HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090049 Ver 2_Year 3 Monitoring Report_2018_20181212MONITORING YEAR 3
Final
GLADE CREEK II RESTORATION PROJECT
Alleghany County, NC
DEQ Contract 6843
DMS Project Number 92343
USACE Action ID 2009-00589
Data Collection Period: March 2018 — November 2018
Submission Date: December 12, 2018
PREPARED FOR:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
PREPARED BY:
W
W ILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: 704.332.7754
Fax: 704.332.3306
kt�
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
December 12, 2018
Mr. Harry Tsomides
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Monitoring Year 3 (MY3) Report — Draft Submittal
Glade Creek II Mitigation Project
DMS Project # 92343
Contract Number 6843
New River Basin - #CU# 05050001 - Alleghany County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Tsomides:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Draft Monitoring Year 3 report for the Glade Creek II Mitigation Project. The following Wildlands
responses to DMS's report comments are noted in italics lettering.
DMS comment; Section 1.2.4, Stream Areas of Concern — DMS concurs that sediment has redeposited
along this reach due to upstream cattle impacts combined with storm events. This was clearly evident
following Hurricane Florence. Can Wildlands estimate of the linear feet of impacted channel where
wetland features predominate over stream features?
Wildlands response; Wildlands estimates that there are approximately 50 linear feet (STA 12+60 to
13+10) of impacted channel on UT to Glade Creek where wetland features predominate over stream
features based on the visual assessment that occurred on 11/8/2018.
Enclosed please find four (4) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy on CD of the Final Monitoring
Report. Please contact me at 704-332-7754 x110 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kirsten Y. Gimbert
Project Manager
kgimbert@w ildlandseng.com
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. • phone 704-332-7754 • fax 704-332-3306 • 1430 S. Mint Street, # 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) completed design and construction management on a design -
bid -build project at the Glade Creek II Restoration Site (Site) for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS) in Alleghany County, NC. The project components included restoring and enhancing
2,579 linear feet (LF) and preserving 129 LF of perennial stream, restoring 0.16 acre of wetlands, and
preserving 0.84 acre of existing wetland. Riparian buffers were also established by removing exotic
invasive plants and installing a variety of native vegetation. The Site is expected to generate 2,167
stream mitigation units (SMUs) and 0.33 wetland mitigation units (WMUs) for the Glade Creek
watershed (Table 1). The Site is located off US Highway 21 in the northern portion of Alleghany County,
NC in the New River Basin, eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 05050001 and the 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 05050001030020 (Figure 1). The project streams consist of one unnamed tributary, UT to
Glade Creek, and two reaches along Glade Creek mainstem (Reach 1 and Reach 2) (Figure 2). Glade
Creek flows into the Little River 4 miles northeast of the Site near Fox Trot Lane in the Town of Hooker,
Alleghany County. The land adjacent to the streams and wetlands is primarily maintained for forestry
production of White Pine trees.
The Glade Creek II Restoration Project is located within a DMS Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) (Brush
Creek, HUC 05050001030020, as documented within the 2009 River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP)
for the New River Basin. Furthermore, the project site is located within a priority subwatershed for
stream and wetland restoration (and habitat protection), Middle Glade Creek, as identified within 2006
Local Watershed Plan and Preliminary Project Atlas for Little River and Brush Creek. Primary stressors
within the Brush Creek TLW and the Middle Glade Creek subwatershed include stream channelization,
livestock access, degraded riparian buffers, and Christmas tree farming. Glade Creek is also classified as
trout water and the project will help improve trout habitat in the watershed.
The project goals established in the mitigation plan addendum (Confluence, 2013) were completed with
careful consideration of goals and objectives described in the RBRP and to address stressors identified in
the LWP. The following project goals established include:
• Improve water quality by repairing eroding stream banks and establishing riparian buffers;
• Improve the community structure of the buffers;
• Improve stream function and habitat by re-establishing stream -to -floodplain connections;
• Restore long-term stability through the restoration of channel dimension, pattern and profile;
• Improve in -stream habitat using in -stream structures; and
• Remove exotic invasive plant species.
The Site construction was completed between December 2015 and April 2016. Planting was completed
in February 2016. The as -built survey was completed in January 2016 with Monitoring Year 0 beginning
in May 2016. Storm repairs prior to project closeout were completed in April 2016. Monitoring Year
(MY) 3 activities occurred between March and November 2018. Morphological surveys and visual
assessments indicate that Glade Creek appears stable and functioning as designed; however, UT to
Glade Creek is not flowing properly due to the excessive sediment deposition and vegetation in the
channel. The average planted stem density (546 stems per acre) has met the MY3 success criterion with
5 out of 6 plots individually meeting this requirement. The Site's groundwater gage met the
performance standard for MY3 and the bankfull performance standard has been met for the project.
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report — FINAL
GLADE CREEK II RESTORATION PROJECT
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1:
PROJECT OVERVIEW...............................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Project
Goals and Objectives.....................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Monitoring
Year 3 Data Assessment..........................................................................................1-2
1.2.1
Vegetation Assessment......................................................................................................1-2
1.2.2
Vegetation Areas of Concern.............................................................................................1-2
1.2.3
Stream Assessment............................................................................................................1-3
1.2.4
Stream Areas of Concern...................................................................................................1-3
1.2.5
Hydrology Assessment.......................................................................................................1-3
1.2.6
Wetland Assessment..........................................................................................................1-3
1.2.7
Wetland Areas of Concern.................................................................................................1-4
1.3 Monitoring
Year 3 Summary......................................................................................................1-4
Section2:
METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................2-1
Section 3:
REFERENCES...........................................................................................................................3-1
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
General Tables and Figures
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component/Asset Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Project Information and Attributes
Table 5
Monitoring Component Summary
Appendix 2
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3
Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 6
Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 7
Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 9 CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 10 Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report — FINAL
Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 12 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters — Cross-section)
Table 13 Monitoring Data—Stream Reach Data Summary
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Cross-section Plots
Reachwide and Cross-section Pebble Count Plots
Appendix 5 Hydrology Summary Data and Plots
Table 14 Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 15 Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Groundwater Gage Plot
Monthly Rainfall Data
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report — FINAL
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Site is a design -bid -build contract with DMS in Alleghany County, NC. The Site is located in the New
River Basin, eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 05050001 and the 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
05050001030020 (Figure 1). Located in the Blue Ridge Belt (USGS,2016), Blue Ridge physiographic
province, the project watershed includes primarily agricultural and forest land uses. The drainage area
for the project site is 8.0 square miles.
The project stream reaches consist of Glade Creek and UT to Glade Creek (stream restoration). The
project wetland areas consist of restoration and preservation (Wetlands A -D). Mitigation work within
the Site included restoring and enhancing 2,579 linear feet (LF) and preserving 129 LF of perennial
stream, restoring 0.16 acre of wetlands, and preserving 0.84 acre of existing wetland and proposes the
generation of 2,167 SMUs and 0.33 WMUs. The stream and wetland areas were planted with native
vegetation to improve habitat and protect water quality. Construction activities were completed by
Carolina Environmental, Inc. in December 2015. Storm repairs prior to project closeout were completed
in April 2016. Turner Land Surveying completed the as -built survey in January 2016 and the storm
repairs were judged to have not resulted in changes that would warrant a revised as -built survey. A
12.8 -acre conservation easement was purchased in 2008 by the State of North Carolina and was
recorded with Alleghany County Register of Deeds. The conservation easement protects the project area
in perpetuity. Appendix 1 includes detailed project activity, history, contact information, and
watershed/site background information. Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure 1 and
project components are illustrated for the Site in Figure 2. Please refer to the Project Component Map
(Figure 2) for the stream and wetland features and to Table 1 for the project component and mitigation
credit information for the Site.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction, the streams had been impacted by historic agricultural practices, silviculture and
valley filling. In addition, there was widespread bank erosion, especially along the outside meander
bends, and mid -channel deposition. The wetlands had been impacted by vegetation clearing, exotic
invasive plant species, and the valley fill buried hydric soils. Table 4 in Appendix 1 and Tables 6a and 6b
in Appendix 2 present the pre- and post -restoration conditions in detail.
This mitigation site is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits within the New River Basin and
addresses habitat degradation, which is the primary water quality stressor described in the New River
Basin Restoration Priorities Plan (2009). While many of the benefits are limited to the immediate project
area, others, such as pollutant removal, reduced sediment loading, and improved aquatic and terrestrial
habitat, have farther -reaching effects. Expected improvements to water quality and ecological processes
are outlined below as project goals and objectives. These project goals were met by giving careful
consideration to the goals and objectives described in the RBRP.
The project specific goals of the Glade Creek II Restoration Site included the following:
• Improve water quality by repairing eroding stream banks and establishing riparian buffers;
• Improve the community structure of the buffers;
• Improve stream function and habitat by re-establishing stream -to -floodplain connections;
• Restore long-term stability through the restoration of channel dimension, pattern and profile;
• Improve in -stream habitat using in -stream structures; and
• Remove exotic invasive plant species.
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 1-1
The project objectives have been defined as follows:
• Restoration and enhancement of approximately 2260 LF of Glade Creek;
• Restoration of 319 LF of the UT to Glade Creek;
• Preservation of 129 LF of UT to Glade Creek;
• Restoration of 0.16 acre of wetland by improving hydrologic connections;
• Preservation of 0.84 acre of existing jurisdictional wetland; and
• Establishment of riparian buffers by removing exotic invasive plants and installing a variety of
native vegetation.
The stream and wetland performance criteria for the Site follow approved performance standards
presented in the Glade Creek II Restoration Plan (December 2008). Annual monitoring and semi-annual
site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished project. The stream restoration and
enhancement reaches (Glade Creek and UT to Glade Creek) of the project were assigned specific
performance standards for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation. Wetland restoration areas
were assigned specific performance standards for wetland hydrology, and vegetation. The Glade Creek
Stream Restoration Project was instituted prior to 7/28/2010; therefore, the Site will be monitored for
five years post -construction.
1.2 Monitoring Year 3 Data Assessment
Annual monitoring was conducted between March and November 2018 to assess the condition of the
project. The stream restoration success criteria for the Site follows the approved monitoring plan
presented in the Glade Creek II Restoration Plan (Ward, 2008).
1.2.1 Vegetation Assessment
A total of six vegetation monitoring plots were established during the baseline monitoring within the
project easement areas using a standard 10 by 10 meter plot. The final vegetation success criterion will
be the survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the riparian corridor along restored and enhanced
reaches at the end of year five of the monitoring period. The interim measure of vegetation success for
the Site is the survival of at least 320 planted stems per acre at the end of year three of the monitoring
period. Please refer to Figure 3 in Appendix 2 for the vegetation monitoring locations.
The MY3 vegetation survey was completed in September 2018, resulting in an average planted stem
density of 546 stems per acre. The Site has met the interim requirement of 320 stems per acre, with 5 of
the 6 plots (83%) individually meeting this requirement. Approximately 88% of the planted stems have a
health score (vigor) of 2 or greater. However, about 37% of the stems have a vigor of 2 or less. The poor
health is a result of dry soil conditions, insects and debris from storm events. Vegetation monitoring plot
1 contains only 6 stems, resulting in a density of 243 stems per acre; whereas plot 3 contains 18 stems
with a density of 728 stems per acre. Please refer to Appendix 2 for vegetation plot photographs and
Appendix 3 for vegetation data tables.
1.2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern
The MY3 vegetation monitoring and visual assessment revealed few vegetation areas of concern. Small
patches (approximately 1.1% of the easement area) of bare or poor herbaceous cover in the riparian
area of Glade Creek Reach 1 and 2 were observed. Supplemental planting may be warranted due to low
density recorded in vegetation plot 1 and low vigor throughout the site. Refer to Figure 3 in Appendix 2
for vegetation areas of concern.
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 1-2
1.2.3 Stream Assessment
Morphological surveys for MY3 were conducted in May 2018. Results indicate that the channel
dimensions are stable and functioning as designed on Glade Creek. However, UT to Glade Creek cross-
section 4 and cross-section 5 plots show significant sediment deposition that has increased the width -to -
depth ratios. In general, the reachwide pebble counts on Glade Creek show coarser materials in the
riffles and fines in the pools. The UT to Glade Creek reachwide channel materials resulted in a D50 of 0.2
mm (sand) during MY3. This fining of sediment materials was observed in MY2 and continues in MY3 for
UT to Glade Creek.
The surveyed longitudinal profile data for the project streams illustrates that bedform features are
maintaining lateral and vertical stability on Glade Creek. The longitudinal profile on Glade Creek showed
little change in slope (riffle, water surface, bankfull) and pool -to -pool spacing from MY2 to MY3. The
longitudinal profile plot for UT to Glade Creek demonstrates the extent of aggradation that has altered
the channel profile which is further discussed below in Section 1.2.4. Refer to Appendix 2 for the visual
stability assessment table and the CCPV map. Refer to Appendix 4 for the morphological summary data
and plots.
1.2.4 Stream Areas of Concern
UT to Glade Creek has continued to experience an increase in fine sediment throughout MY3.
Sedimentation has continued despite the adaptive management was performed in March 2018 on UT to
Glade Creek to improve stream function and reduce active braiding. At the start of UT to Glade Creek
Reach 2, sediment deposition has directed flow through Wetland D on the left floodplain of the channel.
This was observed after two large storm events that occurred in September and October 2018. Land
management activities and cattle pasture upstream of the project are most likely contributing excessive
sediment on UT to Glade Creek.
There are a few areas of minor scour and erosion along Glade Creek. In MY2 it was observed that the
brush mattress around station 18+00 had been displaced; therefore, exposing the bank and minor
scouring continues to be present. In addition, the left bank between stations 23+00 and 25+00 still show
signs of scour under the brush mattress and behind the boulders. In MY3, the right bank around station
23+50 is showing signs of bank instability. Replacing brush mattresses and adding live stakes on Glade
Creek where bank erosion is occurring is recommended for bank stabilization. These stream areas of
concern are indicated in Table 6 and on Figure 3 in Appendix 2.
1.2.5 Hydrology Assessment
At least one bankfull event occurred on all reaches during the MY3 data collection, which was recorded
on crest gages and by visual indicators. Two bankfull flow events must be documented on the
restoration reaches within the five-year monitoring period. The two bankfull events must occur in
separate years. A bankfull event was also recorded during MY2 and MY1; therefore, the Site has met the
bankfull success criteria for the project. Refer to Appendix 5 for hydrologic data and graphs.
1.2.6 Wetland Assessment
One groundwater monitoring gage (GWG 1) was established during the baseline monitoring within the
restoration area using logging hydrology pressure transducers. The gage was installed at an appropriate
location so that the data collected will provide an indication of groundwater levels throughout the
wetland restoration area. The target performance standard for wetland hydrology success consists of
groundwater surface within 12 inches of the ground surface for 21 consecutive days (12.5%) of the
defined 168 day growing season for Alleghany County (April 26th to October 111h) under typical
precipitation conditions. The Site does not contain a rainfall gage; therefore, the daily precipitation data
was collected from closest NC CRONOS Station, Sparta 3.5 SSW. The GWG 1 recorded 169 consecutive
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 1-3
days (100%), meeting the performance standard for MY3. According to the climate data from nearby NC
CRONOS station, the Site received more than typical amounts of rain in 2018. The monthly rainfall in
April, May, August, September, and October exceeded the 70th percentile for the area (USDA, 2018). The
rainfall totals were approximately 14 inches in September and 11 inches in October which is over the
double the 70th percentile for those respective months. Please refer to Appendix 2 for the groundwater
gage locations and Appendix 5 for groundwater hydrology data and plots.
1.2.7 Wetland Areas of Concern
One headcut has formed at the outflow of Wetland B where it meets Glade Creek Reach 2 (around
station 22+80). This area will be monitored in future years for signs of accelerated instability. Please
refer to the CCPV Figure 3 in Appendix 2.
1.3 Monitoring Year 3 Summary
Glade Creek appears stable and functioning as designed; however, UT to Glade Creek is not flowing
properly due to the excessive sediment deposition and vegetation in the channel. This statement is
supported by the morphological surveys and visual assessment. The average planted stem density (546
stems per acre) has met the MY3 success criterion with 5 out of 6 plots individually meeting this
requirement. The Site's groundwater gage met the performance standard for MY3 and the bankfull
performance standard has been met for the project. Some minor adaptive management would be
beneficial to the Site. The areas of concern are minor, but repairs and maintenance of these areas would
benefit the Site long term and decrease additional impacts to the project.
Summary information and data related to the 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 annual monitoring reports can be found in the Mitigation Plan
documents available on DMS's website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices
are available from DMS upon request.
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 1-4
Section 2: METHODOLOGY
Geomorphic data was collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site:
An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). Longitudinal and cross-sectional data were collected using
a total station and were georeferenced. All Integrated Current Condition Plan View mapping was
recorded using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub -meter accuracy and processed using was Pathfinder
and ArcView. Crest gages were installed in surveyed riffle cross-sections and monitored quarterly.
Hydrology attainment installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the USACE (2003)
standards. Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-NCEEP Level 2
Protocol (Lee et al., 2008).
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 2-1
Section 3: REFERENCES
Confluence Engineering, P.C. (2013). Glade Creek II Restoration Project Final Mitigation Plan Addendum.
NCEEP, Raleigh, NC.
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.2. Retrieved from: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-
2.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2009. New River Basin Restoration Priorities.
Accessed from: https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Mitigation%20Services/PublicFolder/Work%20With/Watershed%20PIanners/New—RBRP-200
9.pdf
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). Little River and Brush Creek Local Watershed
Plan. Accessed from: https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/documents/files/LittleRiver-
BrushCrk%20LWP%20FactSheet.pdf
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2016. North Carolina Geology. Accessed from:
http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/mapview/
Ward Consulting Engineers, P.C. (2008). Glade Creek II Restoration Project Restoration Plan. NCEEP,
Raleigh, NC.
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report— FINAL 3-1
APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures
roti �'1
r
1030015
Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
DMS Targeted Local Watershed
Project Location
`` +
J
ter°
I
1
S
i
Glade Vallef
CA
05050001030030
o\
Ln
/� `t Pit y�j5'
The subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed
by a recorded conservation easement, but is bordered
by land under private ownership. Accessing the site
may require traversing areas near or along the easement
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not
permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state and
federal agencies or their designees/contractors involved in
the development, oversight,and stewardship of the restoration
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their
defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with DMS.
llk�ww
WILDLANDS ,`
ENGINEERING
Oull 1-3%11
Directons to Site:
From Charlotte, travel Interstate 77 North. Take Exit 83, US -21
Bypass toward Roaring Gap/Sparta. Travel on US -21
approximately 21 miles. Bear right onto Sheriff Road and travel
Sheriff Road approximately 0.4 mile. Turn right onto Fox Ridge
Road. The project site is located approximately 0.2 miles on the left
side of Fox Ridge Road.
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
I 0.5 1 Miles DMS Project No. 92343
i i i I Monitoring Year 3- 2018
Alleghany County, NC
L
ter°
I
1
S
i
Glade Vallef
CA
05050001030030
o\
Ln
/� `t Pit y�j5'
The subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed
by a recorded conservation easement, but is bordered
by land under private ownership. Accessing the site
may require traversing areas near or along the easement
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not
permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state and
federal agencies or their designees/contractors involved in
the development, oversight,and stewardship of the restoration
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their
defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with DMS.
llk�ww
WILDLANDS ,`
ENGINEERING
Oull 1-3%11
Directons to Site:
From Charlotte, travel Interstate 77 North. Take Exit 83, US -21
Bypass toward Roaring Gap/Sparta. Travel on US -21
approximately 21 miles. Bear right onto Sheriff Road and travel
Sheriff Road approximately 0.4 mile. Turn right onto Fox Ridge
Road. The project site is located approximately 0.2 miles on the left
side of Fox Ridge Road.
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
I 0.5 1 Miles DMS Project No. 92343
i i i I Monitoring Year 3- 2018
Alleghany County, NC
Alleghany County, NC
Conservation Easement
Overhead Easement
Wetland Preservation
Wetland Restoration
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement 1; Reduced Credit
Stream Preservation
No Credit
Non -Project Streams
Reach Breaks
Gates
Figure ZProject [omponent/AsetK8ap
Glade Creek URestoration Project
O 100
m/zLDLANDG U ��m�
200 Feet
�
DK85Pn�ectNo� 92343
..°°..,"°
n � / .m
'r
Monitoring Year 3 2018
Alleghany County, NC
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No.92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
* Stream Enhancement I credit reduced; 90 LF removed at break in conservation easement and 45 LF reduced by 50% at overhead power easement.
AML
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Streamarian Wetland Non -Riparian Wetland Buffer Nitrogen
Rip
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous Nutrient Offset
Type
R
RE R R RE
Totals
2,140.667
25.800 0.330 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Preservation
129
Existing Footage/
Reach ID
Acreage
Restoration (R) or
Approach
Restoration Equivalent (RE)
As -Built
Stationing/ Restoration Footage/Acreage
Location
Credits
Mitigation Ratio
(SMU/WMU)
STREAMS
Glade Creek Reach 1
1200 LF
P2
Restoration (R)
10+00 - 21+70
1,170
1:1
1170.000
Glade Creek Reach 2*
1074 LF
P2
Enhancement I (R)
21+70-26+41;
26+86-29+69;
30+59-32+60
1,090
1.5:1
651.667
UT to Glade Creek Preservation
129 LF
N/A
Preservation (RE)
10+00 -11+29
129
5:1
25.800
UT to Glade Creek Reaches 1 and 2
197 LF
P1
Restoration (R)
11+29 - 14+48
319
1:1
319.000
WETLANDS
Wetland A, B, C
0.84 AC
N/A
Preservation (RE)
N/A
0.84
5:1
0.168
Wetland D
0.16 AC
N/A
Restoration (R)
N/A
0.16
1:1
0.160
* Stream Enhancement I credit reduced; 90 LF removed at break in conservation easement and 45 LF reduced by 50% at overhead power easement.
AML
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream (LF)
Riparian Wetland (acres) Non -Riparian Wetland (acres) Buffer (square feet) Upland (acres)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration
1,489
0.16
Preservation
129
0.84
Enhancement 1
1,090
Enhancement 11 ii
Creation I
.. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
* Stream Enhancement I credit reduced; 90 LF removed at break in conservation easement and 45 LF reduced by 50% at overhead power easement.
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No.92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
rt,,(,ty or Report
M1
Data Collection Complete
Completion or Scheduled Delivery
Mitigation Plan
16 Broad Street
December 2008
December 2008
Mitigation Plan Addendum
January 2013
January 2013
Final Design - Construction Plans
January 2015
January 2015
Construction
Mt. Airy NC 27030
December 2015 - April 2016
April 2016
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area'
Planting Contractor
December 2015 - April 2016
April 2016
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments'
December 2015 - April 2016
April 2016
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
February 2016
February 2016
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
January- May 2016
June 2016
Year 1 Monitoring
Stream Survey
October 2016
December 2016
Vegetation Survey October 2016
Year 2 Monitoring
Stream Survey
May 2017
December 2017
Vegetation Survey September 2017
Year 3 Monitoring
Stream Survey
June 2018
November 2018
Vegetation Survey September 2018
Year 4 Monitoring
Stream Survey
2019
November 2019
Vegetation Survey 2019
Year 5 Monitoring
Stream Survey
2020
November 2020
Vegetation Survey 2020
'Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No.92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
--- Data not provided
Confluence Engineering, PC
Designer
16 Broad Street
Andrew Bick, PE, CFM
Asheville, NC 28806
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Construction Contractor
PO Box 1905
Mt. Airy NC 27030
Keller Environmental
Planting Contractor
7921 Haymarket Lane
Raleigh, NC 27615
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Seeding Contractor
PO Box 1905
Mt. Airy NC 27030
Seed Mix Sources
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Wetland Enhancement
Bare Roots
Live Stakes
Plugs
Monitoring Performers
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Kirsten Gimbert
Monitoring, POC
704.332.7754, ext. 110
--- Data not provided
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No.92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Project
Project Name
Information
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
County
Alleghany
Project Area (acres)
44.50
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Project Watershed
36° 28' 37.0878"N, -81.3' 42.7896"W
Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Blue Ridge Mountains
River Basin
New River
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
05050001
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
05050001030020
DWR Sub -basin
05-07-03
Project Drainiage Area (acres)
5,120
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
1�0111 Reach
61% Forested, 35%Agriculture/Livestock,
Summary Information
3% Residential/Commercial
Parameters
Glade Creek Glade Creek
Reach 1 Reach 2
UT to Glade Creek Reach 1 UT to Glade Creek Reach 2
Length of reach (linear feet) - Post -Restoration
1,170 1,090
129 319
Drainage area (acres)
5,120
13
NCDWR stream identification score
47
31
NCDW R Water Quality Classification
C; Tr
Morphological Desription (stream type)
C4
B4
Underlying mapped soils
Suncook
FEMA classification
no regulated floodplain
no regulated floodplain
Native vegetation community
White Pine Plantation
Percent composition exotic invasive vegetation -Post-Restoration
0%
0%
Parameters
Wetlands A, B & C
Wetland D
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.84
0.16
Wetland Type
Riparian -Non Riverine
Underlying mapped soils
Suncook
Drainage class
frequently flooded, excessively drained
Soil hydric status
N/A
Source of Hydrology
hillside seep
Restoration or Enhancement Method (hydrologic, vegetative, etc.)
Preservation
hydrologic/vegetative
Regulatory
Consideratlof,
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States -Section 404
Yes
Yes
USACE Nationwide Permit No.27 and DWQ401 Water
Quality Certification No. 3885. Action ID # 2009-00589
Waters of the United States -Section 401 Yes
Yes
Division of Land Quality (Erosion and Sediment Control)
Yes
Yes
NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit NCGO10000
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Glade Creek II Restoration Project; Ward Consulting
determined "no affect" on Alleghany County listed
endangered species
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
No recommendations received.
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA)
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
N/A
N/A
The upper portion of Glade Creek is not currenity mapped as
a regulated flood zone
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N/A
N/A
N/A
--- Data not provided
Table S. Monitoring Component Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No.92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
'Pattern measurements will include sinuosity and meander width ratio and will be performed yearly. Measurements of radius of curvature will be monitored on newly constructed
meanders for the first year only.
Quantity/ Length by Reach
Parameter
Monitoring Feature
Frequency
Glade Creek
UT to Glade Creek
Wetlands
Riffle Cross Section
2
1
N/A
Dimension
Annual
Pool Cross Section
1
1
N/A
Pattern
Pattern
Yes
Yes
N/A
See Footnote'
Profile
Longitudinal Profile
Yes
Yes
N/A
Annual
Reach Wide (RW) /
Substrate
Riffle 100 Pebble Count
RW -1, RF 1
RW -1, RF -1
N/A
Annual
(RF)
Stream Hydrology
Crest Gage
L1
N/A
Semi -Annual
Wetland Hydrology
Groundwater Gages
N/A
N/A
Enhancement I (R)
Semi -Annual
Vegetation
CVS Level 2
6
Annual
Visual Assessment
All Streams
Y
Y
Y
Semi -Annual
Exotic and nuisance
Semi -Annual
vegetation
Project Boundary
Semi -Annual
Reference Photos
Photographs
9
Annual
'Pattern measurements will include sinuosity and meander width ratio and will be performed yearly. Measurements of radius of curvature will be monitored on newly constructed
meanders for the first year only.
APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
W I L D L A N D S rk
0 100 200 Feet DMS Project No. 92343
ENGINEERING I I I Monitoring Year 3 - 201E
Alleghany County, NC
Table 6a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek 12.260 LF)
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
in As -Built Unstable Unstable Performing as
Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust%for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 1 20 99%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 9 9 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 6 6 100%
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 6 6 100%
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at upstream of 6 6 100%
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 6 6 100%
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simplyfrom poorgrowth and/orscour
4
127
94%
n/a
n/a
n/a
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
Totals
4
127
94%
n/a
n/a
n/a
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
7
7
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
7
7
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Pi
Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
6
7
86%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
7
7
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
—Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
7
7
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.
Table 6b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
UT to Glade Creek (448 LFI
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust%for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 1 160 64%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 2 5 40%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 2 4 50%
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 2 4 50%
4. Thalweg Positionz
Thalweg centering at upstream of 2 2 100%
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 2 2 100%
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3.Mass wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
Totals
0
0
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
7
7
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
7
7
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Pi
Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
7
7
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
7
7
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
—Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
4
7
57%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.
Applicable to only 2 meander bends because the other 2 meander bends are being impacted by sedimentation and the stream has braided.
Table 7. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Planted Acreage 6.4
Easement Acreage 12.8
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000
Number of
Combined
% of Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Threshold
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
0
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
(acres)
Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0.1
6
0.05
0.8%
1
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, 5, or 7 stem count
Low Stem Density Areas
0.1
1
0.025
0.4%
criteria.
Total
7
0.1
1.1%
1
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
0.25
0
0.0
0%
year.
Cumulative Total
7
0.1
1.1%
Easement Acreage 12.8
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold (SF)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000
2
0.03
0.2%
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
0
0
0%
'Acreage calculated from vegetation plots monitored for site.
Stream Photographs
f
Photo Point 1— view upstream UT Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 1— view downstream UT Glade Creek 7/23/2018)
-
t
L
P 5 �
by
u.
l
„A r
07
Photo Point 2 —view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 2—view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
VIA- �
i ..• ,'4YF
f�'
Photo Point 2—view upstream UT Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 3—view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 3—view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1
Photo Point 4—view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 4—view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 5 —view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 5 — view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 6—view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 6—view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1
Photo Point 7 —view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 7 —view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Photo Point 8—view upstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018) 1 Photo Point 8—view downstream Glade Creek (7/23/2018)
Vegetation Photographs
� Yqiy
M
sem{
qF h
,y
APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Plot MY3 Success Criteria Met
Tract Mean
1 N
83%
2 Y
3 Y
4 Y
5 Y
6 Y
Table 9. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Report Prepared By
IMimiCaddell
Date Prepared
11/8/2018 13:55
Database Name
cvs-eep-entrytool-v2.5.0 Glade MY3.mdb
Database Location
Q:\ActiveProjects\005-02161 Glade Creek II Monitoring\Monitoring\Monitoring Year 3\Vegetation Assessment
Computer Name
MIMI-PC
File Size
51773440
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 SppDamage
values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
JA 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
JA matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY --------------------
Project Code
92343
project Name
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Description
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
Required Plots (calculated)
6
Sampled Plots
6
Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 1
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total stems
Annual Summary
Current Plot Data (MY3 2018)
Scientific Name
Common Name
MY3 (2018)
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
Scientific Name
Common Name
92343-WEI-0001
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
92343-WEI-0002
PnoLS P -all T
92343-WEI-0003
PnoLS P -all T
92343-WEI-0004
PnoLS P -all T
92343-WEI-0005
PnoLS P -all T
92343-WEI-0006
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
Tree 3
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
Alnusserrulata
Tag Alder
Shrub Tree
12
12
20
12
12
57
Alnusserrulata
Tag Alder
Shrub Tree
14
14
1
1
16
Shrub Tree
4
4
3 3
5
1
1
21
7
7
32
Carpinus caroliniana
American Hornbeam
Shrub Tree
Eastern Redbud
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
Eastern Redbud
Shrub Tree
3
Diospyros virginiana
American Persimmon
Tree
8
8
8
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
Shrub Tree
10
10
10
11
11
11
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
Diospyros virginiana
American Persimmon
Tree
3
3
2
2
2
10
10
10
2 2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
Tree 2
2
2
21
22
23
23
23
24
24
24
28
28
28
Nyssa sylvatica
Black Gum
Tree
Hamamelis virginiana
Witch -hazel
Shrub Tree
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
2 2
2
3
3
3
14
14
14
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
Tree
14
14
3
3
3
10
10
11
2 2
2
4
4
4
2
2
2
Nyssa sylvatica
Black Gum
Tree
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2 2
2
91
91
99
110
110
110
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree 1
1
1
3
3
3
5
5
5
2 2
2
3
3
3
size (ACRES)
Sambucus canadensis
ICommon Elderberry
IShrubTree
0.15
0.15
0.15
1 1
1
2
2
2
1 11
1 10
1 1010
10
Stem count 6
6
6
15
15
30
18
18
21
15 15
17
16
16
56
11
11
37
1 742
1 741.9
size (ares)1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count 3
3
3
7
7
7
5
5
6
8
8
8
6
6
7
4
4
5
Stems per ACRE
243
243
607
1 607
1214
728
728
850
607
607
688
647
647
2266
445
445
1497
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 1
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total stems
Annual Summary
Scientific Name
Common Name
MY3 (2018)
Species Type PnoLS P -all T
MY2 (2017)
PnoLS P -all T
MY1(2016)
PnoLS P -all T
MYO (2016)
Pnol-S P -all T
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
Tree
3
3
23
3
3
4
3
3
3
6
6
6
Alnusserrulata
Tag Alder
Shrub Tree
12
12
74
12
12
57
13
13
20
14
14
14
Corpinus caroliniana
American Hornbeam
Shrub Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Cercisconadensis
Eastern Redbud
Shrub Tree
1
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
Shrub Tree
3
Diospyros virginiana
American Persimmon
Tree
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
11
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
Hamamelis virginiana
Witch -hazel
Shrub Tree
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
Tree
21
21
22
23
23
23
24
24
24
28
28
28
Nyssa sylvatica
Black Gum
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
7
7
7
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
22
22
22
Sambucus canadensis
ICommon Elderberry
IShrub Tree
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Stem count
81
81
167
86
86
132
91
91
99
110
110
110
size (ares)
6
6
6
6
size (ACRES)
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
Species count
10
1 SO
1 11
1 10
1 1010
10
SO
11
10
10
SO
Stems per ACRE
546
546
1126
580
580
890
614
1 668
1 742
1 741.9
741.9
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 1
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total stems
APPENDIX 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Glade Creek 11 Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
( --- ): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
'Meander Wave Length was adjusted in the MY2 report.
2 Channel was dry during survey, slope was calculated using channel thalweg
�.
Parameter
Gage
Glade Creek
UT to Glade Creek
Glade Creek
Restoration
UT to Little Pine Trib 1
Glade
Creek
UT to Glade Creek
Glade
Creek
UT to Glade Creek
to Glade Creek
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension;..d -Shallow
Bankfull Width (ft)
17.7
38.5
5.2
9.9
36.3
48.8
6.2
11.1
33.0
5.4
34.6
37.4
5.3
Floodprone Width (ft)
47
115
7
12
69
118
14
46
99
165
22
F
33
106
111
61
Bankfull Mean Depth
2.6
2.1
0.3
0.5
0.9
1.3
0.9
0.5
2.3
0.3
1.9
2.2
0.5
Bankfull Max Depth
2.9
4.1
0.5
0.8
1.9
1.9
0.8
1.6
3.0
0.4
2.9
3.2
0.9
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft')
N/A
46.9
79.0
2.1
5.1
45.6
64.1
3.8
5.1
76.5
1.7
70.2
77.1
2.4
Width/Depth Ratio
6.7
18.8
17.3
26.8
40.3
37.2
6.9
24.2
14.2
17.4
15.5
19.9
11.8
Entrenchment Ratio
2.7
3.1
1.2
1.5
1.9
2.4
2.3
4.1
3.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
2.8
3.2
11.4
Bank Height Ratio
1.1
1.7
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
28.0
31.0
7.0
7.0
44.0
47.0
7.0
7.0
28.0
1
31.0
7.0
90.0
32.0
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
33
57
6.8
32.6
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
°
---
---
---
---
0.0087
0.0271
0.0193
0.0964
Pool Length (ft)
N/A
---
---
5
---
64.0
197.8
8.8
32.9
Pool Max Depth (ft)
4.4
6.6
0.8
5.0
0.7
1.5
3.3
F
4.1
0.8
T
1.0
3.8
5.9
1.5
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
107
353
33.0
70.0
Pool Volume (ft')
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
60
240
7
16
---
---
19
26
112
205
17
155
282
75.0
Radius of Curvature (ft)
21
114
---
---
---
---
30
59.0
99.0
30
59.0
99.0
30
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
N/A
1.2
3.0
---
---
---
---
3.2
5.9
1.8
3.0
5.5-6.0
1.8
3.0
5.5-6.0
Meander Length (ft)1
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
230
425
150
Meander Width Ratio
3.4
6.2
1.3
1.6
---
---
2.5
3.5
3.4
6.2
3.1
7.0
4.5
7.5
3.1
7.0
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d5O/d84/d95/d100
N/A
-/-/3.1/8.6/11.0/16.0
---
-/0.1/0.2/0.5/4.0/8.0
0.1/3.0/8.8/77/180/-
1/26.47/42.3/128/180/>2048
.11/0.63/13.3/176/241.4/>204
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib/ftz
---
--
0.48
0.52
0.82
0.11
0.12
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (Capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
8.00
0.02
4.60
0.05
8.00
0.02
8.00
0.02
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
---
---
---
---
--
Rosgen Classification
E4/C4
F4/B4
C4
C4/B4
C4
B4
C4
B4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
3.8
5.3
3.8
4.9
3.1
1
4.4
4.5
1
6.1
3.9
4.7
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
250
300
8
25
200
23
300
8
---
---
Q-NFF regression (2 -yr)
493
5
352
Q-USGS extrapolation (1.2 -yr)
N/A
561
4
335
Q -Mannings
213
320
8
153
1
228
Valley Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
1,322
280
1,322
280
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1200
197
---
---
2,120
197
2,120
326
Sinuosity
1.68
1.04
1.18
1.09
1.68
1.14
1.60
1.16
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)2
0.0038
0.048
0.0049
0.0473
0.0038
0.0440
0.0031
0.0397
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0031
1
0.0326
SC: Silt/Clay <0.062 mm diameter particles
( --- ): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
'Meander Wave Length was adjusted in the MY2 report.
2 Channel was dry during survey, slope was calculated using channel thalweg
Table 12. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
"=cross-section
Dimension and Substrate
Base
MY1
1, Glade
MY2
Creek (Riffle)
MY31 MY4
JIM cross-section
MY5 Base
MY1
2, Glade
MY2
Creek (Riffle)
MY31 MY4
M& cross-section
MY5 Base
MY1
3, Glade
MY2
Creek (Pool)
MY31 MY4 MY5
bankfull elevation (ft)
2571.8
2571.8
2571.8
2572.0
2569.7
2569.7
2569.7
2570.0
2569.8
2569.8
2569.8
2569.9
low bank elevation (ft)
2571.8
2571.8
2571.3
2571.9
2569.7
2569.7
2569.8
2570.1
2569.8
2569.8
2569.6
2569.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
37.4
34.4
38.7
38.6
34.6
35.0
36.2
35.5
31.9
30.0
32.5
32.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
106
106
102
106
111
110
93
110
---
---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.8
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.2
2.8
2.9
2.8
2.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.9
1 2.9
2.8 1
3.1
3.2 1
3.2
3.2
3.4
4.2
4.2
4.7
4.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftz)
70.2
66.9
70.2
70.2
77.1
78.0
77.6
77.1
89.0
88.4
91.5
89.0
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
19.9
17.7
21.3
21.3
15.5
15.7
16.9
16.3
11.5
10.2
11.6
12.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
2.8
3.1
2.6
2.7
3.2
3.2
2.6
3.1
---
---
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Cross-Section
1.0
<1.0
4, LIT to
1.0
Glade Creek (Pool)
1.0
Cross
1.0
-Section
1.0
5, LIT to
1.0
Glade Creek (Riffle)
---
---
Dimension and Substrate
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3' MY4
MYS Base
MY1
MY2
MY3' MY4
MYS
bankfull elevation (ft)
2574.0
2574.0
2574.0
2574.3
2573.6
2573.6
2573.6
2573.7
low bank elevation (ft)
2574.3
2574.3
2574.1
2574.3
2573.6
2573.5
2573.5
2573.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
5.3
7.1
7.0
6.8
5.3
6.1
5.9
6.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
61
61
61
61
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.5
1.3 1
1.5
0.7
0.9
0.8
1 1.0 1
0.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftz)
4.7
5.5
4.9
2.6
2.4
2.7
3.1
2.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
6.0
9.6
10.1
18.0
11.8
13.5
11.4
17.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
---
---
---
---
11.4
10.0
10.3
9.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
---
---
---
---
1.0
1.0
1.0
<1.0
---: not applicable
'Prior to MY3, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation. For MY3 through MY7 bankfull elevation is calculated using a fixed Abkf as described in the Standard Measurement of the
BHR Monitoring Parameter provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018).
2For cross-section 4 dimensions in MY3, the bankfull elevation was not calculated using Abkf because of agradation in the channel therefore the low bank elevation was used.
Table 13a. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek
'Meander Wave Length was adjusted for MYO and MYS in the MY2 report.
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
34.6
37.4
34.4
35.0
36.2
38.7
35.50
38.60
Floodprone Width (ft)
106
111
97
106
93.3
102.0
106
110
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.9
2.2
1.9
2.2
1.8
2.1
1.8
2.2
Bankfull Max Depth
2.9
3.2
2.9
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.1
3.4
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
70.2
77.1
66.9
78.0
70.2
77.6
70.2
77.1
Width/Depth Ratio
15.5
19.9
15.7
17.7
16.9
21.3
16.3
21.3
Entrenchment Ratio
2.8
3.2
2.8
3.1
2.6
2.7
3.1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
90.0
34.3
39.8
47.7
46.5
52.5
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
33
57
20
57
20
85
19
80
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0087
0.0271
0.0065
0.0235
0.0011
0.0181
0.0012
0.0162
Pool Length (ft)
64
198
66
190
62
222
56
240
Pool Max Depth (ft)
3.8
5.9
4.2
4.4
5.4
3.7
5.8
Pool Spacing (ft)
107
353
91
384
90
337
86
391
Pool Volume (ft)
Pattern'
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
155
282
155
280
155
283
155
283
Radius of Curvature (ft)
59.0
99.0
59.0
99.0
59.0
99.0
59.0
99.0
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.8
3.0
1.7
2.8
1.6
2.6
1.6
2.6
Meander Wave Length (ft)
230
425
227
435
216
445
216
445
Meander Width Ratio
4.5
7.5
4.5
8.0
4.2
7.3
4.2
7.3
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
2,120
2,120
2,120
2,120
Sinuosity (ft)
1.60
1.60
1.60
1.60
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0031
0.0030
0.0027
0.0027
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0031
0.0031
0.0030
0.0025
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%,
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d5O/d84/d95/d100
1/26.47/42.3/128/180/>2048
3.35/19.49/30.4/97.6/137/256.0
3.4/12.5/29.6/75.6/115.5/362.0
0.3/11.0/27.6/109.5/172.5/512.0
% of Reach with Eroding Banks 1
0%
0%
2%
6%
'Meander Wave Length was adjusted for MYO and MYS in the MY2 report.
Table 13b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
UT to Glade Creek
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
5.3
6.1
5.9
6.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
61
32.3
61
61.0
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.9
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
2.4
2.7
3.1
2.4
Width/Depth Ratio
11.8
13.5
11.4
17.2
Entrenchment Ratio
11.4
5.3
10.3
9.5
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
D50 (mm)
32.0
22.6
0.7
Silt/Clay
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
6.8
32.6
17.3
51.4
5.0
42.0
3.0
24.8
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0193
0.0964
0.0118
0.0866
0.0148
0.1416
0.0170
0.1410
Pool Length (ft)
8.8
32.9
15.6
32.6
3.0
5.0
5.0
14.7
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.5
1.3
1.1
2.4
1.0
2.5
Pool Spacing (ft)
33.0
70.0
38.8
84.0
16
99
13
68
Pool Volume (ft)
e ,
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
75.0
75.0
75.0
75.0
Radius of Curvature (ft)
30
30
30
30
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
5.5-6.0
5.5-6.0
5.5-6.0
5.5-6.0
Meander Wave Length (ft)
150
150
150
150
Meander Width Ratio
3.1
7.0
3.1
7.0
3.1
7.0
3.1
7.0
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
B4
B4
B4
B4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
326
326
326
326
Sinuosity (ft)
1.16
1.16
1.16
1.16
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0397
0.0372
0.0323
0.0342
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0326
0.0317
0.0318
0.0362
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
., .
. .
„ . „ .,
. ., .
. . „
.. „ .,
. . . „
. „
., . .,
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100 0.11/0.63/13.3/176/241.4/>2048
0.19/4.65/11.9/124.6/163.3/256
0.2/0.4/0.8/111.2/151.8/256.0
f SC/SC/0.2/101.9/128.0/180.0
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
1
0%
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek Reach 1 and 2 (STA 10+00 - STA 31+20)
2574
2572
2570
w 2568
w
0 2566 -
w 2564 -
2562 -
2560 T
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO-05/2016) TW (MYl-09/2016) t TW (MY2-5/2017) t TW (MY3-6/2018)------- WSF (MY3-6/2018) ♦ BKF (MY3-6/2018) . STRUCrURE (MY3-6/2018)
2150
2574
2572
A
----1
■---------momm-
MmZIM
m o m
mmmW1■mmmmmmmmmmmmmr
2570
mmi®ii�7
mmmmI
•
■mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
=m■ w m
2560 T
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100
Station (feet)
t TW (MYO-05/2016) TW (MYl-09/2016) t TW (MY2-5/2017) t TW (MY3-6/2018)------- WSF (MY3-6/2018) ♦ BKF (MY3-6/2018) . STRUCrURE (MY3-6/2018)
2150
2574
2572
A
2570
•
2568
w-•••-•••-
-
2566
0
..
i
• .....
......... ....... . .
W 2564
All
2562
2560
2150 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550 2600 2650 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 3000 3050 3100 3150 3200 3250 3300
Station (feet)
TW (MYO-05/2016) TW (MYl-09/2016) TW (MY2-5/2017) TW (MY3-6/2018)------- WSF (MY3-6/2018) ♦ BKF (MY3-6/2018) . STRUCTURE (MY3-6/2018)
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
UT Glade Creek (STA 11+29 - STA 14+48)
2583 -
2582
-----------
•
- - -T
Reach Break
-
2580
a
x
2579
w
c
0
°— 2576
x
2577
w
2573
v
v
•
--_'.....................
I
.....
1095 1110 1125 1140 1155 1170 1185 1200 1215 1230 1245 1260 1275
Station (feet)
+TW (MYO-05/2016) t TW (MYl-09/2016) t TW (MY2-5/2017) TW (MY3-6/2018)------- WSF (MY3-6/2018) ♦ BKF (MY3-6/2018) • STRUCrURE (MY3-6/2018)
2583 -
- - -T
-
2580
a
x
x
2577
v
v
0 2574
0
-----•-----
♦
2571
2568
1280 1295 1310 1325 1340 1355 1370 1385 1400 1415 1430 1445 1460
Station (feet)
+TW (MYO-05/2016) t TW (MYl-09/2016) t TW (MY2-5/2017) --4— TW (MY3-6/2018)------- WSF (MY3-6/2018) ♦ BKF (MY3-6/2018) 0 STRUCrURE (MY3-6/2018)
Cross -Section Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Cross -Section 1- Glade Creek
12+28 Riffle
2577
x -section area (ft.sq.)
38.6
width (ft)
1.8
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
40.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
21.3
2575
106
W flood prone area (ft)
2.7
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
x2573
c-490
0
2571
v
w
2569
2567
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
tMYO (5/2016) 4 MY1 (09/2016) +MY2 (5/2017) tMY3 (06/2018) —Bankfull —Flood prone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
70.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
38.6
width (ft)
1.8
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
40.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
21.3
width -depth ratio
106
W flood prone area (ft)
2.7
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 6/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross -Section Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Cross -Section 2 - Glade Creek
19+64 Riffle
2575
2573
x -section area (ft.sq.)
35.5
width (ft)
2.2
mean depth (ft)
3.4
max depth (ft)
37.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.1
hydraulic radius (ft)
16.3
width -depth ratio
110.0
W flood prone area (ft)
3.1
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
x2571PW
c
0
2569
v
w
2567
2565
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
--s.— MYO (5/2016) —*---MY1(09/2016) tMY2(5/2017) --s— MY3 (06/2018) —Bankfull— FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
77.1
x -section area (ft.sq.)
35.5
width (ft)
2.2
mean depth (ft)
3.4
max depth (ft)
37.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.1
hydraulic radius (ft)
16.3
width -depth ratio
110.0
W flood prone area (ft)
3.1
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 6/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross -Section Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Cross -Section 3 - Glade Creek
20+85 Pool
2575
2573
32.7
width (ft)
2.7
mean depth (ft)
4.7
max depth (ft)
34.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
12.0
width -depth ratio
-2571
x
c
0
2569
>
v
w
2567
2565
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
�MYO (05/2016) MY1 (09/2016) --s.—MY2 (05/2017) MY3 (06/2018) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
89.0
x -section area (ft.sq.)
32.7
width (ft)
2.7
mean depth (ft)
4.7
max depth (ft)
34.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.5
hydraulic radius (ft)
12.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 6/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross -Section Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Cross -Section 4 - UT to Glade Creek
12+48 Pool
2577
6.8
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
0.7
max depth (ft)
7.0
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4
2576
18.0
width -depth ratio
x2575
c
0
2574
v
w
2573
2572
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
tMYO (5/2016) MY1 (09/2016) --s.—MY2 (05/2017) tMY3 (06/2018) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
2.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.8
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
0.7
max depth (ft)
7.0
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4
hydraulic radius (ft)
18.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 6/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross -Section Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Cross -Section 5 - UT to Glade Creek
13+50 Riffle
2577
2576
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.4
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
6.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.3
hydraulic radius (ft)
17.2
width -depth ratio
61.0
W flood prone area (ft)
9.5
entrenchment ratio
0.7
low bank height ratio
x2575
c
0
2574
>
v
w
2573
2572
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Width (ft)
�MYO(5/2016) —*---MY1(09/2016) tMY2(5/2017) --*-- MY3 (06/2018) —Bankfull— FloodproneArea
Bankfull Dimensions
2.4
x -section area (ft.sq.)
6.4
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
6.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.3
hydraulic radius (ft)
17.2
width -depth ratio
61.0
W flood prone area (ft)
9.5
entrenchment ratio
0.7
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 6/2018
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min I max
Particle Count
Riffle I Pool Total
Reach Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000 1
0.062 1
1
4
4
4
4
D100 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
90
4
Fine
0.125
0.250
10
10
10
14
SPO
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
7
8
8
22
Coarse
0.5
1.0
4
4
4
26
v
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
4
4
30
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
m
30
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
30
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
1
31
Fine
5.6
8.0
2
1
1
1
32
JIC�
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
1
3
3
35
Medium 11.0 16.0 4 3 7 7
42
Coarse
16.0
22.6
4
Particle Class Size (mm)
4
4
46
Coarse
22.6
32
4
3
7
7
53
Very Coarse
32
45
5
1
6
6
59
Very Coarse 45 64 9 1 10 10
69
Small
64
90
5
5
10
10
79
Small
1
Lp00��
Large
8
180
6
2
8
8
96
Large
180
256
1
1
1
97
Small
256
362
2
2
2
99
Small
362
512
1
1
1
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
1 2048 1
>2048 1
1
1
1
100
Totall
50 1
50 1
100 1
100 1
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.3
D35 =
11.0
D50 =
27.6
D84 =
109.5
D95 =
172.5
D100 =
512.0
Glade Creek, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
70
v
60
v
a
50
m
u
40
v
30
2
20
10
0
ra'L .yh .y5 Oh 1 'L ,yW
00 oy o•
b hb W y1 yro ,L�o .�'L by �a 90 ,L0 �O 5� 6ti 1ti tia a0 0rO
ti ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo 0
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYO-05/2016
■ MYl-10/2016 ■ MY2-05/2017 0 MY3-07/2018
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek, Cross -Section 1
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000 1
0.062 1
46.5
D80. =
0
D95 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
90
Fine
0.125
0.250
80
0
Medium 0.25 0.50
0
SP!p
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
2
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
4
4
6
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
a
50
6
Very Fine 2.8 4.0 1 1
7
Fine
4.0
5.6
2
2
9
U
Fine
5.6
8.0
2
2
11
�S
Medium
8.0
11.0
4
4
15
Medium 11.0 16.0 2 2
17
'v
Coarse
16.0
22.6
10
10
27
Coarse 22.6 32 6 6
33
Very Coarse
32
45
15
15
48
Very Coarse
45
64
22
22
70
Small
64
90
13
13
83
Small
90
128
9
9
92
Large
128
180
5
5
97
Large 180 256 2 2
99
Small
256
362
1
1
100
Small 362 512
100
J�
�p
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048
100
BEDROCK
JBedrock
1 2048 1
>2048 1
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
Cross -Section 1
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
13.3
D35 =
33.5
D50 =
46.5
D80. =
93.6
D95 =
157.1
D100 =
362.0
Glade Creek, Cross -Section 1
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
v
70
60
a
50
N
M
U
40
30
>
'v
20
10
0
OO6ti titih yh Oy ti ti tiw
, O, O•
o hb ro titi tib tib 3ti a`1 ya 90 yw $o y0 eti titi ya �� a`0
'L 1 1 'L 3 5 ,yO ,ti0 �O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-05/2016
■ MYI-10/2016 MY2-05/2017 ■ MY3-07/2018
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek, Cross -Section 2
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000 1
0.062 1
52.5
D80. =
0
D95 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
90
Fine
0.125
0.250
80
0
Medium 0.25 0.50 1 1
1
S!P
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
70
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
3
a
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
N
3
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
U
3
Fine
4.0
5.6
3
30
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
4
�S
Medium
8.0
11.0
6
6
10
Medium
11.0
16.0
5
5
15
Coarse
16.0
22.6
3
3
18
Coarse 22.6 32 6 6
24
Very Coarse
32
45
15
15
39
Very Coarse
45
64
25
25
64
Small
64
90
17
17
81
Small
90
128
6
6
87
Large
128
180
7
7
94
Large 180 256 6 6
100
Small
256
362
100
Small 362 512
100
J�
�p
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048
100
BEDROCK
JBedrock
1 2048 1
>2048 1
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
Cross -Section 2
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
18.0
D35 =
41.1
D50 =
52.5
D80. =
107.3
D95 =
190.9
D100 =
256.0
Glade Creek, Cross -Section 2
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
v
70
60
a
50
N
M
U
40
30
>
20
10
0
Olin' yyh ,yh Oy 'Y ti ,ti'b
o•
Q hb 'b 1ti ,y0 ,ti'o „�'L Ah rod' 90 ,y'b $O y0 bti
ti ti ti ti 3 5
o• o,
do yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-05/2016
■ MYI-10/2016 MY2-05/2017 ■ MY3-07/2018
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
LIT to Glade Creek, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min I max
Particle Count
Riffle I Pool I Total
Reach Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000 1
0.062 1
23 1
23 1
46
46
46
D100 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
90
46
SPO
Fine
0.125
0.250
S
5
10
10
56
Medium 0.25 0.50 1 7 8 8
64
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
2
3
3
67
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0 1 1 1
68
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
v
68
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
68
Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
2
2
70
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
2
2
72
JIC�
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
20
1
1
73
M
Medium
11.0
16.0
1
1
1
74
10
Coarse
16.0
22.6
74
Coarse
22.6
32
6'L .yh .y5 Oh 1 'L ,y4
00 oy o•
b y�o W ,y1 ,oto ti� 3ti eh bA 90 ,L0 �O 5b 6ti .y'L ,yP b0 A�
ti ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo �o
74
Particle Class Size (mm)
Very Coarse
32
45
74
Very Coarse
45
64
1
1
1
75
Small
64
90
3
3
3
78
Small
90
128
7
17
17
95
Lp00��
Large
128
180
5
5
5
00
Large
180
256
100
Small
256
362
100
p�� ^
Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
1 2048 1
>2048 1
1
1
1
100
Totall
60 1
40 1
100 1
100
1 100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
D35 =
Silt/Clay
D50 =
0.2
D84 =
101.9
D95 =
128.0
D100 =
180.0
UT to Glade Creek, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
70
v
60
v
a
50
m
u
40
v
30
2
20
M
10
0
6'L .yh .y5 Oh 1 'L ,y4
00 oy o•
b y�o W ,y1 ,oto ti� 3ti eh bA 90 ,L0 �O 5b 6ti .y'L ,yP b0 A�
ti ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYO-05/2016
■ MYl-10/2016 ■ MY2-05/2017 0 MY3-07/2018
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
UT to Glade Creek, Cross -Section 5
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
min max
Riffle 100-
Count
Summary
Class Percent
Percentage Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000 1
0.062 1
54
54
54
D95 =
Very fine
0.062
0.125
54
90
Fine
0.125
0.250
8
8
62
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
2
64
S!P
Coarse
0.5
1.0
64
Very Coarse 1.0 2.0
64
a
N
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
m
40
64
Very Fine 2.8 4.0
64
Fine
4.0
5.6
30
64
Fine 5.6 8.0
64
�S
Medium
8.0
11.0
64
Medium 11.0 1 16.0
64
Coarse
16.0
22.6
a
[A.h
64
Coarse 22.6 32
64
Very Coarse
32
45
o• o,
do yo
64
Very Coarse 45 64
64
Small
64
90
6
6
70
Small 90 128 18 18
88
Large
128
180
12
12
100
Large 180 256
100
Small
256
362
100
Small 362 512
100
J�
�p
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large 1024 2048
100
BEDROCK
113edrock
1 2048 1
>2048 1
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
Cross Section 5
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
D35=
Silt/Clay
D50=
Silt/Clay
D80. =
118.4
D95 =
156.2
D100 =
180.0
UT to Glade Creek, Cross -Section 5
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
v
70
60
a
N
50
m
40
30
>
'v
20
10
a
[A.h
0 IL U
I J
o6ti yyh by Oy 'Y
o•
ti ,ti'b Q hb 'b 1ti ,y0 ,ti'o „�'L Ah rod' 90 ,y'b $O y0 bti y'L ,ya p96
ti ti ti ti 3 5 cj
o• o,
do yo
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-05/2016
■ MYI-10/2016 MY2-05/2017 ■ MY3-07/2018
APPENDIX 5. Hydrology Summary Data and Plots
Table 14. Verification of Bankfull Events
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Glade Creek, UT
Table 15. Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
l P,•
Glade Creek
MY1 6/27/2016
10/4/2016 Crest Gage
MY2 10/9/2017
12/4/2017 Wrackline
MY3 2/11/2018
4/2/2018 Wrackline
UT
MY1 6/27/2016
10/4/2016 Crest Gage
MY2 10/9/2017
12/5/2017 Wrackline
MY3 2/11/2018
4/2/2018 Crest Gage
Table 15. Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Wetland success criteria is 12.5% of growing season (21 consecutive days).
Summary of Groundwater Gage Results for MY3
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (%)
Gage
Year 1 (2016)Year
2 (2017)
Year 3 (2018) Year 4 (2019) Year 5 (2020)
Yes/127 Days
Yes/169 Days
Yes/169 Days
1
(75.6%)
(100%)
(100%)
Wetland success criteria is 12.5% of growing season (21 consecutive days).
Groundwater Gage Plots
Glade Creek II Restoration Project (DMS Project No. 92343)
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
Wetland D
20
10
0
-10
i
� -20
`w
m
3 -30
-40
-50
-60
=° LL a < O z° o
Rainfall — Reference Gage Depth — Gage #1 — — Criteria Level
6.0
5.0
4.0
C
3.0 j
c
z
2.0
1.0
0.0
Monthly Rainfall Data
Glade Creek II Restoration Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 3 - 2018
' 2018 rainfall collected from NC CRONOS Station Name: Sparta 3.5 SSW (NCSU, 2018)
' 30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from weather station Sparta, NC8158 (USDA, 2018)
3 No onsite data available.
Glade Creek 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2018 Alleghany County, NC
13.00
11.00
9.00
e
7.00
0
CL
5.00
0`
3.00
1.00
Jan -18
Feb -18 Mar -18 Apr -18 May -18 Jun -18 Jul -18 Aug -18 Sep -18 Oct -18
-1.00
Date
NC CRONOS Sparta 3.5 SSW —30th percentile —70th percentile
' 2018 rainfall collected from NC CRONOS Station Name: Sparta 3.5 SSW (NCSU, 2018)
' 30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from weather station Sparta, NC8158 (USDA, 2018)
3 No onsite data available.