The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20120383 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_2018_20181128Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 FINAL Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site NCDMS Contract No.: 6783 NCDMS Project No.: 93875 McDowell County, North Carolina Data Collected: February - November 2018 Date Submitted: November 2018 Submitted to: North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services NCDEQ-DMS, 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1652 Mitigation Project Name Middle South Muddy Creek DMS ID 93875 River Basin Catawba Cataloging Unit 03050101 County McDowell USACE Action ID 20114=33 Data Project Instituted 101112010 NCDWR Permit No 20124383 Date Prepared 5/292018 Credit Release Mihnone Potential Credits(Mitigation Plan Poundal Credits A54u0t Suave PotentialCredihtiRTApproved) Scheduled Releases (Stream) Warm Cool 3,280X00 4,072.470 3,280X00 Cold Anticipated cipated Actual Release Year Release Ooh (Stream) (Stream) Scheduled Releases (Forested) Wetland Credits Riparian Riparian No fivefine Non-rWran Sc1hedulad Releases (Co..]) Coastal Ardicipated Release Year (We0and) Actual Release Data (Wetland) 1 Site Establishment NIA WA WA WA WA WA WA 2 Y earn/ASBbHt 309. 1,221]41 2016 &1112016 30% 30% WA Wq 9 earl Monitoring) 10% 328.000 2017 BIM017 10°/ 10% NIA WA IRTAdjusucher 1,990.000 -237.500 24.000 8/82017 4(Year 2 Monitoring) 1 W 328.080 2018 41252018 10% 13% WA WA 5'(Year 3 Monitorin) 10% 65°h 2019 65°k 10% 20% WA N/A fi ear4 Monitorin IOV. i11.i50 21120 3,793.400 10% 10% WA NIA 71Year6Monnonn) iS/. 74.100 2021 758.660 10% t5°h WA WA Be... Banaml Shndard 15% 492.120 2010 4252018 WA 1 WA Total Credits Released to Data 2,132521 "NOTE: Adjustnent required due to IRT concerns on how Me as -built credits were wlculaded DEBITS Ireleasetl credits only) Rates 2.5 o fE Ea IRT Atljusutl AsBuik Amounts Meat and acres) 1,990.000 171.000 24.000 5,836.000 IRT Adjusted As -Built Amounts (mitigation credits) 1,990.000 114.000 9.600 1,161.200 Percenh9e Released 65% 65°h 65% 65°k Released Amounts (feet lacre5) 1,293.500 i11.i50 15.800 3,793.400 Released Amounts(credito 1,293.590 74.100 6.240 758.660 NCDWR Penult USACE Action lD Project Name NCDOT TIP R-2248AC I AD I 19994337 1999-30776 BA- Charlotte Otlhr Loop 1.750.800 NCOOT TIP R-2248AC /AD I 1999-0337 199930776 BA -Charlotte Outer Loop 117.660 1 1 2006-1179 200630760 Lenoir WaWan 394.000 Charlotte Douglas Akien 2000.1195 200&32521-360 Partial Rumvey 35,040 $1.600 7200 NCDOTTIP R-Y1.4BAC /AD / 19990337 19993076 BA- Charlotte ONer Loop 583.600 NCDOTTIP R-2248AC IAD) 1999-0337 199931176 SA-Chetlotte Outer Loop 120.880 NCO07MP V -2211A- 199&1288 1998.30188 Widening of SR 1001 78.420 16.300 2.400 NCOOTTIP R -2206A -NC 16 2000.1232 2000.31430 Widening 25.000 NCDOTTIP R-2248AC IAD / 1899-0337 1999-3076 SA-Cbadode Cuter Loop 52.840 NCDOT TIP R-2248AC IAD / 1999-0337 199&3078 BA-Chare09OuurLoop 45,825 BerewickResidential 2003-0249 200330589 Communly 2480 2003.1030 2003-31287 NoOthoo Cenbe Parkway 4.506 20030870 200&30960 Bleed Ridge Suhdivislon 5.661 Paddy Creak Dem 2004-1583 200&31252 Improvements 4.514 20060799 200830620 Parses. Harbor 5:Bt3 20054853 200&32297.349 Woodbum Crossing 5.494 2005-0007 200530965 Mlrrcr he be'. 9.195 2007-0938 2007-01932390 1Wkevlbw Rose SRO7.183 NCOOT TIP R-224856 ( C I D 2001-1231 2001-31321 Charlotte Outer Lobp 452.868 42.750 6.000 1.335.535 ------------------- ------------------- ------------------- I -For NCDMS, no credits are r¢feased during the first milestone 2 - For NCDMS projects, the second credit release milestone occurs automatically when the as -built report (baseline monitoring report) has been made available to the NCIRT by posting it to the NCDMS Portal, provided the following criteria have been met: i) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan 2) Recordation tithe preservation mechanism, as well as a lige opinion acceptable to the USACE covering the property 3) Completion of all physical and biological improvements to the mitigation site pursuant to the mitigation plan 4) Reciept of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for porjects where DA permit issuance is not required 3 -A 15% reserve of credits is to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been mel This Page Intentionally Left Blank j� EQU I NOX o bolonce through proper plonning November 28, 2018 Matthew Reid Project Manager DENR Division of Mitigation Services 5 Ravenscroft Dr., #102 Asheville, NC 28801 Subject: Revisions to Middle South Muddy Restoration Monitoring Year 3 (MY3) Report; NCDMS Project #93875 Dear Mr. Reid, The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services contracted the services of Equinox to compile and report on the MY3 conditions of the Middle South Muddy Restoration project. Comments provided by NCDMS on November 27th, 2018 are listed below with red text indicating how each was addressed: Section 1.4.2 Stream Geomorphology • Report indicates structure at STA: 108+83 was noted in previous monitoring efforts as being stressed and removed in subsequent years because it has remained stable. Intense tropical storms and hurricanes in 2018 have caused some localized erosion around this structure. DMS will continue to monitor this structure throughout the upcoming year to document and changes. Additional live stakes may be installed to help stabilize the area this winter. This area will continue to be monitored in future site visits. Equinox will keep DMS apprised of any trends towards instability. Section 1.4.3 Stream Hydrology • Please add a short discussion regarding the two continuous stage recorders installed on Iva Branch and the results. One gauge was installed in the perennial section and one was installed on the intermittent section to document 30 consecutive days of flow. The gauge in the perennial section has successfully demonstrated continuous flow, while the gauge in the intermittent section does not show signs of surface flow. DMS recognized that credit may not be realized for the dry section.. An additional paragraph has been added to Section 1.4.3 Stream Hydrology describing the continuous stage records on Iva Branch and the results for MY3. CCPV • Please add the locations of the two continuous gauges on Iva Branch. The continuous stage recorders have been added to the CCPV. Photo Points • Photo point descriptions for photo stations 17, 18, and 20 all reference Sta: 300+50. Please update with the correct stationing. Photo stations 17, 18, and 20 have been updated with the correct stationing 302+13, 302+82, and 304+20. Table 11a • Please confirm that the MY3 (2018) 13HRs have been calculated based on the attached DMS technical guidance. Please add a note on the table that beginning in MY3, the bankfull elevation and channel cross section 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville NC 28801 828.253.6856 www.equinoxenvironmental.com /` EQU I NOX �� bolonce through proper plonning dimensions are calculated using a fixed Abkf as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). BHRs have been calculated according to the guidance starting in MY3. A note has been added to the bottom of Table Ila Appendix E Hydrologic Data • Please include the continuous stage recorder data for the two gauges on Iva Branch. The two continuous stage recorder plots have been added to Appendix E. The Equinox project manager for this project is Mr. Drew Alderman. His contact is as follows: Natural Resource Specialist Equinox 37 Haywood Street Asheville, NC 28801 Office: 828-253-6856 ext. 213 Fax: 828-253-8256 Sincerely, Drew Alderman 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville NC 28801 828.253.6856 www.equinoxenvironmentai.com Prepared by: EQUINOX balance through proper planning 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Contents 1.0 Project Summary............................................................................................................................... l 1.1. Goals and Objectives....................................................................................................................1 1.2. Success Criteria............................................................................................................................. l 1.3. Project Setting and Background....................................................................................................2 1.4. Project Performance......................................................................................................................3 2.0 Methods.............................................................................................................................................5 3.0 References.........................................................................................................................................6 Appendix A General Tables and Figures...................................................................................................... 8 Appendix B Visual Assessment Data.........................................................................................................17 Appendix C Vegetation Plot Data............................................................................................................... 49 AppendixD Stream Geomorphology Data................................................................................................. 59 AppendixE Hydrologic Data...................................................................................................................... 91 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 1.1. Goals and Objectives The following goals were established to guide the restoration process for the project as outlined in the Final Mitigation Plan: • Improve local water quality within the restored channel reaches as well as the downstream watercourses through: (a) the reduction of current channel sediment loads by restoring appropriately sized channels with stable beds and banks, (b) the reduction of nutrient loads from adjacent agricultural fields with a restored riparian buffer, and (c) the reduction of water temperatures provided through shading of the channel by canopy species along with the resultant increase in oxygen content. • Improve local aquatic and terrestrial habitat and diversity within the restored channels and their vicinity through: (a) the restoration of appropriate bed form to provide habitat for fish, amphibian, and benthic species, (b) the restoration of a suitable riparian buffer corridor in order to provide both vertical and horizontal structure and connectivity with adjacent upland areas, and (c) the restoration of understory and canopy species in order to provide forage, cover, and nesting for a variety of mammals, reptiles, and avian species. • Preclude land disturbing activities including the construction of additional infrastructure, future mining activities and agricultural practices including cattle grazing and the application of pesticides and fertilizer within the riparian buffer area by providing a permanent conservation easement. The following objectives were proposed for accomplishing the above listed goals as outlined in the Final Mitigation Plan: • Provide approximately 3,281 stream mitigation units (SMU's) through Priority I and 11 restoration of approximately 1,989 linear feet of stream, enhancement of approximately 196 linear feet of stream, and preservation of approximately 5,836 linear feet of stream threatened by mining activities. • Restore natural stable channel morphology and proper sediment transport capacity. • Create and/or improve bed form diversity and improve aquatic and benthic macroinvertebrate habitat. • Construct a floodplain bench that is accessible at the proposed bankfull discharge. • Improve channel and stream bank stabilization by integrating in -stream structures and native bank vegetation. • Provide approximately 5.87 acres of riparian buffer restoration by establishing a native forested and herbaceous riparian buffer plant community with a minimum width of 30 feet from the edge of the restored channels. This new community will be established in conjunction with the eradication of any existing exotic and/or undesirable plant species. • Construct barricades on an existing dirt road network on the Haney Tract to prevent future vehicular trespassing. 1.2. Success Criteria 1.2.1. Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability Restored and enhanced streams should demonstrate morphologic stability to be considered successful. Stability does not equate to an absence of change, but rather to sustainable rates of change or stable patterns of variation. Restored streams often demonstrate some level of initial adjustment in the several months that follow construction and some change/variation subsequent to that period is also to be Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 1 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 expected. However, the observed change should not be unidirectional such that it represents a robust trend. If some trend is evident, it should be very modest or indicate migration to a stable form. Dimension - Cross-section measurements should indicate little change from the as -built cross- sections. If changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether the adjustments are associated with increased stability or whether they indicate movement towards an unstable condition. Pattern and Profile — Measurements and calculated values should indicate stability whit little deviation from as -built conditions and established morphological ranges from the restored stream type. Annual measurements should indicate stable bed form features with little change from the as -built survey. The pools should maintain their depth with flatter water surface slopes, while riffles should remain shallower and steeper. Substrate - Calculated D5o and Dsa values should indicate coarser size class distribution of bed materials in riffles and finer size class distribution in pools. Generally, it is anticipated that the bed material will coarsen over time. Sediment Transport - Depositional features should be consistent with a stable stream that is effectively managing its sediment load. Point bar and inner berm features, if present, should develop without excessive encroachment of the channel. Lateral and mid -channel bar features should typically not be present and if so only in isolated instances. Bar features may be more prevalent in sand bed channels but should be transient in nature and should occupy no more than 20% of the cross-sectional area. 1.2.2. Surface Water Hydrology Monitoring of stream surface water stages should indicate recurrence of bankfull flows on average every 1 to 2 years. At a minimum, throughout the monitoring period, the surface water stage should achieve bankfull or greater elevations at least twice. The bankfull events must occur during separate monitoring years. 1.2.3. Vegetation Riparian vegetation monitoring shall be conducted for a minimum of five years to ensure that success criteria are met per USACE guidelines. Accordingly, success criteria will consist of a minimum survival of 320 stems per acre by the end of the Year 3 monitoring period and a minimum of 260 stems per acre at the end of Year 5. If monitoring indicates either that the specified survival is not being met or the development of detrimental conditions (i.e., invasive species, diseased vegetation), appropriate corrective actions will be developed and implemented. 1.3. Project Setting and Background The Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site (MSM) is located in the Catawba River Basin (NCDWQ sub -basin 03-08-30 and HUC 03050101040020) approximately 9.5 miles southeast of Marion, NC in southeast McDowell County at latitude 35.5635'N and longitude 81.92490 W. MSM is comprised of two tracts, the Middle South Muddy Creek tract, which encompasses approximately 5.87 acres of predominately agricultural and forested land, and the 41.05 acre Haney Preservation Tract, which is predominately forested. The Middle South Muddy Creek Tract consists of portions of three streams, Iva Branch (462 feet), Sprouse Branch (635 feet), and South Muddy Creek (1,088 feet). The Haney Tract consists of approximately 5,836 linear feet of stream. The tract is comprised of portions of South Muddy Creek and approximately four tributaries, including Jackson Branch and Moores Branch. MSM is located Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 2 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 within the Muddy Creek Local Watershed planning area and the Site's watershed was identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in DMS' 2009 Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priority report (RBRP). Historic land use at MSM consisted primarily of agriculture, livestock grazing, and mining operations. Livestock previously had unrestricted access to the majority of the streams on site, resulting in significant local disturbance to stream banks (Table 4). Additional land use practices, including the maintenance and removal of riparian vegetation, and the relocating, dredging, and straightening of on-site streams contributed to the degraded water quality and unstable channel characteristics on the site. During the Asbuilt Baseline Monitoring Report, stream lengths in the Haney Tract was increased by 3,960 LF from the approved Mitigation Plan length of 5,836 LF to a total of 9,796 LF. The increase in length was due to mapping of streams within the conservation easement during the Asbuilt Baaseline Monitoring field work data collection stage. Upon verification, DMS determined that many of the included streams have been highly manipulated by past land use (mining) and were not candidates for preservation credit. These streams (UTI -8 and UT -10) were removed by DMS from credit calculations. DMS and IRT viewed the remaining streams within the easement (UT9, UT 11, Jackson Branch, Moores Branch and South Muddy Creek). These streams were impacted less by past use and both DMS and IRT agreed they would be suitable for preservation credit. In lieu of breaking out stream reaches and applying different rations for preservation credit based on quality and function, the IRT and DMS agreed that reverting to the approved Mitigation Plan preservation length assets would be acceptable. The MY2 Monitoring Report has been updated to reflect the change in the preservation assets for the Haney Tract to 5,836 LF at a 5:1 ratio for a total of 1,167 SMUs as found in the Mitigation Plan. The total number of SMUs for the Middle South Muddy site has also been changed to 3,281 SMUs to reflect the Mitigation Plan as well. 1.4. Project Performance Monitoring Year 3 (MY3) data was collected from February to October 2018. Monitoring activities included visual assessment of all reaches and the surrounding easement, collection of images at 31 permanent photo stations, inventory of five permanent vegetation monitoring plots, surveying of 10 cross- sections, conducting three pebble counts, and collection of longitudinal profile survey data for approximately 2,166 linear feet of stream channel. Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly Mitigation Plan) and in the Mitigation Plan (formerly Restoration Plan) documents available on the NCDMS website (http://portal.NCDEQ.org/web/eep). All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from DMS upon request. 1.4.1. Vegetation Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots (Appendix B — Table 6) indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is becoming established throughout the project. A few small areas of invasive exotic vegetation were noted (n = 3) totaling .01 acre. The site will continue to be monitored for invasive exotic vegetation. Monitoring of the permanent vegetation plots (n = 5; VP) was completed in September 2018. Summary tables and photographs associated with MY3 vegetation monitoring are located in Appendix C. MY3 monitoring data indicates that all vegetation plots met the MY3 interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities among plots ranged from 324 to 607 planted Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 3 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 stems per acre with an annual mean of 461 planted stems per acre across all plots. A total of 10 species were documented within the plots. When volunteer stems are included, the mean annual total stems per acre rose to 785 and ranged between 405 and 1,497 stems per acre. 1.4.2. Stream Geomorphology Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. One problem area was noted on South Muddy Creek during MY3 associated with the structure at STA 108+83. Displacement of backfill material has exposed the backer log and filter fabric which has resulted in piping through the structure. While the structure has remained stable, at high flows the thalweg has been redirected at the left bank, scouring out approximately 25 feet of bank downstream. A smaller area of erosion totaling approximately 10 feet was also noted just downstream on the right descending bank (Table 5 and Figure 2). On Iva Branch, the boulder step structure at STA 303+67, has failed (Figure 2). High flows with contributing runoff from the BMP just upstream have scoured around the LDB of the arm of the top 3 boulder arches undermining the structure. Material from the pools of the boulder steps has migrated downstream to fill in the riffle at STA 303+75 (Figure 2, Appendix D Iva Branch Longitudinal Profile). The boulder arches located at STA 301+94 and 303+07 in the upstream portions of Iva Branch remain relatively intact however, the material from these structures has also migrated into the downstream riffle, causing aggradation at STA 302+25 and 303+25 (Figure 2, Appendix D Iva Branch Longitudinal Profile). These problem areas on Iva Branch are not new to MY3, but rather systemic issues from intermittent and flashy flows. All of these areas listed above will be monitored during future site visits for signs of deterioration. Geomorphic data for MY3 was collected from March through October 2018. Summary tables and cross- section data plots related to stream morphology are located in Appendix D. Noticeable change in the cross-section data between MY2 and MY3 occurred mostly at cross-sections four through seven located on South Muddy Creek (Appendix D, Table l Ia/b). Large deposits of sand along the bankfull bench have lowered the bankfull width by 1.6 feet on cross-section four, 2.2 feet on cross-section five, 5.0 feet on cross-section six, and 4.1 feet on cross-section seven. Riffle dimensions remained relatively similar between MY2 and MY3 on Sprouse Branch. The most notable change was that the width/depth ratio decreased by 4.5. Riffle dimensions on Iva Branch also remained stable from MY2 to MY3. No notable changes for Iva Branch can be reported, please refer to Table l lb and cross-sectional overlays for cross- sectional data. Generally, South Muddy Creek longitudinal profile data (Appendix B, Table l lb) indicated relatively little change in riffle and pool dimensions between MY2 and MY3. The most notable change took place at STA 103+01 where a debris jam caused scour in the subsequent pool, lowering the bed elevation 3.0 ft. This change has created great habitat and has reverted this section of stream back to baseline conditions. Profile dimensions for Sprouse Branch changed slightly between MY2 and MY3. Two areas, STA 204+22 and STA 206+87, were identified as riffles during previous monitoring reports, during MY3 monitoring slight bed scour has changed these areas to a step pool sequence anchored by log structures. For the purposes of dimensioning they have been changed to steps for MY3. Another small change was noted at STA 206+08 where bed scour has caused the preceding pool to increase in length, turning the subsequent riffle into a glide. These changes are reflected in Table l lb, where the total number of riffles have changed from 9 to 6. While the total number of riffles changed, dimensions remained relatively similar to MY2 dimensions. The most substantial change was that the total percentage of Sprouse Branch that is characterized as a riffle has decreased by 11%, while the total percentage of the reach is characterized as a step increased by 6%. The longitudinal profile for Iva Branch also saw a few changes from MY2 to M3 (Table l lb). The structure at STA 303+67 has remained unstable and multiple steps Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 4 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 have been removed creating one large pool rather than a step pool sequence. Bed material from this area has been deposited downstream causing aggradation in the subsequent riffle. This change increased the total percent of the reach characterized by as a pool by 4% and decreased the percentage of steps by 4%. For the first time since baseline conditions, Iva Branch had water present upstream of the culvert. Water surface slopes were generated for both Upper and Lower Iva Branch. 1.4.3. Stream Hydrology Since project completion in December 2015, four bankfull events have been documented on all reaches of the Middle South Muddy Project. Based on precipitation data, the suspected dates are February 2"d, 2016 (MY1), October 23rd, 2017 (MY2), February 11', 2018 (MY3), and October 18th, 2018 (MY3). The crest gauge on South Muddy Creek was damaged during multiple events this year therefor no crest gauge readings could be recorded for that reach. The crest gauge was reconfigured during the MY3 final walkthrough in November and will be monitored in subsequent site visits. Two continuous stage recorders were installed during MYO on Iva Branch to document surface flow. One gauge was installed in the perennial section and another was installed on the intermittent section to document 30 consecutive days of flow. The gauge in the perennial section has successfully demonstrated continuous flow, while the gauge in the intermittent section does not show signs of surface flow. During the MY3 monitoring year the intermittent section only saw approximately seven days of consecutive surface flow while the perennial section shows multiple stretches of 30+ days of flow during MY3 monitoring (Appendix E). The continuous stage recorders will be monitored in subsequent site visits. 2.0 METHODS The visual assessment of the project was performed at the beginning and end of each monitoring year. Permanent photo station photos were taken during the initial visual assessment when leaf -off conditions exist. Additional photos of vegetation or stream problem areas were taken as needed. Geomorphic measurements were taken during low flow conditions using a Nikon® NPR 332 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates associated with cross-section and profile data were collected in the field and geo-referenced (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200). Morphological data were collected at 10 cross-sections. Survey data was imported into CAD, ArcGIS®, and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. Channel substrate was characterized using a Wolman Pebble Count as outlined in Harrelson et al. (1994) and processed using Microsoft Excel. Vegetation success is being monitored at 5 permanent monitoring plots. Vegetation monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data is processed using the CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with rebar and photos of each plot are taken from the origin each monitoring year. Precipitation data was reported from the NCCRONOS station NGRF in Marion, NC. Bankfull events were documented with two crest gauges, one located on South Muddy Creek and another on Sprouse Branch. Crest gauges will be monitored semi-annually. The height of the corklines was recorded and cross-referenced with known bankfull elevations at each crest gauge. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 5 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 3.0 REFERENCES Equinox Environmental. 2008. Muddy Creek Local Watershed Plan. Report prepared for North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. September. Harrelson, Cheryl, C. Rawlins and J. Potyondy. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. USDA Forest Service. Fort Collins, Colorado North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). February 2009. Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009. https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs- public/PublicFolder/Work%20With/Watershed%2OPlanners/Upper_Catawba RBRP_2009.pdf Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version 4.2. http:Hcvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm; accessed November 2008. Wolf Creek Engineering. 2012. Final Mitigation Plan Middle South Muddy Creek Restoration. Prepared for North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Final Mitigation Plan, Middle South Muddy Restoration, McDowell County. EEP Project No: 93875 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 6 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 7 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Appendix A General Tables and Figures Driving Directions: From Asheville drive east on 1-40 and lake exit 93. Mm right onto Ashworth Road, after 0.9 miles turn right onto US -221. Follow US -22 t for 4.5 miles then turn left onto Polly Spout Road. After 1.7 miles tum left onto Vein Mountain Road. Follow Vein Mountain Road for 2.6 miles and then turn right onto Brackett Town Road. The Middle South Mitigation Site -ill be on the ]eft after about 1 mile. The subject project site in an environmental restoration site of the NCDMS and encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is 1 bordered by land with private ownership. Accessing the site may require traversing areas near or along the easement boundary and therefore access to the general public is not permitted Access by authorized personnel of slate and federal agencies or their designee/contractors involved in the development, oversight, and stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their defined role. Any intended site visitation nr activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles and activities requires prior coordination with NCDMS. "-�S M edon Q h '''"'iiiiii ij � � l Roadsi at t w a� Streams p i 0 Mitigation Sites ti a� f Jy i ! � l { Middle South Muddy Mitigation Site (((- r t Cz �3t�f 8li Figure I i1 1 1 +�I�Li►1 - t�. s Vicinity Map M +�W_M AIN��j Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 9 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 10 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Z. Integrated current condition Plan View Prepared d for p Log Sill no Baffle �� Easement '�_: Thalweg Vegetation Plots Hook -Log Run Middle South Mudd Muddy Cross -Section �i Top of Bank = Vegetation Plot Criteria Met Stream Restoration Project o Structure Contour (1 ft) Invasive -Exotic Vegetation Hook Run -� � Long Pro Start/End Present Monitoring Year 3 * Photo Point Stream Problem Areas Boulder -Arch Wg McDowell County, NC Crest Gauge Aggradation �/ Nothing Compares NCDMS Contract No.: 00006783 4 Control Point � Bank Erosion Boulder -Arch NORTH CAROLINA November 2018 # Continuous Stage Recorder Failed Structure with Lo g Armored Riffle Sheet 1 of 2 Log Vane Notes: with Hook 1) Baseline Data Provided by Turner Land Log Sill y Log Sill no Baffle Brush Toe Prepared by �t EQUINOX 2. Integrated Current Condition Plan View p 0+00 �- i?p3o o • oma, .• 52+661- 4 -UT-11 PPS o ` o \ sz+oo a x PP -31 1 , 50+00 N 49+00 >. 1 W-28 \48+00 1 p Jackson Branch,/ + + M + - + 4+ vi -o + # + 0 2+00 + p N + N 4+00 UT-6� 0-00 + o PP-20('koo 0 3+00 oo ♦�. 2+00 h �♦ 0+0( r r -�_. zztoo ; , -�,• o+oo p I I O k 21+00 o ; ; UT -3 ' 00 ' j 1 1 p 1, � 1 op +\ \+ N + o o r + v 1 1� o + o i o o N 4 Jim- - + L +oo 1 5A0UT-4�. South Muddy Cree 1 4+00 1 r `3+00 �2+00 L' 1 � v 0 Moores Branch PPS 25 �.�_.... �.... _-_.D. M N 4 � PP -23 °.tUT�-1 1 250 500 _ w .. ► 1,000 Fe Prepared for Hook -Log Run Log Vane Notes: Prepared by with Hook 1) Baseline Data Provided by Turner Land Surveying Middle South Muddy rr� Easement �� Preservation Streams Stream Restoration Project Hook Run Log Sill Cross -Section Top of Bank :'.y Monitoring Year 3 Long Pro Start/End -�, contour (> 11) Log Sill�/ W McDowell County, NC Boulder -Arch no Baffle Photo Point /Nothing Compares— NCDMS Contract No.: 00006783 0 Crest Gauge Boulder -Arch Brush Toe EQUINOX NORTH CAROLINA o November 2018 control Point with Log Sheet 2 of 2 Armored Riffle Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 13 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 1. Project Mitigation Components and Summation Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Mitigation Credits Stream Nitrogen Riparian Wetland Non -riparian Wetland Buffer Nutrient Offset Phosphorous Nutrient Offset Type R RE R RE R RE Totals 2,114 1,167 Project Components Project Component -or- Reach ID Restoration Restoration -or- Stationing/Location Foota ExistinFootage/Acreage ea Footage Restoration Acreage Equivalent Approach AppMitigation (PI, PH etc.) Ratio Mitigation Credits Footage Excluded to Easement Crossing/ Break South Muddy Creek 101+00— 110+91 931 916 R PII 1:1 916 75 Lower South Muddy Creek 110+91— 112+63 177 172 R EI 1.5:1 115 - Upper Sprouse Branch 201+50— 201+74 24 24 R EII I 2.5:1 10 - Middle and Lower Sprouse Branch 201+74— 208+04 598 611 R PII 1:1 611 19 Upper and Lower Iva Branch 302+14— 306+96 471 462 R PI 1:1 462 20 Haney Tract 5,836 5,836 RE Preservation 5:1 1,167 - Component Summation Restoration Stream Riparian Wetland Non -riparian Wetland Buffer Upland Level (linear feet) (acres) (acres) (square feet) (acres) Riverine Non-Riverine Restoration 1,989 Enhancement Enhancement 172 Enhancement II 24 Creation Preservation 5,836 High Quality Preservation BMP Elements Element Location Purpose/Function Notes FB Entire Site Protect Stream Channel BMP Elements BR— Bioretention Cell; SF=Sand Filter; SW — Stormwater Wetland; WDP —Wet Detention Pond; DDP —Dry Detention Pond; FS— Filter Strip; S— Gassed Swale; LS— Level Spreader; NI — Natural Infiltration Area; FB — Forested Buffer Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 13 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery Mitigation Plan Feb - 2012 Mar - 2012 Final Design - Construction Plans N/A Nov - 2012 Construction N/A Dec - 2015 Permanent Seed Mix Applied - Mar - 2016 Live Stake Plantings - Mar - 2016 Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring - Baseline) May - 2016 June -2016 Year 1 Monitoring Dec - 2016 Jan - 2017 Year 1 Geomorphology Monitoring Dec - 2016 - Year 1 Vegetation Monitoring Oct - 2016 - Year 2 Monitoring Oct - 2017 Nov - 2017 Year 2 Geomorphology Monitoring June - 2017 - Year 2 Vegetation Monitoring Sept - 2017 Year 3 Monitoring Nov - 2018 Nov - 2018 Year 3 Vegetation Monitoring Sept - 2018 - Year 3 Geomorphology Monitoring Oct - 2018 - Year 4 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 14 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 3. Project Contacts Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services 217 W Jones Street Suite 3000a Prime Contractor Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Matthew Reid (828) 231-7812 Wolf Creek Engineering 12 1/2 Wall Street Suite C Designer Asheville, North Carolina 28801 S. Gant Conn (828) 449-1930 River Works, hic Construction 6105 Chapel Hill Road Contractor Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Jon Harrell (919) 710-3326 River Works, hic 6105 Chapel Hill Road Seeding Contractor Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Jon Harrell (919) 710-3326 River Works, hic 6105 Chapel Hill Road Planting Contractor Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Jon Harrell (919) 710-3326 Turner Land Surveying 3719 Benson Drive As -built Surreys Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 David Turner (919) 827-0745 Green Resource 5204 Highreen Court Seeding Mix Source Colfax, North Carolina 27235 (336)855-6363 Foggy Mountain Nursery 797 Helton Creek Road Live Stakes Lansing, North Carolina (336)384-5323 Equinox Environmental Monitoring Performers 37 Haywood St. (MYO-MY3) 2016-2018 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Drew Alderman (828) 253-6856 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 15 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes Project Information Project Name Middle South Muddy Creek County McDowell Project Area (acres) 5.87 Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude) 35.5635° N, 81.9249° W Project Watershed Summary Information Physiographic Province Blue Ridge River Basin Catawba River USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit 3050101 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit 03050101040020 DWR Sab-basin 03-08-30 Project Drainage Area (acres) 2,893 Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area > 1% CGIA Land Use Classification 2.03.01.01 Reach Summary Information Parameters South Muddy Creek Iva Branch Sprouse Branch Length of reach (linear feet) 1,108 471 622 Valley classification (Roggen) Valley Type V[IIb Valley Type 11 Valley Type II Drainage area (acres) 3,002 27 29 NCDWQ stream identification score 44 31 34 NCDWQ Water Quality Classification C C C Morphological Description (stream type) (Roggen) CA G5 G5 Evolutionary trend (Roggen) F4 G5 G5 Underlying mapped soils Iotla, Hayesville Clay Iotla, Hayesville Clay Iotla, Hayesville Clay Drainage class Poorly drained Poorly drained Poorly drained Soil Hydric status Non -hydric Non -hydric Non -hydric Slope 0.40% 4.60% 2.20% FEMA classification Limited Detail N/A N/A Native vegetation community Agricultural Agricultural Agricultural Percent composition ofexotic invasive vegetation <1% <1% <1% Wetland Summary Information Parameters Weiland1 Welland2 Weiland3 Size of Wetland (acres) - - - Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian riverine or riparian non-riverine) - - - Mapped Soil Series - - - Drainage class - - - Soil Hydric Status - - - Source of Hydrology - - - Hydrologic Impairment - - - Native vegetation community - - - Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation - - - Regulatory Considerations Rego I ati on Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation Waters of the United States— Section 404 Yes Yes NW 27 2011-02233 Waters of the United States— Section 401 Yes Yes 401 Certification WR# 12-0383 Endangered Species Act No N/A ERTR Historic Preservation Act No N/A ERTR CoastalZone Management Act(CZMA)/Coastal Area Management A,t(CAMA) No N/A FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes yes Case #: 14-0403678 Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 16 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Appendix B Visual Assessment Data This Page Intentionally Left Blank Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site - South Muddy Creek Assessed Length 1,088 feet Major Channel Category Channel Sub -Category Metric Number Stable' Performing as Intended Total Number in As -built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Number with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Footage with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Adjusted% for Stabilizing Woody Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability 1. Awadation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars). 0 0 100% 2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% (Riffle and Run Units) 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 5 5 100% 3. Meander Pool 1. Denth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth 2:1,6), 5 5 100% Condition 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle). 5 5 100% 1. Thalweg centering at up stream of meander bend (Run). 5 5 100% 4. Thalweg Position OIL 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide). 5 5 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured / Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion. 2 36 98% 0 0 98% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear 0 0 100% 0 0 100% sustainable and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse. 0 0 100% 0 0 100% Totals 2 36 99% 0 0 93% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 5 5 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill 5 5 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or anus. 5 5 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed 15%. 5 5 100% Pool forming structures maintaining— Max Pool Depth: Mean 4. Habitat Bankfull Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 5 5 100% base -flow. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 19 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 5 Cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project - Sprouse Branch Assessed Len th 611 feet Major Channel Category Channel Sub -Category Metric Number Stable' Performing as Intended Total Number in As -built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Number with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Footage with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Adjusted% for Stabilizing Woody Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability 1. Awadation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars). 0 0 100% 2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% (Riffle and Run Units) 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 14 14 100% 3. Meander Pool 1. Denth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth 2:1,6), 16 16 100% Condition 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle). 16 16 100% 1. Thalweg centering at up stream of meander bend (Run). 16 16 100% 4. Thalweg Position 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide). 16 16 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured / Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion. 0 0 1001)4. 0 0 100% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear 0 0 100% 0 0 100% sustainable and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse. 0 0 100% 0 0 100% Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 18 18 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill 18 18 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or anus. 18 18 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed 15%. 18 18 100% Pool forming structures maintaining— Max Pool Depth: Mean 4. Habitat Bankfull Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 18 18 100% base -flow. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 20 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 5 Cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project - Iva Branch Assessed Len th 462 feet Major Channel Category Channel Sub -Category Metric Number Stable' Performing as Intended Total Number in As -built Number of Unstable Segments Amount of Unstable Footage % Stable, Performing as Intended Number with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Footage with Stabilizing Woody Vegetation Adjusted% for Stabilizing Woody Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability 1. Awadation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars). 3 15 96% 2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% (Riffle and Run Units) 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 9 9 100% 3. Meander Pool 1. Denth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth: Mean Bankfull Depth 2:1,6), 9 9 100% Condition 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle). 9 9 100% 1. Thalweg centering at up stream of meander bend (Run). 9 9 100% 4. Thalweg Position OIL 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide). 9 9 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured / Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion. 1 15 98% 0 0 98% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear 0 0 100% 0 0 100% sustainable and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse. 0 0 100% 0 0 100% Totals 1 15 98% 0 0 98% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 9 10 90% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill 9 10 90% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or anus. 9 10 90% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does NOT exceed 15%. 9 10 90% Pool forming structures maintaining— Max Pool Depth: Mean 4. Habitat Bankfull Depth Ratio > 1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at 9 10 90% base -flow. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 21 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 N/A - Item does not apply. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 22 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Planted Acreage: 5.87 % of Number of Combined Vegetation Category Definitions CCPV Depiction PolyPlanted gons Acreage Acreage 1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. N/A 0 0.00 0% 2. Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, N/A 0 0.00 0% 4, or 5 stem count criteria. Totals 0 0.00 0% 3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small igiven N/A 0 0.00 0% the monitoring year. Cumulative Totals 0 0.00 0% Easement Acreage: 5.87 % of Number of Combined Vegetation Category Definitions CCPV Depiction Easement Polygons Acreage Acreage 4. Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale). Cross Hatch 3 0.01 <1 IN, (Red - Dense/Yellow - Present) 5. Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale). N/A 0 0.00 0%, N/A - Item does not apply. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 22 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Upper Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 1 Looking Downstream Upper Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 2 Looking Downstream Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 23 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 3 Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 1 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 4 Looking Downstream, Northwest- 292 degrees Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 24 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 4 Looking Upstream; South 182 degrees Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 5 Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 2 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 25 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 6 Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 3 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 7 Looking Upstream from Crossing Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 26 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Lower Sprouse Branch — Permanent Photo Station 8 Station 101+50 - Looking Upstream at Confluence with South Muddy South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 8 Station 101+50 - Looking Downstream Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 27 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 8 Station 101+50 - Looking Upstream South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 9 Station 102+75 - Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 4 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 28 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 10 Station 104+75 - Looking Upstream from Bridge South Muddy Creek —Permanent Photo Station 10 Station 104+75 - Looking Downstream from Bridge Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 29 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 11 Station 107+45 - Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 5 South Muddy Creek — Permanent Photo Station 12 Station 108+58- Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 6 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 30 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 t s t� not -� .s,'A EIft A h wall i forr if tol- Mr - 31 ro W� $ • � 1 1 -gin � ,: ;•��1 f g�3 SII s '�� 't� l�� T - _ �is�i `•ass 'a `f 21 his . 7 .x. Mr - 31 ro W� $ • � 1 1 -gin � ,: ;•��1 f g�3 SII s '�� 't� l�� T - _ �is�i `•ass 'a `f 21 Upper Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 17 Station 302+13 - Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 8 Upper Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 18 Station 302+82 - Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 9 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 34 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Upper Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 19 Station 303+75 - Looking Upstream Upper Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 20 Station 304+20 - Looking Downstream at Cross -Section 10 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 35 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Upper Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 21 Station 305+10 - Looking Upstream Lower Iva Branch — Permanent Photo Station 22 Station 305+85 - Looking Upstream from Crossing Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 36 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 23 Looking Downstream South Muddy Creek Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 24 Looking Upstream South Muddy Creek Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 37 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 AX oil .p A t _ New - 'R4A4 Feb -13 -2-COA \ 1 14 _ g AX oil .p A t _ New - 'R4A4 Feb -13 -2-COA \ �, r �,4TMYly��r$s� %r ��t4� n��y'y^ �' „t��_--• lar •5 r 1 Z I a t - :. itki �,.._._.> i �+ � * ._ \ l I' � p -� °` a \�� `, i �!p•. A'-7 9 uS Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 27 Looking Downstream South Muddy Creek Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 28 Looking Upstream South Muddy Creek Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 41 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 28 Looking Downstream South Muddy Creek Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 28 Looking Upstream Tributary to South Muddy Creek Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 42 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 29 Looking Upstream South Muddy Creek Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 30 Looking Downstream Tributary to South Muddy Creek Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 43 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Haney Tract — Permanent Photo Station 31 Looking Upstream Tributary to South Muddy Creek Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 44 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 IJ I t✓. .,% Ul �2 .moi � 7 ! •• rS',v '� ,'c' ��' .. � �,�C .5 ==�f * �, .c• P f . / t R f i 4 Problem Area Photos Bank Scour RDB— South Muddy Creek 109+00 (looking upstream) Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 47 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 48 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Appendix C Vegetation Plot Data Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Vegetation Plot ID Vegetation Survival Threshold Met? Tract Mean 1 Yes 100% 2 Yes 3 Yes 4 Yes 5 Yes Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 50 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Report Prepared By Owen Carson Date Prepared 9/5/2018 11:09 database name Equinox 2018_ A_ Midd1eSouthMuddy_MY3.mdb database location Z:\ES\NRI&M\EEP Monitoring\Middle SouthMuddy\MY3-2018\Data\Veg computer name FIELD -PC file size 60526592 DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------ Metadata Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data. Proj, planted Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes. Proj, total stems Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems. Plots List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.). Vigor Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots. Vigor by Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species. Damage List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each. Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species. Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot. Planted Stems by Plot and Spp A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded. ALL Stems by Plot and spp natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded. PROJECT SUMMARY ------------------------------------ Project Code 93875 project Name Middle South Middy Description River B as in Catawba le ngth(ft) stream-to-edge width (ft) area (sq m) Required Plots (calculated) Sampled Plots 5 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 51 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 52 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 IPnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment. Table 9. Total Planted Stem Counts (Stems by Plot) Middle Suth Muddy Stream Restoration Project Current Plot Data (MY3 2018) Scientific Name Common Name Species Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4 Plot 5 Type PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T Red Maple Tree Acer rubrum Red Maple Tree 2 Acer rubrum var. rubrum Red Maple Tree Acer rubrum var. rubrum Red Maple Tree 2 2 2 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 Betula nigra River Birch Tree 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Tree Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Tree 4 1 4 11 5 1 21 2 2 Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 11 Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore Tree Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore Tree 4 4 4 7 7 71 1 1 1 6 6 18 2 2 17 Platanus occidentalis var. occidentalis Sycamore, Plane -tree Tree Rhus aromatica Fragrant Sumac Shrub Rhus aromatica Fragrant Sumac Shrub 21 Rhus copallinum 9 Rhus copallinum Flameleaf Sumac Shrub 11 Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac Shrub Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac Shrub Ulmus americana American Elm Tree Ulmus americana American Elm ITree 6 6 2 2 2 7 7 2 2 2 571 571 97 Stem count 10 10 10 15 151 15 81 8 10 11 11 25 131 131 37 size (ares) size (ares) 1 1 1 1 1 size (ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.02 Species count Species count 41 41 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 785 5 486 Stems per ACRE 405 405 405 607 607 607 324 324 405 4451 445 1012 5261 526 1497 IPnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment. 'PnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment. Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% ,Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% 'ails to meet requirements by more than 10% Recruit Stems Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 53 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 9 Cont'd. Total Planted Stem Counts (Annual Means) Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project Annual Means Scientific Name Species Common Name Type MY3 (2018) PnoLS P -all T MY2 (2017) PnoLS P -all T MY1 (2016) PnoLS P -all T MYO (2016) PnoLS P -all T Acer rubrum Red Maple Tree 2 Acer rubrum var. rubrum Red Maple Tree 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Betula nigra River Birch Tree 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam Tree 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 11 11 11 11 1 I l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore Tree 20 20 47 20 20 20 20 201 20 20 201 20 Platanus occidentalis var. occidentalis Sycamore, Plane -tree Tree 19 Rhus aromatica Fragrant Sumac Shrub 11 Rhus copallinum Flameleaf Sumac Shrub 11 Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac Shrub 12 Ulmus americana American Elm Tree 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 7 7 7 Stem count 571 571 97 581 581 89 601 601 71 601 601 60 size (ares) 5 5 5 5 size (ACRES) 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 Species count 7 7 9 71 71 9 71 71 FWT86 7 Stems per ACRE 461 461 785 469 469 720 486 486 575 'PnoLS: No livestakes included in tally; P -all: All planted stems included in tally; T: Total stems including recruitment. Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% ,Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% 'ails to meet requirements by more than 10% Recruit Stems Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 53 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 54 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy - Vegetation Monitoring Plot 1 September 3rd, 2018 Middle South Muddy - Vegetation Monitoring Plot 2 September 3rd, 2018 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 55 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy - Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3 September 3rd, 2018 Middle South Muddy - Vegetation Monitoring Plot 4 September 3rd, 2018 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 56 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy - Vegetation Monitoring Plot 5 September 3rd, 2018 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 57 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 58 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Appendix D Stream Geomorphology Data Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 60 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary Middle South Mudd - South Muddy Creek / Lower South Muddy Creek1,088 feet Parameter Regional Curve Pre-IMsting Condition Reference Reach Data Design As-Built/Baseline Dimension&Substrate - Riffle LL LTL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Max Min Mean Med Max SD N Bankfull Width (ft) - 30.7 - - - - - - - 19.4 - - 36.6 - - - 30.8 - 30.7 31.1 31.0 31.6 0.5 3 Floodprone Width (ft) - - - - - - 30.0 - - 65.0 - - - 65.0 - 65.0 84.7 88.0 101.0 18.2 3 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) - 1.8 - - - - - - - 1.6 - - 1.6 - - - 1.7 - 1.6 1.9 1.9 2.1 0.3 3 Bankfull Max Depth(ft) - - - - - - 2.0 - - 2.2 - - - 2.2 - 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.9 0.4 3 Bankfall Cross Sectional Area (11) 51.7 - - - - - - 30.2 - - 36.6 - - - 52.2 - 50.5 58.1 59.0 64.9 7.2 3 Width/Depth Ratio - - - - - - 12.3 - - 14.9 - - - 18.1 - 14.8 16.8 1 15.9 1 19.8 2.6 3 Entrenchment Ratio - - - - - - 1.3 - - 2.8 - - - 2.1 - 2.1 2.7 2.8 3.3 0.6 3 Bank Height Ratio - - - - - - 1.0 - - 1.2 - - - 1.0 - LO 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 3 d50 (mm) - - - - - - - 29.0 - - - - Profile Riffle Length (ft) - - - - - - 17.7 - - 64.0 - - - - - 54.4 109.6 85.4 229.5 68.9 5 Riffle Slope(ft/ft) - - - - - - 0.77 - - 3.60 - - - - - 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.001 5 Pool Length (ft) - - - - - - 12.0 - - 36.0 - - - - - 34.8 50.8 51.3 66.3 12.4 5 Pool Maas Depth(ft) - - - - - - 2.3 - - 2.9 - - - 3.3 - 3.2 4.6 4.5 6.0 0.9 6 Pool Spacing (ft) - - - - - - 97.5 - - 193.0 - - 154.5 - 220.7 112.6 196.3 187.9 323.2 89.4 5 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - - - - 63.72 86.44 92.6 103 20.34 3 Radius of Curvature (ft) - - - - - - 32.0 - 514.0 - - - 61.0 - 102.1 114.7 120.1 121.8 10.9 3 Re, Bankfull Width (ft) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.9 0.4 3 Meander Wavelength (ft) - - - - - - - 300.0 - - - - - - - 466.5 495.0 497.3 521.1 27.4 3 Meander Width Ratio - - - - - - - 4.3 - - - - - 3.2 - 2.0 2.8 3.0 3.3 0.7 3 Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% - - 55%/11%/26%/8%/0% SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - I%/8%/72%/17%/1%/I% d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/di'/di-(mm) - 7.2/20/29/42/69/120/ -/- Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib/ft2 - 0.857 - Max Part Size (mm) Mobilized at Bankfull - 760 - - Stream Power (Transport Capacity) W/m� - - - Additional Reach Parameters Dminage Area (mi) - 3.33 47 Impervious Cover Estimate (%) - - - Rosgen Classification - C4 C4 Cl Bankfull Velocity (fps) - - 3.9 - Bankfull Discharge (cls) - - 143.0 - Valley Length (fi) - 550 1,136 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) - 600 1,161 1,163 Sinuosity - 1.10 1.03 1.03 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.003 0.003 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.003 0.002 Bankful] Floodplain Area (acres) - - Proportion Over Wide (%) - - Entrenchment Class (ER Range) - - Incision Class (BHR Range) - - BEHI Channel Stability or Habitat M etric - - Biological or Other - - Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 60 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information unavailable. Non -Applicable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 61 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 10 Cont'd. Baseline Stream Data Summary Middle South Muddy -Middle SP -use Branch 177 feet Parameter Regional Curse Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach Data Design As-Built/Baseline Dimension&Substrate -Riffle LL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Max Min Mean Med Max SD S. N Bankfull Width (ft) - - 23.4 - - 24.7 - - - 4.8 - - - - - - Floodprone Width (ft) 43.0 - - 52.0 - - - 15.0 - - - - - - - Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) - - 1.3 - - 1.5 - - - 0.3BankfullMaxDepth(ft) 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 0.5Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft'-) !0.5 33.4 - - 34.6 - - - 1.6 - - - - - - - Width/DepthRatio 15.8 - - 18.4 - - - 14.1 - - - - - - - Entrenchment Ratio 1.8 - - 2.2 - Bank Heigrt Ratio 1.4- d50 uran- Profile Riffle Length (ft) - - - - - - 20.0 - - 40.0 - - - - - 15.2 20.0 16.1 28.8 7.6 3 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) - - - - - - 1.500 - - 4.300 - - - - - 0.005 0.007 0.008 0.010 0.002 3 Pool Length (ft) - - - - - - 6.0 - - 42.0 - - - - - 3.7 9.2 8.2 16.5 5.3 4 Pool Max Depth (IT) - - - - - - 2.3 - - 2.3 - - - 0.8 - 1.6 1 2.0 1.8 2.7 0.5 4 Pool Sp wing (it) - - - - - - 51.0 - - 113.0 - - 15.9 - 22.7 43.0 49.1 44.4 60.1 9.5 3 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) - - - - - - - 43.0 - - - - - - - 7.1 7.9 7.8 8.9 0.9 3 Radius of Curvature (ft) - - - - - - 44.0 - - 103.0 - - - - - 8.2 15.0 14.0 23.8 6.9 4 Re: Bankfull Width (ft) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.7 3.1 2.9 5.0 1.4 4 Meander Wavelength (ft) - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - - - - 20.4 26.3 27.1 30.7 4.5 4 Meander Width Ratio- - - - - - - 1.8 - - - - - 2.3 - 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.9 0.2 3 S ubstrate, Bed and Transport Parameters Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% - - 39%/0%/24%/8%/29% SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - 1%/10%/48%/41%/0% 1% d16/ d35/ d50/ d84/ d95/di' / di' (mm) - 5.2/22/45/75/130/190/ -/- Reach Shear Stress (Competency) lb/ft2 - 1.947 - - M as Part Size (mm) Mobilized at Bankfull - 91 - - Stream Power (Transport Capacity) W/m' - - - Additional Reach Parameters Drainage Area (mit) - 2.77 0.03 Impervious Cover Estimate (%) - - - Rosgen Classification - B4 B5 B5 Bankfull Velocity (fps) - - 6.1 - Bankroll Discharge lets) - - 210.0 - Valley Length (ft) - 380 187 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) - 400 177 177 Sinuosity - 1.1 1.06 1.01 Water Smfwe Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.031 0.029 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.031 0.029 Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) - - Proportion Over Wide (%) - - Entrenchment Class (ER Range) - - Incision Class (BHR Range) - - BEET Channel Stability or Habitat Metric - - Biological or Other - - - Information unavailable. Non -Applicable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 61 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information unavailable. Non -Applicable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 62 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 10 Cont'd. Baseline Stream Data Summary Middle South Mudd - Lower S rouse Branch 434 fret Parameter Regional Curse Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach Data Design As-Built/Baseline Dimension&Substrate - Riffle LL n Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Max Min Mean Med Max SD N Bankfull Width (ft) - 23.4 - - 24.7 - - - 5.2 - 5.1 5.3 5.3 5.4 0.2 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 43.0 - - 52.0 - - - 15.0 - 14.0 19.0 19.0 24.0 3.5 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) - 1.3 - - 1.5 - - - 0.4 - 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 0.6 - 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft'-) fl2.2- 33.4 - - 34.6 - - - 1.9 - 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.0 2 Width/Depth Ratio 15.8 - - 18.4 - - - 14.3 - 15.1 15.9 15.9 16.7 1.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 2.9 - 2.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 1.3 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.4 - - 1.6 - - - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 d50 (mm) - Profile Riffle Length (ft) - - - - - - 20.0 - - 40.0 - - - - - 6.0 16.2 14.2 32.2 9.3 9 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) - - - - - - 1.5 - - 4.3 - - - - - 0.003 0.011 0.011 0.025 0.007 9 Pool Length (ft) - - - - - - 6.0 - - 42.0 - - - - - 3.4 8.7 9.0 12.1 3.1 11 Pool Max Depth (IT) - - - - - - 2.3 - - 2.3 - - - 0.8 - 1.3 1.8 1.8 2.3 1 0.3 11 Pool Sp wing (it) - - - - - - 51.0 - - 113.0 - - 18.1 - 25.8 19.0 32.9 32.2 55.1 10.5 10 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) - - - - - - - 43.0 - - - - - - - 10.1 10.4 10.4 10.6 0.3 3 Radius of Curvature (ft) - - - - - - 44.0 - - 103.0 - - - - - 8.8 10.6 10.6 12.5 1.9 4 Re: Bankfull Width (ft) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.4 0.4 4 Meander Wavelengh (ft) - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - - - - 33.2 38.1 38.5 42.9 3.5 5 Meander Width Ratio - - - - - - - 1.8 - - - - - 3.1 - 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 3 S ubstrate, Bed and Transport Parameters Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% - - 41%/6%/27%/9%/17% SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - 1%/10%/48%/41%/0% 1% d16/ d35/ d50/ d84/ d95/di' / di' (mm) - 5.2/22/45/75/130/190/ -/- Reach Shear Stress (Competency) lb/ft2 - 1.947 - - M as Part Size (mm) Mobilized at Bankfull - 91 - - Stream Power (Transport Capacity) W/m' - - - Additional Reach Parameters Drainage Area (mit) - 2.77 0.04 Impervious Cover Estimate (%) - - - Rosgen Classification - B4 B5 B5 Bankfull Velocity (fps) - - 6.1 - Bankfull Discharge lets) - - 210.0 - Valley Length (ft) - 380.0 422 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) - 400.0 453 453 Sinuosity - 1.1 1.07 1.07 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.014 0.017 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.014 0.017 Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) - - Proportion Over Wide (%) - - Entrenchment Class (ER Range) - - Incision Class (BHR Range) - - BEET Channel Stability or Habitat Metric - - Biological or Other - - - Information unavailable. Non -Applicable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 62 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 63 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 10 Cont'd. Baseline Stream Data Summary Middle South Mudd - Upper Iva Branch 326 feet Parameter Regional Carve Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach Data Design As-Built/Baseline Dimension&Substrate - Riffle LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Max Min Mean Med Max SD N Bankfull Width (ft) - 4.8 - - - - - - - 23.4 - - 24.7 - - - 4.8 - 4.6 4.9 4.9 5.3 0.5 2 Floodprone Width (ft) - - - - - - 43.0 - - 52 - - - 15.0 - 14.0 15.5 15.5 17.0 2.1 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) - 0.5 - - - - - - - 1.3 - - 1.5 - - - 0.3 - 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 2 Bankfull Max Depth (it) - - - - - - 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 1.8 - - - - - - 33.4 - - 34.6 - - - 1.6 - 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.1 0.1 2 Width/Depth Ratio - - - - - - 15.8 - - 18.4 - - - 14.1 - 11.0 12.2 12.2 13.3 1.6 2 Entrenchment Ratio - - - - - - 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 3.2 - 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 0.1 2 Bank Heigh[ Ratio - - - - - - 1.4 - - 1.6 - - - 1.0 - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 d50 - Profile Riffle Length (ft) - - - - - - 20.0 - - 40.0 - - - - - 26.7 48.8 40.1 90.6 24.6 5 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) - - - - - - 1.50 - - 4.30 - - - - - 0.001 0.004 0.002 0.009 0.003 5 Pool Length (it) - - - - - - 6.0 - - 42.0 - - - - - 2.1 2.8 2.7 3.4 0.6 4 Pool M -Depth (ft) - - - - - - 2.3 - - 2.3 - - - 0.8 - 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.3 4 Pool Spacing (ft) - - - - - - 51.0 - - 113.0 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) - - - - - - - 43.0 - - - - - - - 11.9 14.8 14.8 17.6 4.0 2 Radius of Curvature (ft) - - - - - - 44.0 - - 103.0 - - - - - 7.6 9.4 8.4 13.2 2.6 4 Re Bankfull Width (ft) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.5 1.9 1.7 2.7 0.5 4 Meander Wavelength (ft) - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - - - - 43.2 48.1 47.7 53.8 5.0 4 M Bander Width Ratio - - - - - - - 1.8 - - - - - 2.5 - 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.5 0.8 2 Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% - - 80%/0%/4%/2%/14% SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - 1%/10%/48%/41%/0%/1% dl / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / di° / dia' (mm) - 5.2 / 22 / 45 / 75 / 130 / 190 - Reach Shear Stress (Competency) lb/ft2 - 1.947 - Max Part Size (mm) Mobilized at Bankfull - 91 - - Stream Power (Transport Capacity) W/m2 - - - Additional Reach Parameters Drainage Area (mi') - 2.77 0.03 Impervious Cover Estimate (%) - - - Rosgen Classification - B4 B5 B5 Bankfull Velocity (fps) - - 6.1 - Bankfull Discharge (cfs) - - 210.0 - Valley Length (ft) - 380 424 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) - 400 326 326 Sinuosity - 1.10 1.09 1.10 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.058 0.056 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.058 0.056 Bankfud Floodp Iain Area (acres) - - Proportion Ova Wide (%) - - En[renchment Class (ER Range) - - Incision Class (BHR Range) - - BEHI Channel Stability or Habitat Metric - - Biological or Otha - - Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 63 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 64 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 10 Cont'd. Baseline Stream Data Summary Middle South Mudd - Lower Iva Branch 136 feet Parameter Regional Curve Pre-F�sling Condition Reference Reach Data Design As -Built/ Baseline Dimension&Substrate - Riffle LL UL Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Med Max SD N Min Mean Max Min Mean Med Max SD N Bankfull Width (ft) - 5.6 - - - - - 23.4 - - 24.7 - - - 5.5Floodprone Width (ft) - - - - - 43.0 - - 52 - - - 15.0Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) - 0.5 $Eq.Min - - - - - 1.3 - - 1.5 - - - 0.4BankfullMazDepth(ft) - - - - - 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 0.6Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)2.4 - - - - - 33.4 - - 34.6 - - - 2.1Width/DepthRatio - - - - - 15.8 - - 18.4 - - - 14.4 - - - - - - - Entrenchment Ratio - - - - - - 1.8 - - 2.2 - - - 2.7 - - - - - - - Bank Height Ratio - - - - - - 1.4 - - 1.6 - - - 1.0 - - - - - - - ,150 (mm) - - - - - - - 45.0 - - - - Profile Riffle Length (ft) - - - - - - 20.0 - - 40.0 - - - - - 9.4 11.8 11.8 14.3 3.5 2 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) - - - - - - 1.50 - - 4.30 - - - - - 0.010 0.021 0.021 0.033 0.016 2 Pool Length (ft) - - - - - - 6.0 - - 42.0 - - - - - 5.8 9.4 9.4 12.9 3.3 4 Pool Max Depth (it) - - - - - - 2.3 - - 2.3 - - - 0.9 - 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1 0.1 4 Pool Spacing (ft) - - - - - - 51.0 - - 113.0 - - 19.3 - 27.5 20.8 25.9 20.8 36.1 8.9 3 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) - - - - - - - 43.0 - - - - 8.9 9.6 9.6 10.3 1.0 2 Radius of Curvature (ft) - - - - - - 44.0 - - 103.0 - - 12.2 12.5 12.5 12.8 0.4 2 Re: Bankfull Width (ft) - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 0.1 2 Meander Wavelength (ft) - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - 23.0 27.4 25.5 33.6 5.6 3 Meander Width Ratio - - - - - - - 1.8 - - - - - 2.2 - 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.9 0.2 2 Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% - - 24%/17%/38%/20%/0% SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% - 1%/10%/48%/41%/0%/1% d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/dip /0(nam) - 5.2/22/45/75/130/190/ -/- Reach Shear Stress (Competency) lb/ftr - 1.947 - - MaxPart Size (mm) Mobilized at Bankfull - 91 - - Stream Power (Transport Capacity) W/m2 - - - Additional Reach Parameters Drainage Area (mit) - 2.77 0.046 Impervious Cover Estimate (%) - - - Rosgm Classification - B4 B5 B5 Bankfull Velocity (fps) - - 6.1 - Bankfull Discharge (cfs) - - 210.0 - Valley Length (ft) - 380.0 151 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) - 400.0 156 156 Sinuosity - 1.10 1.02 1.03 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.026 0.032 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) - - 0.026 0.035 Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) - - Proportion Over Wide (%) - - Entrenchment Class (ER Range) - - Incision Class (BHR Range) - - BEHI Channel Stability or Habitat Metric - - Biological or Other - - Information unavailable. Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 64 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 N/A - Item does not apply. * Beginning in MY3 (2018), the bankfull elevation and channel cross-section dimensions have been calculated using a fixed Abkf as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter provided by NCIRT and NCDM S (9/2018) Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 65 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 11a. Baseline Morphology & Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site Cross -Section 1 (Riffle) Lower Sprouse Branch Cross -Section 2 (Riffle) Lower Sprouse Branch Cross -Section 3 (Pool) Lower Sprouse Branch Cross -Section 4 (Riffle) South Muddy Creek Cross -Section 5 (Riffle) South Muddy Creek Dimension Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Record Elevation (datum) Used 1,278.1 1,278.1 1,278.1 1,278.2 1,275.8 1,275.8 1,275.8 1,276.0 1,273.7 1,273.7 1,273.7 1,273.8 1,269.4 1,269.4 1,269.4 1,269.5 1,267.9 1,267.9 1,267.9 1,268.1 Low Bank Height Elevation datum Used - - - 1,278.1 - - - 1,275.9 - - - 1,273.7 - - - 1,269.4 - - - 1,268.4 Bankftill Width (ft) 5.4 6.1 6.3 5.5 5.1 5.3 5.4 6.3 6.1 6.8 6.8 8.0 31.6 32.6 31.8 30.2 30.7 30.6 31.8 29.6 Floodprone Width (ft) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 101.0 101.0 101.0 101.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.7 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 2.3 2.6 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.3 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftz 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.7 5.9 6.3 6.3 5.9 50.5 54.1 52.8 50.5 59.0 57.9 61.3 59.0 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 16.7 25.4 25.8 17.4 15.1 21.5 23.7 23.3 6.3 7.5 7.3 10.9 19.8 19.7 19.1 18.0 15.9 16.2 16.4 14.9 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.5 4.5 4.3 4.3 3.7 5.3 4.7 4.7 4.0 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.2 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.4 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 Low Top of Bank Height Depth (ft) 0.4 0.6 1.2 2.7 3.6 d50 (mm) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.0 27.0 27.0 N/A 18.0 15.0 16.0 Cross -Section 6 (Pool) South Muddy Creek Cross -Section 7 (Riffle) South Muddy Creek Cross -Section 8 (Pool) Upper Iva Branch Cross -Section 9 (Riffle) Upper Iva Branch Cross -Section 10 (Riffle) Upper Iva Branch Dimension Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Record Elevation (datum) Used 1,268.0 1,268.0 1,268.0 1,268.1 1,267.3 1,267.3 1,267.3 1,267.5 1,286.1 1,286.1 1,286.1 1,286.2 1,285.3 1,285.3 1,285.3 1,285.2 1,277.1 1,277.1 1,277.1 1,277.2 Low Bank Height Elevation (datum) Used - - - 1,268.5 - - - 1,267.4 - - - 1,286.0 - - - 1,285.2 - - - 1,277.2 Bankfull Width (ft) 35.3 35.9 36.7 31.7 31.0 31.2 34.0 29.9 5.5 5.8 5.6 7.2 4.6 4.2 4.1 6.0 5.3 5.6 5.8 4.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 166.0 166.0 166.0 166.0 88.0 88.0 88.0 88.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.3 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.4 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft) 85.7 86.3 89.2 85.7 64.9 67.7 67.9 64.3 5.7 5.6 5.6 5.7 1.9 1.8 2.1 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.5 2.1 Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 14.5 14.9 15.1 11.7 14.8 14.4 17.0 13.9 5.4 6.1 5.5 9.0 11.0 9.8 8.0 18.7 13.3 16.7 13.3 8.4 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1 4.7 4.6 4.5 5.2 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.9 3.1 2.9 3.1 2.4 3.0 3.3 3.5 2.3 3.2 3.0 3.0 4.0 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio* 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0=1.93 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Low Top of Bank Height Depth (ft) - - - 4.7 -3.3 1.3 - 0.7 - 0.8 d50 (mm) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.0 N/A N/A N/A I N/A N/A I N/A N/A I N/A N/A I N/A N/A I N/A N/A - Item does not apply. * Beginning in MY3 (2018), the bankfull elevation and channel cross-section dimensions have been calculated using a fixed Abkf as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter provided by NCIRT and NCDM S (9/2018) Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 65 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri=Riffle /Ru=Run/P=Pool/G= Glide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 66 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 11b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary Middle South Mudd Stream Restoration Site -South uddy Creek 1,088 feet Parameter Baseline MY -1 MY -2 MY -3 MY -4 MY -5 Dimension & Substrate - Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Bankfull Width (ft) 30.7 31.1 31.0 31.6 0.5 3 30.6 31.5 31.2 32.6 1.0 3 31.8 32.5 31.8 34.0 1.3 3 29.6 29.9 29.9 30.2 0.3 3 Floodprone Width (ft) 65.0 84.7 88.0 101.0 18.2 3 65.0 84.7 88.0 101.0 18.2 3 65.0 84.7 88.0 101.0 18.2 3 65.0 84.7 88.0 101.0 18.2 3 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.6 1.9 1.9 2.1 0.3 3 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.2 0.3 3 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.0 0.2 3 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 0.2 3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.9 0.4 3 2.6 2.8 2.8 3.0 0.2 3 2.6 2.9 3.0 3.1 0.3 3 2.8 3.2 3.3 3.4 0.3 3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ftz) 50.5 1 58.1 59.0 64.9 7.2 3 54.1 59.9 57.9 1 67.7 1 7.0 3 52.8 1 60.7 1 61.3 1 67.9 7.5 1 3 50.5 57.9 1 59.0 64.3 6.9 1 3 Width/Depth Ratio 14.8#2.7 15.9 19.8 2.6 3 14.4 16.7 16.2 19.7 2.7 3 16.4 17.5 17.0 19.1 1.4 3 13.9 15.6 14.9 18.0 2.2 3 Entrenchment Ratio 2.1 2.8 3.3 0.6 3 2.0 2.7 2.8 3.3 0.7 3 2.0 2.6 2.6 3.2 0.6 3 2.2 2.8 2.9 3.4 0.6 3Bank Hei t Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.1 3 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 54.4 109.6 85.4 229.5 68.9 5 64.1 111.4 90.3 203.5 56.0 5 58.0 108.2 99.1 202.2 57.7 5 70.2 102.6 77.4 206.9 58.7 5 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.001 5 0.001 0.005 0.004 0.009 0.003 5 0.001 0.004 0.003 0.008 0.003 5 0.000 0.004 0.001 13 0.005 5 Pool Length (ft) 34.8 50.8 51.3 66.3 12.4 5 17.8 56.4 48.5 96.8 30.1 5 23.4 56.0 56.9 95.7 26.5 5 26.0 55.6 54.3 .7 �6. 24.8 5 Pool Max Depth (ft) 3.2 4.6 4.5 6.0 0.9 6 3.4 4.1 3.8 5.4 0.8 5 3.7 4.6 4.4 5.8 0.8 5 3.0 4.7 4.6 2 Pool Spacing (11) 112.6 196.3 187.9 323.2 89.4 5 177.1 247.4 239.1 334.2 68.6 4 179.1 249.1 230.1 357.2 81.2 4 139.1 248.7 229.5 396.8 112.5 4 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) 63.7 86.4 92.6 103.0 20.34 3 Radius of Curvature (ft) 102.1 114.7 120.1 121.8 10.94 3 Rc: Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 3.28 3.7 3.86 3.92 0.35 3 Meander Wavelength (ft) 466.5 495.0 497.3 521.1 27.38 3 Meander Width Ratio 2.0 2.8 3.0 3.3 0.65 3 Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification C4 C4 C4 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) 1,163 1,158 1,174 1,151 Sinuosity (ft) 1.03 1.03 1.05 1.03 Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) 0.003 0.0033 0.0033 0.0027 Bankf ill Slope (ft/ft) 0.002 0.0029 0.0037 0.0031 Ri% / Ru-/. / P% / G% / S% 1 55% 1 11% 1 26% 1 8% 1 0% 56% 6% 28% 1 9% 0% 54% 10% 28% 1 8% 0% 53% 11% 29% 1 8% 0% - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri=Riffle /Ru=Run/P=Pool/G= Glide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 66 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 67 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table I I b Cont'd. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site - Middle Sprouse Branch 177 feet Parameter Baseline MY -1 MY -2 MY -3 MY -4 MY -5 Dimension & Substrate - Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Bankf ill Width (ft) Floodprone Width (ft) Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) Bankfull Max Depth (ft) Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft 2) Width/Depth Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Bank Height Ratio -L-4 - Profile Riffle Length (ft) 15.2 20.0 16.1 28.8 7.6 3 18.1 27.3 23.6 40.1 11.5 3 16.9 24.0 19.6 35.5 10.0 3 16.3 23.9 18.4 37.0 11.4 3 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.005 0.007 0.008 0.010 0.002 3 0.003 0.008 0.009 0.013 0.005 3 0.002 0.010 0.011 0.017 0.008 3 0.007 0.010 0.009 0.013 0.003 3 Pool Length (ft) 3.7 9.2 8.2 16.5 5.3 4 6.5 9.4 9.9 11.5 2.2 4 5.7 8.1 7.4 11.9 2.7 4 6.0 8.5 8.2 11.7 2.4 4 Pool Maas Depth (ft) 1.6 2.0 1.8 2.7 0.5 4 1.1 1.8 1.8 2.4 0.6 4 1.3 1.8 1.7 2.4 0.5 4 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.8 0.2 4 Pool Spacing (ft) 43.0 49.1 44.4 60.1 9.5 3 52.3 58.9 52.6 71.7 11.1 3 42.4 49.3 47.2 58.3 8.2 3 42.2 48.9 47.8 56.5 7.2 3 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) 7.1 7.9 7.8 8.9 0.9 3 Radius of Curvature (ft) 8.2 15.0 14.0 23.8 6.9 4 Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 1.7 3.1 2.9 5.0 1.4 4 Meander Wavelength (ft) 20.4 26.3 27.1 30.7 4.5 4 Meander Width Ratio 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.9 0.2 3 Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification 135 B5 B5 135 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) 177 159 160 158 Sinuosity (ft) 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.02 Water Surface Sloe Channel ft/ft 0.029 0.028 0.029 0.030 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.029 0.025 0.026 0.023 Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S% 39% 1 0% 1 24% 1 8% 1 29% 44% 1 0% 20% 1 7% 1 28% 1 1 46% 1 0% 1 21% 1 7% 1 27% 1 1 45% 1 0% 21% 1 5% 28% - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 67 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Ron /P= Pool /G= Glide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 68 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table I lb Cont'd. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary Middle South uddy Stream Restoration Site - Lower S rouse Branch 434 feet Parameter Baseline MY -1 MY -2 MY -3 MY -4 MY -5 Dimension & Substrate -Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Bankfull Width (ft) 5.1 5.3 5.3 5.4 0.2 2 5.3 5.7 5.7 6.1 0.6 2 5.4 5.8 5.8 6.3 0.6 2 5.5 5.9 5.9 6.3 0.5 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 14.0 19.0 19.0 24.0 3.5 2 14.0 18.5 18.5 23.0 6.4 2 14.0 18.5 18.5 23.0 6.4 2 14.0 18.5 18.5 23.0 6.4 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 2 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 2 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft2) 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.0 2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.1 2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.2 2 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.0 2 Width/Depth Ratio 15.1 15.9 15.9 16.7 1.1 2 21.5 23.4 23.4 25.4 2.8 2 23.7 24.8 24.8 25.8 1.5 2 17.4 20.3 20.3 23.3 4.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 2.6 3.6 3.6 4.5 1.3 2 2.3 3.3 3.3 4.3 1.4 2 2.2 3.2 3.2 4.3 1.4 2 2.5 3.1 3.1 3.7 0.8 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.0 2 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 6.0 16.2 14.2 32.2 9.3 9 7.6 19.1 14.2 39.7 11.0 9 5.3 15.1 10.6 30.2 9.2 9 6.4 16.2 12.2 32.5 10.6 6 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.003 0.011 0.011 0.025 0.007 9 0.004 0.009 0.009 0.016 0.004 9 0.004 0.012 0.010 0.025 0.007 9 0.007 0.014 0.011 0.030 0.008 6 Pool Length (ft) 3.4 8.7 9.0 12.1 3.1 11 5.2 10.4 10.4 15.7 3.6 11 3.8 9.3 9.1 15.5 4.2 11 5.4 9.4 9.1 17.8 3.6 11 Pool Max Depth ft 1.3 1.8 1.8 2.3 0.3 11 1.0 1.8 1.9 2.3 0.4 11 1.4 1.7 1.7 2.1 0.3 l I 1.2 1.6 1.6 2.0 0.3 11 Pool Spacing (ft) 19.0 32.9 32.2 55.1 10.5 10 26.3 39.2 38.6 62.5 10.8 10 17.3 32.9 33.0 54.6 10.1 10 19.4 32.8 34.3 55.2 10.9 10 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) 10.1 10.4 10.4 10.6 0.3 3 Radius of Curvature ft 8.8 10.6 10.6 12.5 1.9 4 Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.4 0.4 4 Meander Wavelength (ft) 33.2 38.1 38.5 42.9 3.5 5 Meander Width Ratio 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 3 Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification 135 B5 B5 135 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) 453 465 463 466 Sinuosity (ft) 1.07 1.04 1.04 1.04 Water Surface Sloe Channel ft/ft 0.017 0.014 0.017 0.018 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.017 0.016 0.020 0.020 Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S% 41% 1 6% 1 27% 1 9% 1 17% 41 % 6% 27% 1 9% 16% 1 390/ 6% 29% 10% 16% - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Ron /P= Pool /G= Glide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 68 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 69 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table I I b Cont'd. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary Middle South Mudd Stream Restoration Site -Upper Iva Branch 326 feet Parameter Baseline MY -1 1 MY -2 MY -3 MY -4 MY -5 Dimension & Substrate - Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Bankfill Width (ft) 4.6 4.9 4.9 5.3 0.5 2 4.2 4.9 4.9 5.6 1.0 2 4.1 4.9 4.9 5.8 1.2 2 4.2 5.1 5.1 6.0 1.2 2 Floodprone Width (ft) 14.0 15.5 15.5 17.0 2.1 2 14.0 15.5 15.5 17.0 2.1 2 14.0 15.5 15.5 17.0 2.1 2 14.0 15.5 15.5 17.0 2.1 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.1 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 2 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.1 2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.1 2 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft 2) 1.9 2.0 1 2.0 1 2.1 1 0.1 1 2 1 1.8 1 1.9 1 1.9 1 1.9 1 0.0 1 2 1 2.1 1 2.3 1 2.3 2.5 1 0.3 2 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.1 0.2 1 2 Width/Depth Ratio 11.0 12.2 12.2 13.3 1.6 2 9.8 13.2 13.2 16.7 4.9 2 8.0 10.6 10.6 13.3 3.7 1 2 8.4 1 13.6 1 13.6 18.7 7.3 2 Entrenchment Ratio 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 0.1 2 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.3 0.2 2 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.5 0.4 2 2.3 3.2 3.2 4.0 1.2 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.1 2 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 26.7 48.8 40.1 90.6 24.6 5 21.8 46.1 37.7 88.5 25.5 5 23.6 46.3 35.6 87.7 25.1 5 26.6 46.6 32.3 83.9 24.6 5 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.001 0.004 0.002 0.009 0.003 5 0.005 0.007 0.007 0.011 0.002 5 0.006 0.008 0.007 0.011 0.002 5 0.011 0.022 0.023 0.033 0.010 5 Pool Length (ft) 2.1 2.8 2.7 3.4 0.6 4 3.2 4.5 4.1 6.7 1.7 4 1.6 4.2 4.2 6.9 2.3 4 6.2 6.7 6.3 7.9 0.8 4 Pool Maas Depth (ft) 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.3 4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.2 4 0.3 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.3 4 0.4 0.6 0.4 1.0 0.4 3 Pool Spacing (ft) 47.1 55.5 59.0 60.4 7.3 3 49.6 54.9 54.9 60.1 5.3 3 48.2 54.8 53.9 62.3 7.1 3 41.3 55.5 43.5 81.7 22.7 3 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) 11.9 14.8 14.8 17.6 4.0 2 Radius of Curvature (ft) 7.6 9.4 8.4 13.2 2.6 4 Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 1.5 1.9 1.7 2.7 0.5 4 Meander Wavelength (ft) 43.2 48.1 47.7 53.8 5.0 4 Meander Width Ratio 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.5 0.8 2 Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification 135 B5 B5 135 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) 326 330 328 332 Sinuosity (ft) 1.10 1.11 1.11 1.12 Water Surface Sloe Channel ft/ft 0.056 - - 0.0532 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.056 0.0598 0.0595 0.0670 Ri% / Ru -/o / P% / G% / S% 80% 1 0% 1 4% 1 2% 14% 75% 0% 6% 1 4% 15% 1 1 75% 0% 5% 1 4% 15% 1 1 77% 1 0% 9% 1 3% 11% - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 69 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 70 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table I I b Cont'd. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Site - Lower Iva Branch 136 feet Parameter Baseline MY -1 MY -2 MY -3 MY -4 MY -5 Dimension & Substrate - Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Bankf ill Width (ft) Floodprone Width (ft) Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) Bankfull Max Depth (ft) Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft 2) Width/Depth Ratio - Entrenchment Ratio - Bank Height Ratio - - - Profile Riffle Length (ft) 9.4 11.8 11.8 14.3 3.5 2 10.4 16.5 16.5 22.7 8.7 2 11.6 17.2 17.2 22.8 7.9 2 6.7 12.7 12.7 18.7 8.5 2 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.010 0.021 0.021 0.033 0.016 2 0.005 0.015 0.015 0.026 0.015 2 0.009 0.015 0.015 0.020 0.007 2 0.009 0.022 0.022 0.035 0.019 2 Pool Length (ft) 5.8 9.4 9.4 12.9 3.3 4 2.9 5.3 5.0 8.3 2.7 4 3.4 5.8 4.9 10.0 3.1 4 3.5 7.1 7.5 9.8 2.9 4 Pool Maas Depth (ft) 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.1 4 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.3 4 0.5 1.1 1.0 1.7 0.5 4 0.3 0.9 0.9 1.5 0.5 4 Pool Spacing (ft), 20.8 25.9 20.8 36.1 8.9 3 18.0 23.4 24.4 27.8 5.0 3 18.9 23.8 25.0 27.6 4.5 3 21.3 25.2 25.5 28.8 3.8 3 Pattern Channel Belt Width (ft) 8.9 9.6 9.6 10.3 1.0 2 Radius of Curvature (ft) 12.2 12.5 12.5 12.8 0.4 2 Re: Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3 0.1 2 Meander Wavelength (ft) 23.0 27.4 25.5 33.6 5.6 3 Meander Width Ratio 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.9 0.2 2 Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification 135 B5 B5 135 Channel Thalweg Length (ft) 156 154 159 158 Sinuosity (ft) 1.03 1.03 1.07 1.06 Water Surface Sloe Channel ft/ft 0.032 - - 0.0503 Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.035 0.0257 0.0326 0.0336 Ri% /Ru% /P% /G% /S% 24% 1 17% 1 38% 1 20% 0% 43% 1 17% 28% 1 14% 1 0% 1 1 45% 14% 30% 1 11% 0% 1 1 34% 1 13% 38% 1 16% 0% - Information Unavailable N/A - Information does not apply. Ri= Riffle /Ru= Run /P= Pool /G= aide /S=Step Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 70 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 1 Station: 203+60 Reach Name: Lower Sprouse Branch XS Type: Riffle Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 71 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1285 1284 1283 1282 1281 c 1280 1279 ----------- -------------1277 --- ------------------------------------------------------ A 1278 ---------------------------- 1277 1276 1275 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 MYO MYl 0+20 0+25 Station (feet) MY2 - MY3 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 5.4 6.1 6.3 5.5 Floodprone Width (ft) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.8 Width/Depth Ratio 16.7 25.4 25.8 17.4 Entrenchment Ratio 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.5 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - 0.4 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 71 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 2 Station: 204+72 Reach Name: Lower Sprouse Branch XS Type: Riffle Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 72 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1282 1281 1280 1279 1278 c 1277 1276 A 1275 1274 1273 1272 0+00 0+05 0+10 MYO 0+15 MYl 0+20 Station (feet) MY2 - 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 MY3 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 5.1 5.3 5.4 6.3 Floodprone Width (ft) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.7 Width/Depth Ratio 15.1 21.5 23.7 23.3 Entrenchment Ratio 4.5 4.3 4.3 3.7 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - 0.6 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 72 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 3 Station: 205+79 Reach Name: Lower Sprouse Branch XS Type: Pool Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 73 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1280 1279 1278 1277 1276 c 1275 1274 -------------------------- -------- ------------ --- ----- ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- 1273 1273 1272 1271 1270 0+00 0+05 0+10 MYO 0+15 MY 0+20 Station (feet) MY2 - 0+25 0+30 0+35 0+40 MY3 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 6.1 6.8 6.8 8.0 Floodprone Width (ft) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.7 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 5.9 6.3 6.3 5.9 Width/Depth Ratio 6.3 7.5 7.3 10.9 Entrenchment Ratio 5.3 4.7 4.7 4.0 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - 1.2 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 73 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 4 Station: 102+79 Reach Name: South Muddy Creek XS Type: Riffle Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 74 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1278 1276 1274 v ''"., 1272 c 1270 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------- ----------- ----- 1268 A 1266 1264 1262 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 MYO 0+35 MYl 0+40 0+45 0+50 Station (feet) MY2 - 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85 0+90 MY3 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 31.6 32.6 31.8 30.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.3 2.6 2.6 2.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 50.5 54.1 52.8 50.5 Width/Depth Ratio 19.8 19.7 19.1 18.0 Entrenchment Ratio 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.2 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) 2.7 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 74 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 5 Station: 107+45 Reach Name: South Muddy Creek XS Type: Riffle Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 75 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1276 1274 i 1272 1270 c 1268 1266 b 1264 1262 1260 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 MYO 0+35 0+40 MYl 0+45 0+50 Station (feet) MY2 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85 0+90 0+95 MY3 - - -BKF CHANNEL DIMINSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 30.7 30.6 31.8 29.6 Floodprone Width (ft) 101.0 101.0 101.0 101.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 59.0 57.9 61.3 59.0 Width/Depth Ratio 15.9 16.2 16.4 14.9 - Entrenchment Ratio 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.4 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - - - 3.6 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 75 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 6 Station: 108+57 Reach Name: South Muddy Creek XS Type: Pool Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 76 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1274 1272 1270 w 1268 C O 1266 A 1264 1262 1260 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 MYO 0+35 0+40 MYl 0+45 0+50 Station (feet) MY2 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85 0+90 0+95 - MY3 - - -BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 35.3 35.9 36.7 31.7 Floodprone Width (ft) 166.0 166.0 166.0 166.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.7 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 85.7 86.3 89.2 85.7 Width/Depth Ratio 14.5 14.9 15.1 11.7 Entrenchment Ratio 4.7 4.6 4.5 5.2 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) 4.7 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 76 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 7 Reach Name: South Muddy Creek XS Type: Riffle Station: 109+57 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 77 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1274 1272 a 1270 w 1268 O---- O ---- -------------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- --- -- ---- -------------- ---- 1266 A 1264 1262 1260 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 0+20 0+25 0+30 MYO 0+35 0+40 0+45 0+50 Station (feet) MYl MY2 0+55 0+60 0+65 0+70 0+75 0+80 0+85 0+90 0+95 MY3 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 31.0 31.2 34.0 29.9 Floodprone Width (ft) 88.0 88.0 88.0 88.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.1 2.2 2.0 2.2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.4 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 64.9 67.7 67.9 64.7 Width/Depth Ratio 14.8 14.4 17.0 13.8 - Entrenchment Ratio 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.9 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - - - 3.3 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 77 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 8 Station: 302+13 Reach Name: Upper Iva Branch XS Type: Pool Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 78 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1292 1291 1290 1289 �"•' 1288 o° 1287 -------------- -------------- ---------- - 1286 A 1285 1284 1283 1282 0+00 0+05 0+10 MYO -MY1 0+15 Station (feet) -MY2 0+20 - MY3 0+25 0+30 0+35 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 5.5 5.8 5.6 7.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.6 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 5.7 5.6 5.6 5.7 Width/Depth Ratio 5.4 6.1 5.5 9.0 Entrenchment Ratio 3.1 2.9 3.1 2.4 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.8 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) 1.3 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 78 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy XS Number: 9 Station: 302+82 Reach Name: Upper Iva Branch XS Type: Riffle Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 79 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1291 1290 1289 1288 1287 o° 1286 ----------------------- --------- 1285 A 1284 1283 1282 1281 0+00 0+05 0+10 MYO -MY1 0+15 Station (feet) -MY2 0+20 - MY3 0+25 0+30 0+35 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY'2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 4.6 4.2 4.1 6.0 Floodprone Width (ft) 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.3 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.7 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 1.9 1.8 2.1 1 1.9 Width/Depth Ratio 11.0 9.8 8.0 18.7 Entrenchment Ratio 3.0 3.3 3.5 2.3 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - - - 0.7 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 79 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Project Name: Middle South Muddy Reach Name: Upper Iva Branch XS Number: 10 XS Type: Riffle Station: 304+20 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 80 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1283 1282 1281 1280 1279 o° 1278 ----------- -----------1276 - 1277 ------------------------- 1276 1275 1274 1273 0+00 0+05 0+10 0+15 MYO -MY1 0+20 0+25 Station (feet) -MY2 - MY3 0+30 0+35 0+40 0+45 ----- BKF CHANNEL DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Bankful Width (ft) 5.3 5.6 5.8 4.2 Floodprone Width (ft) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft) 2.1 1.9 2.5 2.1 Width/Depth Ratio 13.3 16.7 13.3 8.4 Entrenchment Ratio 3.2 3.0 3.0 4.0 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Low Top of Bank Depth (ft) - - - 0.8 Left Descending Bank Right Descending Bank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 80 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1275 1274 1273 1272 1271 1270 1269 1268 1267 1266 4 c 1265 1264 W 1263 1262 1261 1260 1259 1258 1257 1256 1255 Middle South Muddy South Muddy Creek Longitudinal Profile Staioning 101+00 to 112+75.16 XS4-R • Easement Break 12 XSS-R A XS6-P XS7-R -------------- ---------------- - -------------- ----------------------- V V Vk/ lOIO 2 019 xOO IO C xOO s xOO x1919 lea IO )xC YOO *O 190 Station (feet) II D xDO xOO IIIx I II1 xDO xOO TW - MYO 5/18/2016 TW - MY1 11/02/2016 TW - MY2 6/29/2017 - TW - MY3 10/24/2018 ♦ Structure - MYO • BKF - - - - WS Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 81 NCDMS Project No. 93875 Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Equinox Annual Monitoring Report t�4 1290 1289 1285 1287 1286 1285 1294 1253 1252 1281 1280 1279 1 Z78 1277 1276 1275 1274 1273 1272 1271 1270 1269 126E 1267 1266 1265 1264 1263 1262 1261 1260 A -fiddle South Tvhid(lv SI) rouse EFmich L ongftn(hnal Profile Sk 4oning, "A1+,2.34 to 208+01.81 30 -lap 11P Station (feet) TW-MYO-TW-MYl TW -Mn +TWMY3 o Strwture -MYO a BI{F ---- WS Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 82 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 egm AlIddle NproUSe bran=e + 1-R XS2-R 4 Pr 11 Slope —__�— Begin Lower Spi ouse Branch - - - - ■ Cr 30 -lap 11P Station (feet) TW-MYO-TW-MYl TW -Mn +TWMY3 o Strwture -MYO a BI{F ---- WS Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 82 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 1295 1294 1293 1292 1291 1290 1289 1288 1287 1286 1285 1284 1283 1282 1281 1280 1279 1278 1277 1276 1275 1274 1273 1272 1271 1270 1269 1268 1267 1266 1265 1264 1263 1262 1261 1260 Middle South Muddy Iva Branch Longitudinal Profile Staioning 300+79.55 to 307+17.78 Begin Upper Iva Branch . 302+14 X59 -R 7% - Begin Lower Iva Branch .10 X510 -R X6.19 X00 x00 100 x00 x00 X00 x00 Station (feet) TW - MYO 5/18/2016 TW - MY1 11/03/2016 TW - MY2 7/12/2017 � TW - MY3 10/24/2018 • Structure - MYO • BKF - - - - WS Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 83 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 84 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Cross Section 4 - Riffle Monitoring Year - 2018; MY3 Bed Surface Material Particle Size Class (mm) Number % Individual Cumulative 0-0.062 0 0.0% 0% 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.0% 0% 0.125-0.25 0 0.0% 0% 0.25-0.5 0 0.0% 0% 0.5 - 1.0 5 4.9% 5% 1 - 2 5 4.9% 10% 2 - 4 1 1.0% 11% 4 - 8 12 11.7% 22% 8-16 10 9.7% 32% 16-32 27 26.2% 58% 32-64 34 33.0% 91% 64-128 8 7.8% 99% 128-256 1 1.0% 100% 256-512 0 0.0% 100% 512-1024 0 0.0% 100% 1024-2048 0 0.0% 100% 2048-4096 0 0.0% 100% Bedrock 0 0.0% 100% Total 103 100% 100% Summary Data D50 27 D84 52 D95 83 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 85 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 86 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Cumulative Cross -Section 4 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% 3 0 t MY1 Cumulative % w 60% tMY2 Cumulative% a tMY3 Cumulative % 50% ~ 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Obti O. � bti O� ytih by Oh O. O• �tih Otih O• ,yO ti O5• 'L b 4 ,y6 .h'L 60b ,yW ti P" � rO• ti ti 1 "� rod` y6 ,6;L y'L ,y'y dy .t5 ,tiG AO c 'yO .t, bO aco ytiti 1O,tP ryO�4 Oe Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Individual Cross -Section 4 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% o' ■ MY1 % by Size Group v ■ MY2 % by Size Group 60% a ■ MY3 % by Size Group C 50% F 40% d C 30% 20% 10% 0% O Obti O OObti ,y'L5 O.tiS Oh O• y' yah O'L O' ,yO ,y; c�' O L ,y,A b 0 10 '6'b toy` '411 0 .y�o .5'L raP .tiO 1 56 'L ,ti,1 �:L 0� eat y1 10ti ryOQ 0 Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 86 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Cross Section 5 - Riffle Monitoring Year - 2018; MY3 Bed Surface Material Particle Size Class (mm) Number % Individual Cumulative 0-0.062 0 0.0% 0% 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.0% 0% 0.125-0.25 0 0.0% 0% 0.25-0.5 0 0.0% 0% 0.5 - 1.0 8 7.5% 8% 1 - 2 5 4.7% 12% 2 - 4 5 4.7% 17% 4 - 8 12 11.3% 28% 8-16 23 21.7% 50% 16-32 20 18.9% 69% 32-64 27 25.5% 94% 64-128 5 4.7% 99% 128-256 1 0.9% 100% 256-512 0 0.0% 100% 512-1024 0 0.0% 100% 1024-2048 0 0.0% 100% 2048-4096 0 0.0% 100% Bedrock 0 0.0% 100% Total 106 100% 1 100% Summary Data D50 16 D84 48 D95 68 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 87 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 88 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Cumulative Cross -Section 5 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% 3 0 t MY1 Cumulative % w 60% tMY2 Cumulative% a tMY3 Cumulative % 50% ~ 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Obti O. � bti O� ytih by Oh O. O• htih Otih O• ,yO O5• 'L b 4 ,y6 .h'L 60b ,yW ti ti P" � rO• ti ti 1 "� rod` y6 ,6;L y'L ,y'y dy .t5 ,tiG AO c 'yO .t, bO aco ytiti 1O,tP ryO�4 Oe Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Individual Cross -Section 5 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% o' ■ MY1 % by Size Group v ■ MY2 % by Size Group 60% a ■ MY3 % by Size Group C 50% F 40% d C 30% 20% 10% 0% O' Obti O OObti ,y'L5 O.tih Oh O• y' yah O'L O' ,yO c�' O ,Y; L ,�,G b 0 10 '6'b toy` y'L0 0 .y�o .5'L raP .yd .tiO 1 a'r't" 56 'L O'La �� OOd oc ,ti,1 �:L 0� eat y1 10ti ryOQ 0 Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 88 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Cross Section 7 - Riffle Monitoring Year - 2018; MY3 Bed Surface Material Particle Size Class (mm) Number % Individual Cumulative 0-0.062 0 0.0% 0% 0.062 - 0.125 0 0.0% 0% 0.125-0.25 0 0.0% 0% 0.25-0.5 1 0.9% 1% 0.5 - 1.0 5 4.7% 6% 1 - 2 14 13.1% 19% 2-4 3 2.8% 21% 4 - 8 2 1.9% 23% 8-16 24 22.4% 46% 16-32 28 26.2% 72% 32-64 22 20.6% 93% 64-128 8 7.5% 100% 128-256 0 0.0% 100% 256-512 0 0.0% 100% 512-1024 0 0.0% 100% 1024-2048 0 0.0% 100% 2048-4096 0 0.0% 100% Bedrock 0 0.0% 100% Total 107 100% 100% Summary Data D50 18 D84 46 D95 80 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 89 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 90 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Cumulative Cross -Section 7 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% 3 0 t MYl Cumulative % w 60% tMY2 Cumulative% a tMY3 Cumulative % 50% ~ 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Obti ytih by Oh O. 'Q, O• � bhtih Otih O� O• ,yO 'L b 4 ,y6 .h'L 60b ti ti P" rO• ti O5• 1 "� ,yW ti rod` y6 ,6;L y'L ,y'y dy .t5 ,tiG e AO 'yO .t, bO aco ytiti 1O,tP ryO�4 Oe Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Pebble Count - Percent Individual Cross -Section 7 - Riffle 100% 90% 80% 70% o' ■ MY1 % by Size Group v ■ MY2 % by Size Group 60% a ■ MY3 % by Size Group C 50% F d C 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 4 Obti ,y'L5 O.tih Oh O O• y' OObti yti`' Oti O' ,yO ,Y; L ,y,A b 0 10 '6'b toy` c�' 0 .y�o .5'L O y'L0 raP .tiO 1 56 'L c ,ti,1 �:L 0� eat y'r ' ryOQ 0 Particle Size Groups Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 90 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Appendix E Hydrologic Data This Page Intentionally Left Blank 'Potential Date is 2/2/2016 Potential Date is 10/23/2017 3Potential Date is 2/11/2018 4Potential Date is 10/18/2018 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 93 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project South Muddy Creek Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method Feet Above Bankfull Elevation Photo # (if available) 2/25/2016 Unknown' Wrack Lines Unknown - 10/27/2017 Unknown Wrack Lines Unknown - 2/13/2018 Unknow3 Wrack Lines Unknown 1 11/1/2018 Unknow4 Wrack Lines Unknown 2 Sprouse Branch Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method Feet Above Bankfull Elevation Photo # (if available) 3/23/2016 Unknown' Wrack Lines Unknown - 10/27/2017 Unknown Crest Gauge 1.08 - 2/13/2018 Unknow 3 Crest Gauge 0.1 3 11/1/2018 Unknow 4 Crest Gauge 0.4 4 Iva Branch Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method Feet Above Bankfull Elevation Photo # (if available) 2/25/2016 Unknown' Wrack Lines Unknown - 10/27/2017 Unknown Wrack Lines Unknown - 2/13/2018 Unknow3 Wrack Lines Unknown 5 11/1/2018 Unknow4 Wrack Lines Unknown 6 'Potential Date is 2/2/2016 Potential Date is 10/23/2017 3Potential Date is 2/11/2018 4Potential Date is 10/18/2018 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 93 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Photo Verification of Bankfull Events Photo #1 - South Muddy Creek Wrack Lines from bridge looking upstream Photo #2 - South Muddy Creek Wrack Lines STA 111+25 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 94 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Photo Verification of Bankfull Events Photo #3 — Sprouse Branch Crest Gauge at 14 inches (recorded bankfull is 9") Photo #4 — Sprouse Branch Crest Gauge at 10 inches (recorded bankfull is at 9") Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 95 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Photo #5 Iva Branch Wrack Lines at STA 305+00 Photo #4 — Iva Branch Wrack Lines at STA 304+25 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 96 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 FiLFUYe 3. Dailv PreCiDitation Totals for the Middle South Muddv Stream Restoration Site Proiect 4.5 4 Susy ected Ban Hull 0/18/201 3.5 a) v u 3 Suspec ted Bankf ill 2.5 2/11/2018 o m ° 2 •U of i a > 1.5 •m 1 0.5 0 — 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 C -0 L fa N fl- T C co to 7 CL +' > U of O N O LL Q 2 A Q N Z D 4. lvlontnly rrecivitatlon Lata uomparea to w... ana iur" rercentnes for 1vicLowen 18.0 18.0 14.0 712.0 8.0 IL` 4.0 2.0 0.0 Jan -18 Feb -18 Mar -18 Apr -18 May -18 Jun -18 Jul -18 Aug -18 Sep -18 Oct -18 Nov -18 Dec -18 NC Cronos Monthly Rainfall — — - - 30th Percentile — — 70th Percentile — — - •Average Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 97 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 5.0 0.0 N d V -5.0 C 10.0 'a -15.0 O L 0 -20.0 O 25.0 Q d D -30.0 -35.0 0 CO CO CO w w CO 0 CO CO w CO CO CO w 0 CO ao CO w CO CO Middle South Muddv Iva Branch Perrenial Gauge 5.0 T 0.0 U C CO 0 0 0 0 w V 0 0 0r 0 V 0 0 0 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N to M N f0 N CO M r W N O M O lb N r N N N N to N n M NN M N r r N N M M V N fD r ti CO CO M M — O Middle South Muddy Iva Branch Intermittent Gauge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r !9 01 N to N w M M r � V N t0 0 M r- O 'q co N N N N N LO N to � M N N C N r r N N M M LO tD I� r CO CO 01 C1 — 0 -20.0 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 98 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5 Middle South Muddy Stream Restoration Project 99 Equinox NCDMS Project No. 93875 Annual Monitoring Report Monitoring Year 3 of 5