 647.69 648.16 648.09 0.35 -0.21 0.47 -0.07 0.13 0.54
5 649.07 648.90 649.11 649.10 649.04 -0.17 0.21 -0.01 -0.06 -0.01 -0.03
6 648.67 648.75 648.65 648.71 648.70 0.08 -0.10 0.06 -0.01 0.01 0.03
Average d fference = 0.03 -0.005 0.05 0.08 0.01 0.27
Page 20
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Figure 8a - 8b Channel Geometry - Homestead Site
Homestead
Cross Section 1
678.00
677.00
676.00
c
0
m
0
w 675.00
674.00
673.00
0.0 5.0 10.0
Channel Geometry - 2004
Channel Geometry - 2007
679.00
-- Channel Geometry - 2006
- Bankfull
15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
¦ Channel Geometry - 2005
Channel Geometry - 2008
Homestead
Cross Section 2
678.00
w 677.00
0
m
m
w 676.00
675.00
674.00 1 1
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
tChannel Geometry - 2004 ¦ Channel Geometry - 2005 --Channel Geometry - 2006
- Channel Geometry - 2007 Channel Geometry - 2008 - Bankfull
35.0
Page 21
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
Figure 8c - 8d Channel Geometry - Homestead Site
Homestead
Cross Section 3
678.00
677.00
676.00
x
0
0
CU
m
w 675.00
674.00
673.00 1
0.0 5.0
s Channel Geometry - 2004
- Channel Geometry - 2007
677.00
676.00
"675.00
C
0
a?
W674.00
673.00
672.00 1 1
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
Channel Geometry - 2004 -Channel Geometry - 2005 Channel Geometry - 2006
- Channel Geometry - 2007 -Channel Geometry - 2008 - Bankfull
35.0
Year 5 Monitoring Report
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
-Channel Geometry - 2005 )K Channel Geometry - 2006
-Channel Geometry - 2008 Bankfull
Homestead
Cross Section 4
Page 22
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Figure 8e Channel Geometry - Homestead Site
676.00
675.00
C
674.00
io
m
w
673.00
672.00
0.0 5.0 10.0
- 4 Channel Geometry - 2004
--.1 Channel Geometry - 2007
Homestead
Cross Section 5
15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
-Channel Geometry - 2005 ? Channel Geometry - 2006
s-Channel Geometry - 2008 -Bankfull
Page 23
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Figure 9a - 9b Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site
Second Creek
Cross Section 1
654.00
653.00
652.00
c
0
CU
m
ED 651.00
650.00
649.00 1
0.0 5.0
+- Channel Geometry - 2004
- - Channel Geometry - 2007
653.00
652.00
651.00
0
0
CU
(D
w 650.00
649.00
648.00 1
0.0 5.0 10.0
-s Channel Geometry - 2004
Channel Geometry - 2007
15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
-Channel Geometry - 2005
-+-Channel Geometry - 2008
35.0 40.0 45.0
-Channel Geometry - 2006
- Bankfull
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
--Channel Geometry - 2005 Channel Geometry - 2006
-+ Channel Geometry - 2008 - Bankfull
Second Creek
Cross Section 2
Page 24
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Figure 9c - 9d Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site
653.00
Second Creek
Cross Section 3
652.00
651.00
C
O
(0
_N
w 650.00
649.00
648.00 4-
0.0
3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 15.0 18.0 21.0 24.0 27.0 30.0 33.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
6 Channel Geometry - 2004 -Channel Geometry - 2005 ? Channel Geometry - 2006
- ?-Channel Geometry - 2007 -+-Channel Geometry - 2008 -Bankfull
652.00
651.00
650.00
c
0
m
a?
w 649.00
648.00
647.00 1 r
0.0 5.0 10.0
-?-Channel Geometry - 2004
Channel Geometry - 2007
15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
f Channel Geometry - 2005 AE Channel Geometry - 2006
+ Channel Geometry - 2008 - Bankfull
Second Creek
Cross Section 4
Page 25
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Figure 9e - 9f Channel Geometry - Second Creek Site
652.00
Second Creek
Cross Section 5
651.00
650.00
0
0
m
m
w 649.00
648.00
647.00 ;
0.0 5.0
-+- Channel Geometry - 2004
Channel Geometry - 2007
652.00
10.0 15.0 20.0
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
--Channel Geometry - 2005
-Channel Geometry - 2008
Second Creek
Cross Section 6
25.0 30.0
Channel Geometry - 2006
- Bankfull
651.00
650.00
c
0
m
m
w 649.00
648.00
647.00 '-
0
5
4 Channel Geometry - 2004
--- Channel Geometry - 2007
10 15 20 25 30
Width from River Left to Right (ft.)
-¦-Channel Geometry - 2005 Channel Geometry - 2006
* Channel Geometry - 2008 - Bankfull
Page 26

1

r

Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT )ear 5 Monitoring Report
The bankfull stage, as determined during the stream channel design, was used to compare stream
geometry, such as the calculated cross sectional area at bankfull, width at bankfull, and depth at bankfull.
At the Homestead Site, the average riffle cross sectional area slightly increased from 5.9 square feet (sq-
ft) in 2007 to 7.2 sq-ft in 2008. The average riffle width at bankfull slightly decreased from 10.2 feet in
2007 to 8.9 feet in 2008. The average riffle depth at bankfull increased slightly from 1.3 feet in 2007 to
1.4 feet in 2008. The average pool cross sectional area increased slightly from 15.7 sq-ft in 2007 to 16.3
sq-ft in 2008. The average pool depth at bankfull remained unchanged (1.6 feet in 2007 to 1.6 feet in
2008). From the 2004 to 2008 monitoring period, the cross sectional area of riffles generally decreased
from 8.1 sq-ft to 7.2 sq-ft. Maximum depth at bankfull decreased from 1.7 feet in 2004 to 1.4 feet in
2008. Width at bankfull generally increased from 2004 at 9.1 feet to 2006 at 13.6 feet then decreased to
8.9 feet in 2008. Cross sectional area of pools remained essentially unchanged from 2004 to 2008 (16.5
sq-ft in 2004 to 16.3 sq ft in 2008). Depth at bankfull also changed slightly from 1.7 feet in 2004 to 1.6
feet in 2008. Width at bankfull generally increased from 18.7 feet in 2004 to 22.9 feet in 2008. A
comparison of cross section characteristics for the Homestead Site between monitoring Years 1 through 5
is provided in Table 10.
At the Second Creek Site, the average riffle cross sectional area slightly decreased from 5.9 sq-ft in 2007
to 5.5 sq-ft in 2008. There was no significant change in average riffle depth at bankfull (1.4 feet in 2007;
1.3 feet in 2008). The average riffle width at bankfull slightly increased from 8.3 feet in 2007 to 8.9 feet
in 2008. The average pool cross sectional area at bankfull decreased from 22.2 sq-ft in 2007 to 20.3 sq-ft
in 2008. The average pool depth at bankfull decreased slightly (2.1 feet in 2007; 1.9 feet in 2008). From
the 2004 to 2008 monitoring period, the cross sectional area of riffles generally remained unchanged from
5.5 sq-ft in 2004 to 5.5 sq-ft in 2008. Throughout the five years, the cross sectional area has increased and
decreased slightly, but ended at approximately the same dimension as the initial monitoring year.
Maximum depth at bankfull also remained unchanged from 1.3 feet in 2004 to 1.3 feet in 2008. Width at
bankfull for riffles generally increased from 7.6 feet in 2004 to 8.9 feet in 2008. Cross sectional area,
maximum depth at bankfull, and width at bankfull for pools all decreased from 2004 to 2008. In 2004, the
average cross sectional area was 24.7 sq-ft. as compared to 20.3 sq-ft. in 2008. The average maximum
depth at bankfull in 2004 was 2.5 feet, while 2008 data resulted in 1.9 feet. Average width at bankfull in
2004 was 20.3 feet. This dimension increased to 22.1 feet in 2006, but then decreased to 17.9 feet in
2008. A comparison of cross section characteristics for the Second Creek Site between monitoring Years
1 through 5 is provided in Table 11.
3.3.1.2 Longitudinal Profile
The longitudinal profile was surveyed through the thalweg of the channels and captured all notable slope
breaks at the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site. Also captured at each surveyed point, were the
bankfull elevation and water surface elevation. Figures 10 and 11 illustrate the bed elevations, bankfull
elevations and water surface elevations surveyed along the longitudinal profile at the Homestead Site and
the Second Creek Site. The overall slope of the Homestead Site is approximately evenly distributed at
0.16 percent. The slope of the upper end (stations 0 to 300) of Second Creek Site is approximately 0.85
percent, and the slope of the lower end (stations 300 to 3000) of Second Creek Site is approximately 0.09
percent. All of these values were consistent over the five year monitoring period as illustrated by the
tables provided below. The pool and riffle periodicity observed throughout the project reach is illustrated
as the abrupt breaks in slope on the longitudinal profile.
The calculated slopes for the Homestead site are as follows:
• 2004 = 0.18 percent
• 2005 = 0.18 percent
Page 27
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
Year 5 Monitoring Report
' 2006 = 0.16 percent
• 2007 = 0.16 percent
' • 2008 = 0.16 percent
The 2004 to 2008 average slope for the Homestead Site was 0.168 percent.
The calculated slopes for the Second Creek site are as follows:
' Upstream Reach (Station 0 to 300)
• 2004 = 0.85 percent
• 2005 = 0.86 percent

' • 2006 =
2007 = 0.87 percent
0.83 percent
• 2008 = 0.85 percent
Downstream
• 2004
• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2008
Reach (Station 300 to 3000)
= 0.09 percent
= 0.11 percent
= 0.11 percent
= Not calculated due to drought
= 0.09 percent
' The 2004 to 2008 average slope for the upstream reach of Second Creek was 0.853 percent. The 2004 to
2008 average slope for the downstream reach of Second Creek was 0.098 percent.
Overall slope
• 2004
• 2005
' 2006
• 2007
• 2008
(Station 0 to 3000)
= 0.24 percent
= 0.24 percent
= 0.19 percent
= 0.19 percent
= 0.16 percent
The 2004 to 2008 overall average slope for Second Creek was 0.204 percent.
The majority of variations in thalweg overlays are likely due to the difference in stationing that occurs
year to year when the tape measure is laid along the stream channel during the longitudinal profile survey.
The distance between sections may increase or decrease each year which would cause the stationing not
' to match from year to year. For example the following data was taken from several of the longitudinal
profile stationing for the Second Creek Site surveys:
• In 2006, Cross-Section-5 had a station of 2,309;
• In 2007, Cross-Section-5 had a station of 2,361; and
• In 2008, Cross-Section-5 had a station of 2,389.
This is a difference of 52 linear feet from 2006 to 2007 and another 28 feet between 2007 and 2008. The
longitudinal distance increased by 80 feet over 3 years; however, based on the cross section data (which is
surveyed annually at exactly the same physical location on the stream), the thalweg elevation only varied
' by approximately 0.03 feet between the five years from 2004 and 2008.

u
Page 28

1

1
1

L

u
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
TABLE 10: STREAM CROSS SECTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS - HOMESTEAD SITE

Cross
Section

Calendar
Year

Monitor
Year
Width at
Bankfull
ft. Maximum
Depth at
Bankfull
ft. Cross
Sectional Area
at Bankfull
sq-ft.
2004 1 28.9 2.4 30.1
Cross 2005 2 29.0 2.0 29.1
Section
1 2006 3 30.2 2.2 27.6
Pool 2007 4 27.6 1.9 22.8
2008 5 28.9 1.9 26.0
2004 1 7.5 1.8 8.8
Cross 2005 2 10.2 1.7 9.0
Section
2 2006 3 8.0 1.6 7.7
Riffle 2007 4 8.4 1.6 7.4
2008 5 8.5 1.8 9.4
2004 1 12.9 1.0 6.2
Cross 2005 2 14.8 1.0 6.9
Section
3 2006 3 13.4 0.9 5.0
Pool 2007 4 15.9 1.1 6.4
2008 5 13.9 1.1 5.6
2004 1 10.6 1.6 7.3
Cross 2005 2 12.7 1.2 7.8
Section
4
2006
3
19.1
0.9
6.7
Riffle 2007 4 11.9 0.9 4.4
2008 5 9.2 1.0 5.0
2004 1 14.3 1.7 13.3
Cross 2005 2 15.9 1.8 13.5
Section
5
2006
3
21.3
2.0
17.7
Pool 2007 4 26.0 1.7 17.9
2008 5 26.0 1.8 17.2
Averages (2004-200 8)
Riffles 2004 1 9.1 1.7 8.1
Riffles 2005 2 11.5 1.5 8.4
Riffles 2006 3 13.6 1.3 7.2
Riffles 2007 4 10.2 1.3 5.9
Riffles 2008 5 8.9 1.4 7.2
Pools 2004 1 18.7 1.7 16.5
Pools 2005 2 19.9 1.6 16.5
Pools 2006 3 21.6 1.7 16.8
Pools 2007 4 23.2 1.6 15.7
Pools 2008 5 22.9 1.6 16.3
' Page 29
1
1

I

Louis Berger Stream and Gf'etland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Rep
TABLE 11: STREAM CROSS SECTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS - SECOND CREEK SITE

Cross
Section

Calendar
Year

Monitor
Year
Width at
Bankfull
ft. Maximum
Depth at
Bankfull
ft. Cross
Sectional Area
at Bankfull
sq-ft.
2004 1 7.6 1.4 6.3
Cross 2005 2 7.0 1.5 5.6
Section
2006
3
7.7
1.4
5.8
Riffle 2007 4 8.0 1.5 6.2
2008 5 10.4 1.2 5.9
2004 1 19.0 2.3 24.1
Cross 2005 2 18.1 2.2 20.7
Section
2
2006
3
20.0
2.3
24.4
Pool 2007 4 19.4 2.1 21.9
2008 5 18.1 1.7 19.5
2004 1 6.7 1.1 4.5
Cross 2005 2 7.3 1.2 5.0
Section
3
2006
3
6.7
1.1
3.6
Riffle 2007 4 9.0 1.4 5.8
2008 5 8.8 1.5 5.1
2004 1 21.6 2.7 25.2
Cross 2005 2 15.1 2.2 18.8
Section
4
2006
3
24.1
2.6
22.7
Pool 2007 4 20.5 2.1 22.5
2008 5 17.7 2.2 21.2
2004 1 9.1 1.2 5.2
Cross
i 2005 2 10.9 1.3 5.7
Sect
on
5
2006
3
8.4
1.1
4.7
Riffle 2007 4 9.3 1.1 5.1
2008 5 9.0 1.2 5.3
2004 1 7.0 1.5 5.9
Cross
S
i 2005 2 6.2 1.4 5.5
ect
on
6
2006
3
6.0
1.5
5.9
Riffle 2007 4 6.9 1.4 6.4
2008 5 7.2 1.5 5.8
Averages (2004-200 8)
Riffles 2004 1 7.6 1.3 5.5
Riffles 2005 2 7.9 1.4 5.5
Riffles 2006 3 7.2 1.3 5.0
Riffles 2007 4 8.3 1.4 5.9
Riffles 2008 5 8.9 1.3 5.5
Pools 2004 1 20.3 2.5 24.7
Pools 2005 2 16.6 2.2 19.8
Pools 2006 3 22.1 2.5 23.6
Pools 2007 4 20.0 2.1 22.2
Pools 2008 L7 5 17.9 1.9 20.3
Page 30
O N
0

O

O
O

?

(0

H
(D
O
O
7

L

0

O
O 3

o
co
00
O
v
L
N N J

O
O
I-
(1)
y-
O
L.
a
m
d =
0 ?
co
O
O
N
O
O
N
O O O
O O O
N N N
:Q
0
L
bll
.r
O
O
Cl
r
a?
O U
O C
(D
3
U)

v (0
O C m 0) 3:
° 00
10 ? ? o
6 _
N (0 O
U) L? ? N
r L
h L
Lo O N
N
O O C-
O N N J

v p
I
O
O
M
O
O
N
m m =
Q) N
Y

(0 (0 c
0 m
0
r I- O
O
O O O O O O O O
(Yi C6 f-? (6 L6
m m m ( o ~ ((o O O Cfl
(GAON '}}) uoilenaI:l
M
0
O
0
d
4-
O
L.
a
ca
ca
0 O
= J
co
O
O
N
d'
O
O
N

N U
ca

7

N

U (A
_
c L

7 (U
^
r
VJ
0 0)
O (1) O
N N 0
O
N M

L
r
?
L
(U
O O C
O O
N N J

O
O
O
N
O
O
00

o
0)
0) ca
co

m (D
3 (D oo
N
cu
(D
O
N
O H H L
o
I ,n
o oo
o (o
W
co o .
0 N J
O
O
v
0
O
N

a) (D
Y
m m c
s L co
m
,It 00
O O O
O O O
N N N
Cl

O
I
1
O T
O O O O O O O 0-
0 O O O O O O O
CO (O ? ti r- I-
(O ti
(O (fl (O Cfl (O
(GAJN ':4) uol;en313
N
M
bhp
y
W

CQ
bn
4-
O
L-
a.
Y Co
d
L
U
O O
v J
d OD
co O
O
N
O
O
N
N-
i m
I 3c x?; X
XA
X
x x
xx
X,
I
X X
X XI
?,
xx
X
x x.
x x
x
3E `a
Cl)
X,
3E X
I
x
X
x
I ? ? I
# X
0
O
O
0
O rn
O 0)
3
m
H
r
O
O O
O N
O
O
0
rl-
a°'i ?
C)
O H m
m CO 00
Cl O
O O
1N N
O
O O
;
LO
U
U)
C) m
O
It
N
f-
LO 00
0 0
0 0
N N
O
O
M X
O
O
N
O O
(6 m
o v 00
O O O
C) O
N N
O
O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O
r O L6 4 M N r O rn 0
LO LO LO Lr) LO LO LO LO It I-
O O O O O co O O O O O
(anJN 4) uOIJena13
M
M
y
w

0

0
K

1
h

1
O
O
O
' N
0
0
0
1
O
=
CSC

L"
O

L
CG
r'r

' U O
?
o L
d
0
Y
I ?
d
(D

c°a L
U r

V J
?
Q M
L co
O
' U N

O p
v
Q
?n O

N
'

C?

O

m O
y
r
0
ti a
? CC

b4
C
O
O
0
O
N
a)
O M Y
O
O
r as
CF) co
a) CC)
O
C)
0 m co ca
00- o o m
O O .?
N N J
O
O
ti
r
O
Cl
? U
7
o a)
O c m
? o
U) 3 o
L? L? N
r H L
O Cn M M
0 0 0
o O
r N N J
0
O
M
r
O
O
N
O
O
m c0 C
_r_ ca
1- 00
O O Cl O
O O O O
N N N
a O O O O O O O O O O O-
O O O O O O O O O O O 1 1
o? .4 M N O 6 0 ? m 6
LO LO LO LO U') LO
O (fl O O O CO CO O O O O (.0
?o WNDN '}}) U01}enal3

b L

v
1 w
Z,
i
O
v
'
O
0

h

w
O
O

M
O
O
O
O
' N
CJ
O
cC

O

S.
RS
G

' U O
o a
0

?
N L
U +
+
_
c c
,x V J
? d M

U c
.O N
?
O
v ?
o
N
'
CC

O
y
Z ?

cw.
O
`
O

? C

O
O
O
O
M
(7) ` - Y
N ? CCU
p? m
N 00
3 O
(U (U 20
O H O > L O O O (9
N O O C
O O
N N J
O
Cl
ti
N
O
O
O U
N It
7
U)
O N
lf O
N (/) ?: ?: O
L L?L N
r L
O Lo 00 (6
0 co a)
,IV O O C:
cl N N J
O
O
M
N
O
O
N
N
O
0 CD 0)
N _ :
(0 (0 C
C M
? H m
O O
O O
O O O O
O INI N N
a O O O O O O O O O O O N 1
' O O O O O O O O O O O T
i
O LO LO IN In O ? O CO In
O O O O O ? ?
s G
?o (GAON 14) u01lenal3

w
h
M
4.

1

I

Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT ) ear 5 Monitoring Report
3.3.1.3 Channel Bed Materials
The channel bed materials at the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site primarily consist of silt, clay,
and sand. The median grain size (Dso) for all cross sections at both sites is approximately 0.1 mm. The
results of the channel bed material survey are presented in Tables 12 and 13. The Homestead Site
channel materials remained relatively constant from 2007 to 2008 (68 percent in 2007 to 63 percent in
2008). The channel bed material at the Second Creek Site also remained virtually unchanged between
2007 and 2008 (81 percent silt/clay in 2007 to 83 percent in 2008). From the 2004 to 2008 monitoring
period, the percent silt/clay of channel materials at Homestead Creek increased from 2004 from 62
percent to 89 percent in 2006 then decreased to 63 percent in 2008. At Second Creek, the percent silt/clay
of channel material generally increased from 72 percent in 2004 to 83 percent in 2008.
TABLE 12: HOMESTEAD CHANNEL BED MATERIAL SURVEY RESULTS
Cross DSO Calendar Monitoring Percent b Substrate T e
Section (mm) Year Year Silt/clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
2004 1 50 50 0 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 69 31 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 92 8 0 0 0 0
2007 4 73 27 0 0 0 0
2008 5 81 19 0 0 0 0
2004 1 59 40 1 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 54 46 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 100 0 0 0 0 0
2 2007 4 71 29 0 0 0 0
2008 5 69 31 0 0 0 0
2004 1 60 40 0 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 35 65 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 63 37 0 0 0 0
3 2007 4 48 52 0 0 0 0
2008 5 46 59 0 0 0 0
2004 l 59 39 2 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 39 61 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 90 10 0 0 0 0
4 2007 4 66 33 1 0 0 0
2008 5 44 56 0 0 0 0
2004 1 83 16 0 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 59 41 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 100 0 0 0 0 0
5 2007 4 84 16 0 0 0 0
2008 5 76 24 0 0 0 0
Averages (20 04-2008)
Year 1 (2004) 62.2 37.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 2 (2005) 51.2 48.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 3 (2006) 89.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 4 (2007) 68.4 31.4 02 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 5 (2008) 63.2 37.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Page 36
1
1

n

1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT }'ear 5 Monitoring Report
TABLE 13: SECOND CREEK CHANNEL BED MATERIAL SURVEY RESULTS
Cross DSO Calendar Monitoring Percent b Substrate Type
Section (mm) Year Year Silt/clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
2004 1 32 56 12 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 47 53 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 70 30 0 0 0 0
2007 4 41 56 3 0 0 0
2008 5 40 59 1 0 0 0
2004 1 83 17 0 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 97 3 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 81 19 0 0 0 0
2 2007 4 82 18 0 0 0 0
2008 5 81 19 0 0 0 0
2004 1 100 0 0 0 0 0
Cross 2005 2 90 10 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 80 20 0 0 0 0
3 2007 4 82 18 0 0 0 0
2008 5 93 7 0 0 0 0
2004 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cross 2005 2 74 26 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 93 7 0 0 0 0
4 2007 4 91 9 0 0 0 0
2008 5 88 22 0 0 0 0
2004 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cross 2005 2 100 0 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 100 0 0 0 0 0
5 2007 4 100 0 0 0 0 0
2008 5 100 0 0 0 0 0
2004 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cross 2005 2 89 11 0 0 0 0
Section 0.01 2006 3 100 0 0 0 0 0
6 2007 4 91 9 0 0 0 0
2008 5 97 3 0 0 0 0
Averages (2004-2008)
Year 1 (2004) 71.7 24.3 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 2 (2005) 82.8 17.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 3 (2006) 87.3 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 4 (2007) 81.2 183 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Year 5 (2008) 83.2 18.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
3.3.2 Benthic Invertebrates Sampling Results
Samples were collected to assess the benthic invertebrate diversity, tolerance levels, and biotic index at
the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site. Water flow during the sampling efforts in October was
low for both the Homestead and Second Creek Sites. Flow at the Homestead Site was consistent
throughout the restoration reach. At Second Creek, there was greater flow in the upper portion of the
restoration reach. Our results, when compared to last years, reveal an overall increase in abundance and
Page 37
Louis Berger Stream and Wedand Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring
diversity at both sites as last year experienced severe drought conditions. No Ephemeroptera (mayflies),
Plecoptera (stoneflies), or Trichoptera (caddisflies) were identified at any of the six sample sites in 2008.
Sample results at Homestead indicate the macrobenthic invertebrates in greatest abundance were isopods
(Isopoda) and chironomidae (Diptera). Sample results at both Second Creek indicate the macrobenthic
invertebrates in greatest abundance were isopods, amphipods (Amphipoda), and Oligochaetes
(Oligochaeta). The following table reports sampling results from October 6, 8, and 15, 2008.
' TABLE 14: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY RESULTS

1

11

1
C
L

V F
F
G Homestead Creek Second Creek
SPECIES T.
. .
.
. Upper Middle Lower Upper Middle Lower
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Veneroida
S haeriidae *8 FC
Pisidium s p. 6.5 FC 14
Sphaerium sp. 7.6 FC 4 24
Gastropoda
Basommato hora
L mnaeidae SC
Pseudosuccinea columella 7.7 SC 5 2
Ph sidae
Physella s p. 8.8 CG 1 2
Planorbidae *6 SC
Planorbella s p. 6.8 1
ANNELIDA
Oligochaeta *10 CG
Tubificida
Tubificidae w.h.c. 7.1 CG 1
Tubificidae w.o.h.c. 7.1 CG 1 51 2
Hirudinea P
Arh nchobdellida
Er obdellidae P 1
ARTHROPODA
Arachnoidea
Acariformes 5.5
Arrenuridae 5.5
Arrenurus sp. 5.5 1
Crustacea
Ostracoda 12 5
C clopoida 5
Cladocera
Da hnidae
Ceriodaphnia sp. 7
Iso oda
Asellidae SH
Caecidotea sp. 9.1 CG 22 10 1 6 169 195
Amphipoda CG
Cran on ctidae
Crangonyx sp. 7.9 CG 1 31 3 48 3
Page 38
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Table 14 Continued
SPECIES T
V F
F
G Homestead Creek Second Creek

Decapoda
Cambaridae
Procambarus sp. .
.
7.5
7 .
.
.
SH Upper Middle Lower Upper

2 Middle Lower
Insecta
Collembola 6
Odonata
Aeshnidae P
Epiaeschna heros 1 2
Coena rionidae P 2 2
Ar is sp. 8.2 P 1
Libellulidae P
Erythemis sp. 3 1
Pachydi lax lon ipennis 9.9 4
Coleoptera
D tiscidae P 1
Copelatus sp. 10 2
Hydaticus sp. P 1
Neoporus sp. 8.6 1
H dro hilidae P 1
Sta h linidae P 1
Diptera
Cerato 0 onidae P 3 1
Atrichopogon sp. 6.5 P 1
Chironomidae
Chironomus s p. 9.6 CG 2 2 1
Clinotanypus sp. P 8
Goeldichironomus sp. 2 80
Polypedilum illinoense 9 SH 3 1 2
Procladius s p. 9.1 P 1
Tanypus sp. 9.2 P 1
Tribelos jucundum 6.3 5
Dixidae CG 1
Culicidae FC 2
Tabanidae PI
Chr sops s p. 6.7 PI 2
Ti ulidae SH
Ormosia sp. 6.3 CG 1
SPECIES Homestead Creek Second Creek

TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS Upper
67 Middle
69 Lower
76 Upper
50 Middle
221 Lower
295
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA 17 6 10 15 5 11
EPT INDEX 0 0 0 0 0 0
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.65 8.21 7.38 7.30 8.59 8.76
Page 39
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and I'etland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Table 14 Notes:
Identification analysis provided by Pennington & Associates, Inc.
1: T.V. - Tolerance Value: Tolerance values for individual species have a range of 0-10, with higher numbers indicating more
tolerant species or more polluted conditions.
2: F.F.G. - Functional Feeding Group
CG - Collector/Gatherer FC - Filtering/Collectors
SC - Scrapers SH - Shredders
P - Predators PI - Piercer
TABLE 15: HOMESTEAD AND SECOND CREEK BENTHIC SURVEY SUMMARY
FROM 2004 TO 2008
Monitoring Year 1 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2004
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA Upper
32 Middle
34 Lower
24 Upper
42 Middle
30 Lower
23
TOTAL NUMBER OF EPT TAXA 4 6 1 10 6 3
EPT NUMBER 24 17 1 50 28 16
NC BIOTIC INDEX 7.57 7.55 7.55 6.66 7.85 7.68
Monitoring Year 2 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2005
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS Upper

44 Middle

34 Lower

39 Upper

257 Middle

161 Lower

327
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 20 17 18 17 19 20
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 2 1 2
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.14 7.86 7.41 8.49 6.49 7.32
Monitoring Year 3 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2006
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS Upper

14 Middle

15 Lower

33 Upper

11 Middle

3 Lower

DRY
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 5 4 2 2 2 DRY
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 1 0 DRY
Monitoring Year 4 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2007
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS Upper

N/A* Middle

N/A* Lower

DRY Upper

N/A* Middle

DRY Lower

DRY
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA N/A* N/A* DRY N/A* DRY DRY
EPT TAXA WA* N/A* DRY N/A* DRY DRY
Monitoring Year 5 Homestead Creek Second Creek
2008
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ORGANISMS Upper

67 Middle

69 Lower

76 Upper

50 Middle

221 Lower

295
TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA 17 6 10 15 5 11
EPT TAXA 0 0 0 0 0 0
NC BIOTIC INDEX 8.65 8.21 7.38 7.30 8.59 8.76
11 ,??.„?a.??,? N???c???cu „iciuucs wuai was proviaea oy the iaentmcation laboratory for each monitoring year.
N/A*: Species and number of taxa found in Year 4 were similar to those found in Year 3. Because of severe drought
conditions. several sampling sites did not contain sufficient flow for adequate sampling: therefore, samples were not
sent to the lab for analysis.
Page 40
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 ?
Loads Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
3.3.3 Stream Monitoring Results Summary
The stream monitoring results are compared to the performance criteria defined in the Mitigation Banking
Instrument to evaluate success. The stream monitoring component and results are presented in Table 15
as well as the actions required to achieve the performance criteria.
TABLE 16: SUMMARY OF MITIGATION COMPONENTS, YEAR 5 MONITORING
RESULTS, AND THE REQUIRED ACTIONS FOR STREAM MITIGATION
Monitoring Component Monitoring Results Actions Required
(1) Photo Reference Sites
Longitudinal photos and lateral Substantial* channel aggradation,
photos established. Photographs degradation, or bank erosion was not No further action required.
at the cross sections are included observed.
in Appendix A
(2) Plant Survival
Survival plots were established at
monumented cross sections. Tree Homestead: 2,469 (Trees/Acre) >
counts were taken and analyzed than required 288 (Trees/Acre).
against the pre-determined target- No further action required.
species tree per acre survival Second Creek: 1,202 (Trees/Acre) >
numbers. The locations of the than required 288 (Trees/Acre).
cross sections are located in
Appendix B.
(3) Channel Stability
Cross-sections were established
and surveyed, and stream Minimal evidence of bank erosion

longitudinal profiles were was observed. The channel is not

surveyed. The locations of the experiencing significant channel No further action required.

cross sections are depicted on the aggradation or degradation.
plan sheets, which are located in
Appendix B.
Both streams have annually met
geomorphic success criteria, the
streams have had less success with
meeting the biological criteria. No
(4) Biological Indicators Only 1 out of 5 sample sites produced further action required unless
Monitored and recorded Ephemeroptera. No Plecoptera or regulatory staff plan to withhold
invertebrate populations using Trichoptera species were found at any credit due to lack of biological
Qual 4 standards. sample sites. Amphipods and isopods indicators. If this is the case the
common. necessary action would be to
conduct additional monitoring after
sufficient recovery period from
drought conditions and further
maturation of vegetation.
Substantial or sublectlve determinations of success will be made by the mitigation sponsor and confirmed by U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and review agencies.

Page 41

11

1
Louis Berger Strewn and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
4.0 MAINTENANCE & MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
The following maintenance and management actions will be implemented at the Louis Berger Wetland
and Stream Bank.
• Berger has contracted with a wildlife and pest control company to provide annual inspection and
removal of beavers from the site.
At this time the 5 year monitoring period has concluded and the beaver removal contract has been
terminated.
Page 42
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The results of the 2008 monitoring performed at the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site represent
the fifth and final annual monitoring event for this project. Per the performance criteria defined in the
Mitigation Banking Instrument, there will be no more additional monitoring events to be conducted
following the procedure established in 2004.
' The density of riparian woody stems for the Homestead Site is 3,177 woody stems per acre and Second
Creek 1,318 woody stems per acre, which is significantly above the target density of 260 woody stems
per acre established in the performance standards. The density of wetland woody stems for the
Homestead Site is 1,708 and 1,872 for Second Creek. This is also significantly above the target density of
260 woody stems per acre established in the performance standards. The dominant planted tree species for
both sites are Q. lyrata, S. nigra, and E pennsylvanica. The dominant planted shrub in both areas is C.
amomum. Dominant volunteer species for both sites include A. rubrum and L. styraciua. Tables 1
through 5 in Section 3.1 provide a summary of the circular plot transect monitoring results for the
Homestead and Second Creek Sites.
The visual field inspection performed during the monitoring of the vegetation at both the Homestead Site
and Second Creek Site included recording the percent cover provided by herbaceous plant species. The
monitoring results showed that nearly 100 percent cover throughout the sites was achieved. A list of the
species observed is provided in Table 6 in Section 3.1. The herbaceous species that exhibited the greatest
abundance across both the mitigation sites included Aster spp., Bidens fi°ondosa, Echinochloa crusgalli,
Juncus effuses, Leersia ooryzoides, Polygonuin spp., Rubus spp., and Solidago spp.
Groundwater wells at the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site demonstrated that groundwater
levels within the wetland areas met the performance criteria indicated in the Mitigation Banking
Instrument. The results of the hydrology monitoring are summarized in Table 7 in section 3.2.1. On each
site the one well that did not meet the hydrology standard was within one reading of having exceeded the
criteria. On additional well location had exceeded the criteria each of the first 4 years, and was saturated
the majority of the growing season, but failed to maintain its hydrology consistently enough to achieve
the success criteria. Upon deeper inspection the well readings seem to show a subtle pattern of errors and
it is assumed that if the inconsistency with the well had been identified earlier the data captured would
have confirmed continual saturation during the required time period.
The stream survey performed at both the Homestead Site and the Second Creek Site demonstrated that the
restored streams are fairly stable. Figures 10 and I 1 provide a representative longitudinal profile of the
streams at both sites. The overall slope of the Homestead Site is approximately 0.16 percent, the slope of
the upper end (stations 0 to 300) of Second Creek Site is approximately 0.85 percent, and the slope of the
upper end (stations 300 to 3000) of Second Creek Site is approximately 0.09 percent. All of these values
were consistent over the five year monitoring period. The pool and riffle periodicity observed throughout
the project reach is illustrated on the longitudinal profile. Overall the stream banks are well vegetated and
appear stable.
The cross section locations for both sites are provided on the plan sheets located in Appendix B. At both
the Homestead Site and Second Creek Site, the channel thalweg did not significantly change from
elevations surveyed in 2008 as well as throughout the 5 year monitoring period. In 2008 at the Homestead
Site, the average cross section difference was 0.10 feet. For the 5 year monitoring period, the average
cross section difference was 0.17 feet. In 2008 at the Second Creek Site, the average cross section
difference was 0.08 feet, while the 5 year monitoring period average cross section difference was 0.27
feet. In 2008, both the Homestead and Second Creek cross sections thalwegs generally decreased in
height. However, over the 5 year monitoring period, cross section thalwegs generally increased in height.
Page 43

1
1
1
1
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT
Year 5 A4onnoring Report
The results of the Year 5 monitoring of the Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
demonstrate that wetland hydrology and vegetation performance criteria have been achieved for the
wetland areas, stable stream reaches with perennial flow have been established within the Homestead and
Second Creek Sites based on physical parameters and gauge data, and riparian buffers have been
maintained at appropriate densities. Berger will have a final meeting with the MBRT and, having
completed its five years of monitoring (with all specific banking instrument conditions met) has
concluded the monitoring and management obligations under the Banking Instrument.
Page 44
Louis Berger Stream and [Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
' 6.0 REFERENCES
Mitsch, William J. 1993. Wetlands. Riparian Wetlands. 14: 452-458.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
Protocols for Compensatory Stream Restoration Projects. 401/Wetlands Unit.
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mitigation Banking Instrument. July 2003. Submitted to: U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office.
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Progress Report: Completion of Construction and Planting. February 2004.
Submitted to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office.
Nation Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Climate Data Center. 2008. Available URL:
' http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/coop/coop.html. Accessed: December 8, 2008.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. Prepared with cooperation
from the US Environmental Protection Agency, NC Wildlife Resources Commission, and the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality.
Wolman, M.G. 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Transactions of American
' Geophysical Union. 35: 951-956.
u

n
' Page 45

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 1: Homestead Cross Section 1, looking upstream (October 8, 2008)
Photo 2: Homestead Cross Section 1, looking downstream (October 8, 2008)
Page A-1
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Repor
Appendix A
Photo 3: Homestead Cross Section 1, view of left bank (October 8, 2008)
Photo 4: Homestead Cross Section 1, view of right bank (October 8, 2008)
Page A-2
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 5: Homestead Cross Section 2, looking upstream (October 8, 2008)
Photo 6: Homestead Cross Section 2, looking downstream (October 8, 2008)
Page A-3
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 7: Homestead Cross Section 2, view of left bank (October 8, 2008)
Photo 8: Homestead Cross Section 2, view of right bank (October 8, 2008)
Page A-4
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 9: Homestead Cross Section 3, looking upstream (October 23, 2008)
Photo 10: Homestead Cross Section 3, looking downstream (October 23, 2008)
Page A-5
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 11: Homestead Cross Section 3, view of left bank (October 23, 2008)
Photo 12: Homestead Cross Section 3, view of right bank (October 23, 2008)
Page A-6
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 13: Homestead Cross Section 4, looking upstream (October 23, 2008)
Photo 14: Homestead Cross Section 4, looking downstream (October 23, 2008)
Page A-7
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 15: Homestead Cross Section 4, view of left bank (October 23, 2008)
Photo 16: Homestead Cross Section 4, view of right bank (October 23, 2008)
Page A-8
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 17: Homestead Cross Section 5, looking upstream (October 23, 2008)
Photo 18: Homestead Cross Section 5, looking downstream (October 23, 2008)
Page A-9
' Louis Berger Strewn and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 19: Homestead Cross Section 5, view of left bank (October 23, 2008)
Photo 20: Homestead Cross Section 5, view of right bank (October 23, 2008)
Page A-10
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 21: Homestead Photo Station 1 (October 13, 2008)

Photo 22: Homestead Photo Station 2 (October 13, 2008)
Page A-11
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A

Photo 23: Homestead Photo Station 3 (October 13, 2008)
Photo 24: Homestead Photo Station 4
Page A-12
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A

Photo 25: Homestead Photo Station 5
Photo 26: Homestead Photo Station 6
Page A-13
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 27: Second Creek Cross Section 1, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
Photo 28: Second Creek Cross Section 1, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
Page A-14
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 29: Second Creek Cross Section 1, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
1 Photo 30: Second Creek Cross Section 1, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-15
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 31: Second Creek Cross Section 2, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
Photo 32: Second Creek Cross Section 2, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
Page A-16
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year J Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 33: Second Creek Cross Section 2, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
Photo 34: Second Creek Cross Section 2, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-17
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 35: Second Creek Cross Section 3, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
Photo 36: Second Creek Cross Section 3, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
Page A-18
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 37: Second Creek Cross Section 3, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
Photo 38: Second Creek Cross Section 3, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-19
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 39: Second Creek Cross Section 4, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
Photo 40: Second Creek Cross Section 4, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
Page A-20
t Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year S Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 41: Second Creek Cross Section 4, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
Photo 42: Second Creek Cross Section 4, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-21
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 43: Second Creek Cross Section 5, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
Photo 44: Second Creek Cross Section 5, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
U
Page A-22
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 45: Second Creek Cross Section 5, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
Photo 46: Second Creek Cross Section 5, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-23
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 47: Second Creek Cross Section 6, looking upstream (October 6, 2008)
1 Photo 48: Second Creek Cross Section 6, looking downstream (October 6, 2008)
Page A-24
' Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 49: Second Creek Cross Section 6, view of left bank (October 6, 2008)
1 Photo 50: Second Creek Cross Section 6, view of right bank (October 6, 2008)
Page A-25
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 51: Second Creek Photo Station 1 (October 6, 2008)

Photo 52: Second Creek Photo Station 2 (October 6, 2008)
Page A-26
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 53: Second Creek Photo Station 3 (October 6, 2008)

Photo 54: Second Creek Photo Station 4 (October 6, 2008)
Page A-27
Louis Berger Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank - DRAFT Year 5 Monitoring Report
Appendix A
Photo 55: Second Creek Photo Station 5 (October 6, 2008)
Photo 56: Second Creek Photo Station 6a (October 6, 2008)
Page A-28
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX B
PLAN SHEETS
°s
w
a
? a
U
? rv F
W
U ?

P,
6 a
? f
C7
s

0
d
C
O
y
+
O
N

N

C ?
O
n
C) '
o
a C o
O
CO

p O
J
N

C N
O O
J
O _
G
d E

U
O

L p
C)
?
C O
6 U O vl

CO L J
O O
p O N O

.
U)
p
O

O
p
C
N
p
p

C
L
u -C N
m ?,
0 N
> L
- N
m
O
o
CD O E
r
Ln 3: -C
X E Q ?-QI
Z I I I If] In L3
W
LLJ w U) UI S cn _ ,--,

??ED
X
?

0 0
U)
Y Z

Q Q
J z
a 2
g z
QO
w U)
Z
Q
a P: U)
Q
J F- Y 00 Q C
U) LLI
X
ui D L LI U
3 z co CE ?o z
Q U Z
Z

W 0
?
0
0
ad ?
o

CD z
Qz Z
0 0-0
QH (Y
ollf o
pC ?O U z
m WQ ? U WU'°
m>?
Q N
N O ?- z

U) 0
J 3

O
W wom
=
w
J °

0
0
0
w
W
m
W
U
o?
w
Q
0
0
N
1
S
W
.-7
? o
U _
F
W
U ?
x In z
a
? s
f?
c
O
c
0 -
0
C O
O U O
J
O
O J ?
?
a
o a E
O ?
U pi U O C
U O
(n
Q) 0
Ul J O
O
E U
? U
to
_ O U ? ? C L
p O C O C p O
L N O c

N
U
12 d m U > m
O
4
O ?o CD
o
r
N
Z -
V 3 S
X E a D
W I

U U U D N Cr
U )
J X X+ o O
?, .??? ?„???w ison?.?du ?!vu?+agip?????autluuw N?aa.???NO.ns;??ronuyuu,?„.?u!rr?e ioo.wa??=?I_>,w a?u <?nv?

APPENDIX C
GROUNDWATER WELL DATA
(•ui) uoiju;!diaaid
0 0 o O o 0 0
o ?n o v, o v, o
M N N -? O O
0
A
L
° o
i ?
?x
L3
U
CC
v
E
0
x
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A

2-Dec-08 C7
z
18-Nov-08 w
4-Nov-08
w

21-Oct-08 s,

7-Oct-08

23-Sep-08 c
9-Sep-08 0

26-Aug-08 c.
12-Aug-08 W
I p"
I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
1-Jul-08
c?
17-Jun-08 z
3-Jun-08

20-May-08 U
C7 0
6-May-08
4;
22-Apr-08 L o
8-Apr-08
3 3
25-Mar-08
^? F+I
11-Mar-08
C7 .?
26-Feb-08 c a
0 0

12-Feb-08
0 w
0

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I

1-Jan-08
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o ?n o ?n o v, o ?n o v, o
d M M N N O O Q 01 00 00
00 00 00 co 00 00 00 r- r- r- r-
? ? ?10 \C ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?-o
0

w

c :..
U aq
------

--------

---- -----

0

cd

0
_ M___
__ ____
___________________
0
CZ3
o (1)
?o
'c c

-C Cj)
WDANI 'j3) uoi;L'n413
A
L
CC
3
? o
o
?x
L3
U

E
0
x
(•ui) uol;u;Idpaad
0 0 0 0 0
o v? o v, o
M N N r-. ^0 0
v? O
O O
olu
.3
0
tW
0 0

c
- ------ -------------------------------------
0
ct
N

4-i
T 00
b 00000

-----
0
on N -- ---- ------------------------------------

.a ?
N ? O ? 00
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08
2-Dec-08 Z

18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08

21-Oct-08 s.
7-Oct-08 C

23-Sep-08
9-Sep-08 w
E.
26-Aug-08 L
w w
12-Aug-08
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08

1-Jul-08 _

17-Jun-08 z
w
3-Jun-08

20-May-08 U

6-May-08
w c
22-Apr-08 c
8-Apr-08 3

25-Mar-08
o ?
11-Mar-08 ° N
L7 .?
26-Feb-08 c c

12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I
1J 0
- an- 8
0 0
0 0
(W)AN *AJ) uOIIUAal:l
(•ui) uopnj!dpaad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ? o v? o ?n o
M N N --^? O O
A
L
CC

b
? o
o ,
?x
L
U
zs
0
x
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 ;

2-Dec-08
z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 w

21-Oct-08 L
v?
7-Oct-08 o

23-Sep-08 O
.o

9-Sep-08 c "
? c.
26-Aug-08 a
W a
12-Aug-08 I I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
A
1-Jul-08

17-Jun-08
z
w
3-Jun-08
A i
20-May-08
6-May-08 z

22-Apr-08
8-Apr-08 3

25-Mar-08 0

11-Mar-08

26-Feb-08 0 0
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 ( I
1
J
08 -
-
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v, o v-? o v, o ?n o ? o v, o
N O O O\ ? 00 00 ? r- r- ?

110 1%0 ?.c ?.c 1%0 110 \c 110 110 110 110 \.o
.3
0
0

0
ct

G ----------------------------------
0

ro

0

0

cz
w
C

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

w
C) Cj
tj
CIO
c
•
? o
.0 cq
(QDAN IJ) uoIIenal:l
11
1
(-al) uoijupolamd
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M N N ^O O
i
A
L
3
° o

U

0
x
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A
2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 4a
21-Oct-08 v?

7-Oct-08 zs .?
a
23-Sep-08 u 0
9-Sep-08

26-Aug-08
W rs,
12-Aug-08 I I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08 _
A
1-Jul-08

17-Jun-08 Z

3-Jun-08

20-May-08 A ?

6-May-08 Z z
c+ C
22-Apr-08 o°

8-Apr-08
3 s
.
25-Mar-08

11-Mar-08 F°-
N

26-Feb-08 0 0
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 ( I
1
J
08 -
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v, o v? o ?, o ?n o v, o v-? o
N ^ ,--. O O ? ? 00 00 l? l? ?D ?D
00 00 00 00 00 ? ? r- r- r- r- r- r-

.3
0
?o
b
c ?
U v,
______________ _______ _____ ______________________

0

w
0

----------------------------
0
o ?

.
7 2
(([DAiV IJ) uoi;eAal:l
(•ui) uo1 vj!dpaj j
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o ?n o ?n o
M N N -' --O O
A
? o
?x

0
x
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A

2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08

21-Oct-08 L

7-Oct-08 .O .-.

23-Sep-08 O
o
9-Sep-08

26-Aug-08
W a
12-Aug-08 I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08 _

1-Jul-08 A
>

17-Jun-08 Z
w
3-Jun-08
A 4
20-May-08

6-May-08 Z "o

22-Apr-08 L
8-Apr-08 3 3
25-Mar-08

11-Mar-08
N

26-Feb-08 c c
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I
1
J
08 -
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o ?n o v? o ?n o v, o v, o
M N N O O - ? 00 00 ? ?
00 00 00 oe 00 r

.
3
0
?o 0

-°c ct
ct

---------------
A L
4 C3
o ? ------ ---------------------------
bf1

-C CID
((1DAN 'I3) uoi;Unall
(•ui) uoijuj!dpaad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v-? o ?n o v, o
M N N ^? ^O O
c?
A
3
o U
o ?
z,
U
c
0
v
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 P
2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 ewva
21-Oct-08
7-Oct-08
23-Sep-08 o
9-Sep-08
? c.
26-Aug-08 a
W a
12-Aug-08
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
A
1-Jul-08 >
C7
17-Jun-08 z

3-Jun-08

20-May-08 A ?

6-May-08 Z
4: o
22-Apr-08
8-Apr-08 3

25-Mar-08 0
o A
11-Mar-08

26-Feb-08 0 0
12-Feb-08
y
29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08
1
J
08 -
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v? o ?n o v-? o ?n o v-? o ?n
N N -? O O O? 01 00 00 [?

0

w ?

0
a?i aq
----- ---------- ----------- ---------------

c

w
0
73
73

--- -- ------- -----------------------
w

? o

((DAN IJ) uoi)ueal:l
(•u?) uo?;vjidlaaad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o ?n o ?n o
M N N ---? O O
A
s.
?s
3
.a N
? O
o U
L7 '?
L
U
?a
a
0
v
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08
2-Dec-08 z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08

21-Oct-08 L
7-Oct-08
23-Sep-08 u c
9-Sep-08 w

26-Aug-08
W A?
12-Aug-08 I I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
1-Jul-08 Ay
C7
17-Jun-08 Z
w
3-Jun-08

20-May-08 ? U
L7 0
6-May-08 Z
w a
22-Apr-08 c

8-Apr-08 ?
3 L

25-Mar-08
o A
11-Mar-08 ° N

26-Feb-08 0 0

12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 w W
15-Jan-08 I I
1 -Jan-08

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
?n O v-? o v? o v, o ?n o ?n
N N O O O\ O? 00 00 l?
- d
110
•
3
0
uo
0 0

0

?o
T

a,
----- ----
0 ------- -------------------------------
o ro
on ?

((1DANi IJ) uolJuAald
1
(•ui) uo?ju;idlaaad
' o 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v? o ?n o ?n o
M N N O O
1
1
1

A

3
o
a
c U
'
x ?
?
1 U

a
0

1

0

o
c a?

--a? ------ ---
l ---- ---------------------
ow

0

0

b
00
M

0
0
ct
o
?
t,oN

c ?3

30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08

2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 4a
21-Oct-08 v,
7-Oct-08
23-Sep-08 o
9-Sep-08

26-Aug-08
W A-.
12-Aug-08 I I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08

1-Jul-08 A

17-Jun-08 z

3-Jun-08 _
A ?
20-May-08

6-May-08 z
z
.a
c
22-Apr-08
8-Apr-08

25-Mar-08 0
a
i
M
M
11-Mar-08

26-Feb-08 0 0

12-Feb-08 w

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I
1
-Jan-08
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v? o v-, o ?n o ?n o ?n O
' o o 'T 17T ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?10
((1DAN 1J) uoiJunald
1
(•u?) uopuj!dpa jd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v, o ?, o ?n o
M N N ---? O O
?s
A
^a ?
c o
o U
o ?
s,
L7 ?,
x 3
s.
U
a
0
U
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A

2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 w
21-Oct-08 v?
7-Oct-08
23-Sep-08 u .c
9-Sep-08 0

26-Aug-08
w a
12-Aug-08 I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08 _
A
1-Jul-08 y
L7
17-Jun-08 Z

3-Jun-08 ,

20-May-08 A

6-May-08 Z
w c
22-Apr-08
8-Apr-08

25-Mar-08 0
z
o ?
11-Mar-08

26-Feb-08 0 0
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I
1 -Jan-08

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o v? o ?n o ?n o v, o
?t M M N N O O o\ 01

.
3
0

o
N
c ?

---------- ---------- ------------ ----------------

---------- ---- --- ------------------------------

w
o

"
c c

,? oq
((MAN T) uoltueald
(•ui) uopupdpaad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o v, o ?n o
M N N --? -? O O
w
c?
A
L
Y
3
c U
L ?
C7 ?,
L
U
a
0
U
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A

2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 w

21-Oct-08 L
7-Oct-08 o
23-Sep-08 u o
9-Sep-08 ,

26-Aug-08
W a
12-Aug-08 I I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
A
1-Jul-08
C7
17-Jun-08 z
w:
3-Jun-08

20-May-08 A ?

6-May-08 Z
w. a
22-Apr-08 L
8-Apr-08 3

25-Mar-08 0

11-Mar-08

26-Feb-08 °0 0
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 ( I
1
J
08 -
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ?n o ?n o ?n o ?n o v, o
N ? O O ? O 00 op [? (?

.3
0
0 0
0

0

-------
0 ------- ----------------------------------
o ?

.n on
WDAN T) uoi;eAald
(•ui) uol;u;?dlaa id
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v-? o ?n o ?n o
M N N ^^O O

A
3
a o
o V
C7 =?
x3
L
V
zs
0
U
30-Dec-08
16-Dec-08 A
2-Dec-08 Z
18-Nov-08
4-Nov-08 w
21-Oct-08 z

7-Oct-08 .O .-.
o

23-Sep-08 O
u
o
9-Sep-08
G
26-Aug-08
w a
12-Aug-08 I
29-Jul-08
15-Jul-08
1-Jul-08
C7
17-Jun-08 z
w
3-Jun-08
--
r
? U
20-May-08

6-May-08 Z
w c
22-Apr-08 c

8-Apr-08 ?
3 s.
3
25-Mar-08
o ?
11-Mar-08 6
N

26-Feb-08 0 0
12-Feb-08

29-Jan-08 W W
15-Jan-08 I I
1
J
08 -
an-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o v, o ?n o ?n o ? o v-, o

v 0 0 0, o, o0 00
? v) v? d
110

.
3
0
oq
? 0
o
c ?

c - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0

0
ro
b

M
--- --
a ---- ---- --- --------------------------------

o 0
cd
?
t N

• 3
? o
y th

((1DAN 1J) uoi;UAal:l