20050098 Ver 1_Complete File_20050121

001 `QG
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
March 3, 2005
Mr. Cal Miller
Wetlands Resource Center
3970 Bowen Road
Canal Winchester, OH, 43110
Subject Property: Bailey Fork Stream Restoration
Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Miller:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
DWQ Project # 05-0098
Burke County
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to restore
5,500 feet of streams at the subject property, as described within your application dated January 20, 2005
and received by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on January 21, 2005. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that the impacts are covered by General Water Quality Certification
Number(s) 3495 (GC3495). The Certification(s) allows you to use Nationwide Permit(s) 27 when issued
by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). In addition, you should obtain or otherwise comply with
any other required federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not
limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control, Non-discharge, and other regulations. Also, this approval to
proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct impacts to waters as depicted in your
application shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
This approval is for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold,
the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. If total fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of
wetland or 150 linear feet of stream, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506 (h). This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
The Additional Conditions of the Certification are:
1. Impacts Approved
The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and general
conditions of this Certification (or Isolated Wetland Permit) are met. No other impacts are
approved including incidental impacts:
Amount Approved Units Plan Location or Reference
Stream 5,500 (feet) Restoration plan
401 Oversight/Express Review Permits Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr,state,nc.us/ncwetiands
Noy thCarolina
rrtt?ral??
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/ 10% Post Consumer Paper
Wetlands Resource Center
Page 2 of 3
March 3, 2005
2. Erosion & Sediment Control Practices
Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications
governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to protect surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control
measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices
shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects,
including contractor-owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Surface Mining Manual.
d. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in
accordance with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
3. No Waste, Spoil, Solids, or Fill of Any Kind
No waste, spoil, solids, or fill of any kind shall occur in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas beyond
the footprint of the impacts depicted in the Pre-Construction Notification. All construction
activities, including the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of sediment and erosion
control Best Management Practices, shall be performed so that no violations of state water quality
standards, statutes, or rules occur.
4. No Sediment & Erosion Control Measures w/n Wetlands or Waters
Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters
is unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within six months of the date
that the Division of Land Resources has released the project.
5. Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result in
criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Certification (associated with the approved wetland or
stream impacts), you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that
you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of
Wetlands Resource Center
Page 3 of 3
March 3, 2005
the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh at 919-
733-9721 or Kevin Barnett in the DWQ Asheville Regional Office at 828-296-4500.
AWKlcbk
Enclosures: GC 3495
Certificate of Completion
cc: USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
DWQ Asheville Regional Office
DLR Asheville Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Filename: 050098 B ailey(B urke)401
D
NATURAL SYSTEM 0`'[?g
D
E N S IN E E R i N G
I r ?^
January 20, 2005
DENR - "JH .? C.i:.'_ITY
V,ETIANDS NID S T GrOM ER BRANCH
Mr. Steve Chapin Mr. John Domey
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regulatory Office 401 Wetlands Unit
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 1650 Mail Service Center
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
RE: Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Project, Burke County, Morganton, North Carolina.
NSE Project: WRC-0402.
Dear Mr. Chapin and Dorney,
Enclosed is the detailed restoration plan for the proposed Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Project.
This project has been selected by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program for the purpose of fulfilling
compensatory mitigation requirements within the Catawba 01 Drainage Basin. Natural Systems
Engineering (NSE) is submitting this restoration plan on behalf of Wetland Resource Center and is
requesting a Nationwide 27 permit and Water Quality Certification Number 3495 in order to
commence with the implementation of the restoration project.
The restoration plan proposes to restore 5500 linear feet of highly degraded channel and the creation
of a vegetated riparian zone with a minimum width of 30 feet from top of bank. The restoration
design entails the modification of the current stream pattern, bed profile, and cross-sectional
dimension utilizing reference stream reach data, the rural piedmont curve, and existing stream data.
NSE is available to meet the regulatory agencies on site if required to clarify the design and to
observe the subject stream channels. If this is desired please contact me at your earliest
convenience so a mutually agreeable time can be determined for both regulatory agencies. I can be
contacted at 919-878-5444 (office), 919-605-6134 (mobile) or e-mail at pielenevsky(a)l?pc.cocn.
Sincerely,
NATURAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Peter Jelene s S 14?p
Director of tream Restoration Services
.
James M. Halley, PE
Principal
Attachments: Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Plan
copy: Mr. Cal Miller, Wetlands Resource Center
371 9 B..... D.- RALCIOM, NC 276139 OF-c[ (9191 B7B-5444 FAX [phone]
I?
¦
f *
.r ?
-,.
n?
a ?
?s

Prepared for:
D
J4, N! 2 1 7005
pE-NIR WA t:r' QUALITY
syi
E I
T k Ds AND STORMWAT=R BRANCH ll 11'k 1 i 1 1C rRQUR W
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
L E
On behalf of
Wetlands Resource Center
3970 Bowen Road
Canal Winchester, OH 43110
Prepared by:
NATURAL SYSTEMS
E N G I N E E R I N G
January 2005 l
r
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina - January 2005
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................1
2.0 Project Goals and Objectives .............................................................................2
3.0 Site Description ...................................................................................................2
3.1 General Description ................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Surface Waters ........................................................................................................... 3
4.0 General Watershed Description ........................................................................ ..3
5.0 Existing Stream Conditions .............................................................................. ..5
5.1 Existing Stream Geometry ......................................................................................... 5
5.1.1 Stream Survey Methodology .............................................................................. 5
5.1.2 Bankfull Verification ......................................................................................... 6
5.1.3 Stream Classification ......................................................................................... 6
5.1.4 Channel Classification ....................................................................................... 6
5.2 Stream Substrate ......................................................................................................... 8
5.3 Soils ............................................................................................................................8
5.4 Existing Plant Communities ....................................................................................... 9
5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species .......................................................................... 9
6.0 Reference Reaches ............................................................................................ 10
6.1 Sal's Branch ............................................................................................................. 10
6.2 Whites Creek ............................................................................................................ 10
6.3 S. Muddy Birchfield ................................................................................................. 11
6.4 S. Muddy Tributary 4 ............................................................................................... 11
7.0 Stream Channel Design ..................................................................................... 11
7.1 Natural Channel Design ........................................................................................... 11
7.2 Dimension ................................................................................................................ 17
7.3 Pattern ...................................................................................................................... 17
7.4 Bed Form .................................................................................................................. 17
7.5 Sediment Transport Analysis ................................................................................... 18
7.6 Riparian Area ........................................................................................................... 20
7.7 Stormwater ............................................................................................................... 20
7.8 Stream Structures ..................................................................................................... 21
7.8.1 Boulder Cross-Vane ......................................................................................... 21
7.8.2 J-Hook Vane ..................................................................................................... 21
7.8.3 Root Wads ........................................................................................................ 21
7.8.4 Channel Sill ...................................................................................................... 22
7.8.5 Boulder Step-Pool Structure ............................................................................ 22
7.8.6 Double Step Cross Vane .................................................................................. 22
8.0 Restoration Design Plan Sheets ....................................................................... 22
9.0 Riparian Planting Plan ....................................................................................... 23
10.0 Monitoring Plan .................................................................................................. 24
10.1 Stream Channel ........................................................................................................ 25
10.2 Riparian Buffer ......................................................................................................... 25
11.0 Success Criteria ................................................................................................ 25
12.0 References ......................................................................................................... 26
I
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan - Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina - January 2005
a
Appendix A - Figures
Appendix B - Rural Regional Curve vs. NSE Reference Reach Data
Appendix C - Bailey Fork Existing Conditions Data Summary
Appendix D - Pre-Construction Notification Application Form
Appendix E Support Documents
Construction Easements
NC DENR Natural Heritage Program 11-16.04 Letter
NCDOT Right-of-Way Encroachment 12.20.04 Letter
Appendix F - Photographs
B
011

©NSE
ii
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005

11

Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Plan
1.0 Introduction
Bailey Fork and two unnamed tributaries of Bailey Fork have been selected for restoration by the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program
to fulfill a portion of the Request for Proposals: Full Delivery Project Catawba 01. The purpose of the
RFP is to provide compensatory stream mitigation within the Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit
03050101. The Request for Proposal has been designated RFP 16-D04006. Closing date for the
request was March 25, 2004. Wetlands Resource Center (WRC) entered into a contract with the State
of North Carolina on July 22, 2004 to deliver 5,500 stream units within this project site (Contract No.
D04006-2).
WRC proposes to restore stream dimension, pattern, and bed profile to approximately 5,500 linear feet
of existing highly degraded and poorly functioning perennial stream channels. The proposed design
will expand the current channel length by approximately 600 linear feet. Also proposed is the
restoration of approximately 7.5 acres of riparian buffer (extending landward 30 feet from bankfull on
each side of the stream) which will be protected in perpetuity. As outlined in the request for proposals
for this project, the riparian buffer width requirements were obtained from the US Army Corps of
Engineers April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
The site has been selected because of the highly degraded state of Bailey Fork and the tributaries.
Based on site observations the degraded condition of the streams within the project area may be the
result of flood plain accretion, historic channelization, periodic dredging, past and present day
vegetation maintenance practices, and to a lesser extent storm water runoff onto the site from the
incremental increase in impervious surface associated with urbanization.
The stream banks are generally denuded, actively eroding, and have a nearly vertical profile.
Vegetative cover is minimal along the embankment. As a result, the banks are eroding, subsequently
slumping, promoting lateral channel migration and asymmetrical meander creation. The majority of
the stream is classified as an "F" type channel with some sections classifying as E and G-type channel
under the Rosgen Stream Classification System. Some sections of channel have limited access to the
flood plain during peak flood flows. The channels do not have access to the flood plain during
bankfull events that typically occur in stable stream channel during the 1.5 to 2 year return period
storm (Leopold et al. 1992). The channels are in a highly incised state; therefore, flood flows are
constrained to the channel and the flood plain functions more as a terrace that is not accessible at the
bankfull elevation. The streams are in a progressive state of channel evolution referred to as Stage III
and Stage IV (Ward and Trimble, 2004). Meanders and a new lower and functional flood plain
located at the bankfull elevation are beginning to take form within the existing confined channel as a
result of active stream bank erosion, and bed degradation. Only during intense rain storm events does
flood water ever reach the historic flood plain.
Bailey Fork and its unnamed tributaries within the project site present a viable and feasible restoration
project. The main stem of Bailey Fork and its tributaries are morphologically unstable and are
contributing to water quality degradation and possess limited aquatic habitat. Several factors support
this proposed restoration project. The current degraded state of the channel, limited flood plain
functionality due to channel incision, existing and future erosion potential, limited native vegetation
along the banks and riparian area, and amenable landowners make this site a viable and feasible
restoration project.
ONSE
0
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
a
Additional information is located in the Appendicies of this report. Report figures are located in
Appendix A. A comparison of the North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute's regional curve
versus the project specific regional curve is presented in Appendix B. The existing conditions data
collected for Bailey Fork is presented in Appendix C and the Pre-Construction Notification Form is
located in Appendix D. Documents related to the project such as agency correspondence and legal
agreements with the property owners are located in Appendix E. Photographs of the project site can
be found in Appendix F.
2.0 Project Goals and Objectives
The project goal for this restoration plan is to modify the current dimension, pattern and profile of the
existing stream channels so it will be stable and self-maintaining by utilizing natural channel design
techniques and procedures. The design has been developed utilizing Rosgen-based natural channel
design principles. Physical restoration and the return of the overall biological and water quality
functionality will be accomplished by fulfilling the following objectives:
1) Design a channel with the appropriate cross-sectional dimension, pattern, and longitudinal
profile utilizing the existing channel condition survey, and collected reference reach data as a
guide.
2) Improve upon and create bed form and aquatic habitat diversity (riffles, runs, pools, and
glides).
3) Integrate, in conjunction with the stream restoration, a nested flood plain (bankfull bench) that
will be accessible at the proposed bankfull channel elevation (Priority II restoration) or raise
the bed elevation of the current stream so the bankfull elevation matches the current flood
plain elevation (Priority I).
4) Ensure channel and stream bank stabilization by integrating in-channel grade control
structures, root wads, and native vegetation into the proposed restoration design while also
creating a stable and functional aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
5) Establish a native forested riparian plant community within a minimum of 30 feet from the
proposed top of the bankfull channel along with the removal of exotic vegetation during
construction implementation and the elimination of current embankment maintenance
practices.
6) Provide aesthetic and educational opportunities.
3.0 Site Description
3.1 General Description
The project site is located approximately 2 miles southwest of Morganton, Burke County, North
Carolina (Figure 1). The site is specifically located approximately 1.7 miles southwest of the I-40/US
64 interchange. To get to the site from I-40, take US 64 south to Propst Road (SR 1112), turn right
and the project site is located on the north and south sides of Propst Road approximately 1,800 feet
from the Propst Road and US 64 Intersection (Figure 2). The site includes four parcels of property
owned by three separate parties (Figure 3). The project site and subject properties are also depicted
against an aerial photograph as shown in Figure 4.
0
ONSE
2
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
3.2 Surface Waters

The project site is located within the Catawba River Basin, USGS Hydrologic Unit 03050101 (USGS
1974), subbasin 030831 (NCDENR, 2003), and Local Watershed 14-digit basin 03050101050050
(NCDENR, 2001). Bailey Fork (Stream Index Number 11-34-(2)) flows directly into the Catawba
River approximately 1.7 miles downstream of the project terminus. The North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NC DWQ) has not assigned stream index numbers to the unnamed tributaries of Bailey
Fork located within the project extents. The current State classification of Bailey Fork and each
unnamed tributary is Class C waters (NCDENR, 2004). Class C waters are protected for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture (NCDENR, 2004).
Based on the most recently published USGS quadrangle, Bailey Fork is a 2"a order stream and the
drainage area at the terminus of the project is approximately 6.5 square miles (Figure 5).
4.0 General Watershed Description
The primary land use within the immediate project site is agricultural. The project site is currently
being utilized to produce hay for livestock feed. The site has been degraded by past land management
practices including mechanical land clearing, straightening and dredging of stream channels and
continual hay production. Utilizing the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1993
orthophotograph of the watershed area, it has been estimated that the land use within the Bailey Fork
watershed consists primarily of forested, agricultural, and urban land uses. Approximately sixty
percent (60%) of the watershed is forested, thirty percent (30%) is agricultural, and ten percent (10%)
is urbanized (Figure 6).
The watershed area is located in the Piedmont physiographic region of North Carolina and is classified
geologically as the Chauga Belt. The ecoregion has been classified as the Northern Inner Piedmont
ecoregion. The surrounding landscape topography of the watershed is characterized as predominately
strongly sloping to very steep uplands and narrow nearly level flood plains. The site topography along
the flood plain is relatively flat adjacent to the subject streams. Elevations within the watershed vary
from 2800 feet mean sea level (MSL) at the headwaters of Bailey Fork to a low of 1035 feet (MSL) at
the project terminus (USGS, 1993a and USGS, 1993b).
Bailey Fork originates in the Burkemont Mountains and flows from south to the north and eventually
empties directly into the Catawba River, which flows from west to east. The confluence of Bailey
Fork and the Catawba River is west of Morganton, North Carolina. An unnamed tributary, referred to
in this restoration plan as Unnamed Tributary 1 (UT 1), intersects Bailey Fork approximately 250 feet
south of Propst Road. Unnamed Tributary 2 (UT 2) connects to Lower Bailey Fork downstream of
Propst Road at the approximate terminus of the restoration project.
' Vertical fall across the project site from the origin to the terminus is approximately 8 feet resulting in a
valley slope of 0.004 ft/ft based on the 1-foot topographic map developed by 4D Site Solutions. The
wide, gently sloping, well-defined flood plain is a Valley Type VIII as defined in Applied River
Morphology (Rosgen, 1996). The drainage area for the entire project site, which correlates with the
confluence of Lower Bailey Fork with Unnamed Tributary 2 (UT 2) has been estimated to be
approximately 6.5 square miles.
ONSE
3
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
The project site currently exhibits various existing uses. The primary land use within the site is
agricultural. The current agricultural use is the production of fescue hay and includes the
infrastructure required to access, maintain, and service the project area for this purpose. Structures
observed on the project site include fencing, a bridged stream crossing, a stormwater outfall fed by
NCDOT roadside drainage ditching, driveway access from Propst Road, a swing gate, and three 7.5-
foot wide oval corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culverts that pass flow under Propst Road. NCDOT has
determined that a right-of-way encroachment agreement is not needed to perform the construction
work associated with this project (see 12-20-04 letter, Appedix E). In addition to the agricultural use
a high tension electrical utility exists north and parallel to Propst Road. Based on property owner
information, this electrical utility has a 50-foot right-of-way from each side of its centerline. The
utility right-of-way crosses the bottom end of Upper Bailey Fork and the lower most section of UT 1
immediately upstream and adjacent to Propst Road at an estimated 22 degrees to the orientation of
Upper Bailey Fork.
Land use within the watershed and immediately surrounding the site has been slowly yet progressively
converted to residential and commercial land uses (urban land uses) although the conversion appears
to be limited and consists primarily of single family residences. There were no large scale commercial
or residential development projects observed within the vicinity of the project. The expectation is that
land use within the watershed area will remain fairly constant because there is little evidence of an
increase in urbanization or significant shift of current land uses.

D
ONSE
4
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
5.0 Existing Stream Conditions
' The restoration site consists of a historically modified (re-aligned, channelized, and periodically
maintained) stream channel as interpreted from the 1993 orthophotograph (Figure 4). Based on
photographic interpretation, the site has been historically utilized for agricultural production (row
crops, hay production). It is very likely the project site has been farmed since the Civil War era. As a
result of the conversion to this land use, the natural plant communities, topography, and hydrologic
conditions have been altered or in some cases obliterated.
Although the site has been converted and subsequently stabilized due to the termination of tillage and
wide spread land clearing, maintenance adjacent to the channel has continued. Vegetation along the
channel is sparse and is apparently periodically maintained. The incised nature of Bailey Fork and the
unnamed tributaries has resulted in continuous bank erosion, slump, mass wasting, scour, and head
cutting. Previous historic alteration such as straightening, dredging and the deforestation of the
embankment has increased stream slope, stream power, shear stress, and confined flood flows to the
channel have perpetuated the degradation process.
Existing stream features within the project site consist of three separate perennial stream channels.
Stream channels consist of Bailey Fork, and two unnamed tributaries of Bailey Fork referred to as UT
1 and UT 2. Bailey Fork has been separated into Upper and Lower Bailey Fork for the purposes of
this restoration plan and the dividing point is Propst Road. Upper Bailey Fork has a watershed
drainage area of approximately 5.0 square miles and Lower Bailey Fork prior to the confluence with
UT 2 is a watershed drainage area of approximately 5.5 square miles. UT 1, which is located on the
south side of Propst Road and oriented east of Upper Bailey Fork has an estimated watershed area of
0.54 square miles. The origin of UT 1 within the project site is immediately below the box culvert
located under US 64. UT 2 is located on the north side of Propst Road and is oriented west of Lower
Bailey Fork. Watershed drainage area for UT 2 is estimated to be 0.98 square miles. The source of
UT 2 within the project area is a 45-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) located under Propst Road.
5.1 Existing Stream Geometry
5.1.1 Stream Survey Methodology
A field reconnaissance of the channel was performed prior to the commencement of the site survey.
The purpose of the field reconnaissance was to identify the bankfull elevation utilizing existing
indicators. Typical bankfull indicators were obscured and sporadic due to active bank erosion,
slumping, land maintenance activities, and past landscape modifications. Features that were utilized
1 when present included depositional features, vegetation positions, scour lines, and wrack lines. Other
features that were identified during the reconnaissance and subsequently surveyed included existing
stormwater outfalls, culverts, bridges and utilities.
Natural Systems Engineering subcontracted 4D Site Solutions to survey the existing channel
conditions under field supervision and to develop a one-foot topographic map that was utilized in the
development of this restoration plan. Survey data was collected and compiled during October 2004.
The base map generated was used to evaluate present landscape conditions and constraints, and to
determine the final location of the proposed channel alignment.
OiNSE
5
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
During the site survey, numerous channel cross-sections were collected encompassing all three of the
subject channels. Data was collected utilizing either a total station or survey level. The cross-
sectional data is presented in Figure 8, Appendix A.
5.1.2 Bankfull Verification
Cross-sectional data that was collected in the field was plotted and subsequently compared to the
North Carolina Rural Regional Curve (Harmon et al, 1999 and SRI 2000) for accuracy. All of the
cross-sectional areas surveyed and subsequently plotted were within the 95% confidence interval
relative to drainage area (Appendix B).
5.1.3 Stream Classification
Stream channels were classified utilizing the stream classification system devised by Dave Rosgen
(Rosgen, 1996 and Rosgen et al. 1998). This classification system utilizes several parameters based
on field collected data and site observations, which collectively determines the stream type. The
criteria utilized to determine stream type includes the stream slope, width-to-depth ratio, entrenchment
ratio, sinuosity, and substrate class.
5.1.4 Channel Classification
Based on the completed channel survey and observations made during the site reconnaissance, Bailey
Fork, UT 1 and UT 2 have been functionally and hydrologically modified to maximize available land
for the purpose of accommodating current agricultural uses. Modifications may have included
dredging, channelization, and clearing and grubbing of the native vegetation once present along the
channel and within the flood plain. Stream channelization in this case was probably completed to
maximize productive cropland acreage, promote positive site drainage, and to reduce the historic
groundwater table elevation. As a direct result of the channelization procedure, the dredged and
lowered channel no longer has full access to the historic flood plain at the bankfull elevation. The
channel is considered to be incised resulting in the concentration of flood flows within the confines of
the channel that would otherwise be dispersed onto the flood plain. As a result of the incision, stream
power within the confined channel increases beyond sustainable levels causing destabilization in the
form of bed degradation and bank erosion (Ward and Trimble, 2004; Gordon et al., 1992).
Bank erosion is present throughout the length of the project reaches. Perpetuated by incision, the
channels are in the preliminary stages of transition from an "E/F" to a "G" type channel. As the
degree of vertical incision increases from downstream to upstream (headcutting) the channels will
have limited access to the flood plain. The lower most reaches of each channel classify as G-type
channel and are exemplifying Stage VI evolution (Ward and Trimble, 2004). Channel reaches above
those sections shared characteristic of both E and F type channels and these sections are in Stage III
evolution.
Stage III channel evolution consists primarily of channel degradation or erosion of the bed. Stage IV
evolution consists of bed degradation and bank erosion. Bank erosion consists primarily of slumping
caused when the toe of the embankment is eroded to the point where the critical bank height is
exceeded. At this point, the embankment is no longer supported and the entire bank slumps into the
channel. Critical bank height is influenced by soil type, vegetation type, rooting densities and depths.
ONSE
6
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005

t

11
t

t
Computing current bank height ratios, which is the maximum bank height divided by the maximum
bankfull depth, can numerically express the extent of channel incision. Utilizing the survey data
gathered in the field, bank height ratios for Upper Bailey Fork averaged 1.9 with a range of 1.8 to 2.0.
UT 1 bank height ratios averaged 2.0 with a range of 1.8 to 2.3. UT 2 bank height ratios averaged 1.6
with values ranging from 1.5 to 2.2. Typically, bank height ratios on reference reach streams are 1.0
and rarely greater than 1.1; therefore, based on this comparison Bailey Fork, UT 1 and UT 2 are
extremely incised. Channel adjustments due to these conditions include lateral channel migration, bed
degradation, and bank erosion.
Several representative riffle cross-sections were surveyed along Bailey Fork, UT 1, and UT 2.
Existing bankfull cross-sectional area for Bailey Fork (includes Upper and Lower Bailey Fork data)
ranges from 67.4 to 95.3 square feet. Bankfull width ranges from 19.9 to 37.4 feet with mean depths
between 1.6 to 3.0 feet. The stream type transitions from an E to F to a G-type channel as the channels
proceed downstream, with the majority of the reach lengths emulating an F channel type. The lower-
most segments of each channel are G channels simulating an active bed degradation process
(headcutting) which will continue until stream slope equilibrium is reached. The average dimensions
are below and the individual cross-sections are summarized in Appendix C.
Bailey Fork
Bankfull Width:
Cross-sectional Area:
Bankfull Mean Depth:
Maximum Depth:
Width/Depth Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
27.9 feet
78.1 square feet
2.9 feet
4.3 feet
10.1
5.9
2.1
Riffle cross-sections taken along Unnamed Tributary 1 varied from 14.5 to 17.3 square feet. Bankfull
widths varied from 9.4 to 12.0 feet with mean depths from 1.4 to 1.6 feet. Average values are below.
Unnamed Tributary 1
Bankfull Width:
Cross-sectional Area:
Bankfull Mean Depth:
Maximum Depth:
Width/Depth Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
10.8 feet
16.3 square feet
1.5 feet
2.2 feet
7.2
2.1
2.0
Riffle cross-sectional taken along Unnamed Tributary 2 ranged from 18.7 to 20.8 square feet. The
bankfull width ranged from 7.6 to 8.5 with mean depth from 2.2 to 2.7. Average Values are below.
ONSE
7
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
8
Unnamed Tributary 2
Bankfull Width:
Cross-sectional Area:
Bankfull Mean Depth:
Maximum Depth:
Width/Depth Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
8.2 feet
20.1 square feet
2.4 feet
3.5 feet
2.7
13.0
1.6
Additional existing conditions parameters are available on the morphological tables provided in
Section 7.2.
Past impacts as explained in the previous paragraphs and continual vegetative maintenance are
perpetuating and accelerating the degradation process of Bailey Fork and the two unnamed tributaries
Vertical incision has constrained channel discharges resulting in bed scour and bank erosion. As a
result native plants along the riparian zone are sparse and these areas are dominated by fescue grass
resulting in shallow rooting depths compared to the existing bank heights, essentially providing
limited bank stability and high erodibility potential.
5.2 Stream Substrate
Bed material in Bailey Fork and the unnamed tributaries is dominated with coarse sand and fine
gravel. Depending on the specific location where the individual pebble count was collected, some
samples were slightly coarser compared to the overall substrate class and were composed of coarse
gravel. The D50 ranged from 6 millimeters for Upper Bailey to a maximum of 24 millimeters for UT1.
Therefore 50% of the bed material sampled consisted of particles that are classified as coarse gravel or
finer. After evaluation of the collected stream data, it was observed that coarser pebble counts
correlated to channel segments that are undergoing active channel degradation (i.e. scour). This
observed channel degradation was supported by the data that showed these sections of stream as
having the steepest measured facet slopes. The physical attributes at specific locations has revealed
subpavement material which is not indicative of the substrate class observed throughout the length of
the channel or that is being actively transported during effective discharge.
5.3 Soils
The project site is located in the Northern Inner Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina.
Soils are mostly mesic in nature versus the thermic soils present in the majority of the Piedmont. Soils
present in the riparian areas adjacent to Bailey Fork are characteristic of those found in alluvial
landforms within this region and have been mapped by USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) as Colvard sandy loam (Figure 8, Appendix A).
Colvard soils are the only mapped unit located within the flood plain and located immediately adjacent
the subject stream channels. Formed in loamy alluvial deposits, these soils are nearly level, very deep,
well drained or moderately well drained.
Other soils in the project's vicinity include Fairview sandy clay loam and Unison fine sandy loam,
which are often mapped on adjacent slopes and terraces. No hydric soils were mapped by NRCS
within the project corridor.

Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
5.4 Existing Plant Communities
Throughout most of the property, Bailey Fork and its unnamed tributaries flow through a fescue
pasture. Thus, the native riparian plant community is restricted to the stream banks and is rarely wider
than ten feet wide. Trees are sporadic and are limited to river birch (Betula nigra), red maple (Ater
rubrttm), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), and black willow (Salix nigra). Slumb and
herbaceous layer consisted of privet (Ligustrum sinense) multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), blackberry
(Rubes spp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), deer-tongue (Panicum clandestinum), poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and goldenrod (Solidago spp.) (Radford et al., 1968). Fescue grass
(Festttca sp.) dominates the plant community throughout the site.
In patchy spots along and within the banks, smaller individuals of black willow (Salix nigra), alder
(Alms serrtdata), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciua)
occur sporadically, often within the active channel and on top of depositional features. To a lesser
extent, common wetland herbs observed included Carex spp. and Juntas spp. within the active
channel and banks.
5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
In order to assess any potential impacts to threatened and/or endangered species that may potentially
occur within the project site, a search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database
was conducted for a one-mile radius around the project area.
No occurrence of either federally or state-listed species were identified. This finding was supported
by a letter from Mr. Harry LeGrand Jr. of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) which
is located in Appendix E. The species that are listed as federally threatened or endangered by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Burke County are listed below (FWS, 2004):
Common Name
Bald Eagle
Bog Turtle
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf
Heller's blazing star
Mountain golden heather
Small-whorled pogonia
Spreading avens
Scientific Name Status
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened
Clenznrys nuthlenbergii
Hexastylis naniora
Liatris helleri
Hudsonia montana
Isotria medeoloides
Geum radiatum
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Due to the fact that the land use in the project's immediate vicinity experiences extensive and periodic
maintenance associated with hay production and the degraded state of the stream channel, no suitable
habitat for the above listed federal species was observed within the proposed restoration site.
The stream restoration is not expected to have any adverse effect on the habitat of any of these listed
species; rather, habitat quality will likely be enhanced as a result of the project.
During the field reconnaissance, characteristic piedmont fauna were observed onsite. Tracks of or
physical sighting of the following species were observed: whitetail deer (Odocoileus virginianus),
raccoon (Procyon lotor), American crow (Carduelis tristis), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), Great
blue heron (Ardea herodias), and red tail hawk (Buteo jamaicencis) (Webster'et al. 1985 and Potter et
al. 1980).
ONSE
9
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
6.0 Reference Reaches
The reference reaches described below were utilized to provide guidance in the design process of the
proposed stream restoration plan. Data collected was not used as an exact template but as a vital part
of the design process. These channels were chosen because of the similarities that are evident when
compared to the project streams. For instance, all of the reference reaches and the project streams are
located in a wide flat alluvial valley (Valley Type VIII), classify as E type channels, possess fine
grained channel substrate (sand to fine gravel), and have low gradient channel slopes (<0.8%). All of
the data collected relative to each reference reach plotted within the 95% confidence interval
(Appendix B) when compared to the North Carolina Regional Curve (SRI, 2000).
6.1 Sal's Branch
Sal's Branch is located approximately 1.5 miles south east of the Highway 70/540 interchange in
Umstead State Park, Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina. Based on the Southeast Durham 7.5-
minute topographic quadrangle Sal's Branch is a 1" order stream and the reference survey was
collected at a point at which the drainage area was calculated to be approximately 0.35 square miles.
The headwaters of the stream originate at Highway 70, which is predominately characterized as
commercial. As the creek flows onto Park property the watershed becomes forested with the
exception of an access road and buildings utilized to service the needs of the park and its patrons.
Stream data was collected in July of 2001. Information gathered included pattern and longitudinal
profile, cross-sectional area, slope, and pebble count data. Based on the data collected, Sal's Branch
was determined to be an E4 channel type when utilizing the Rosgen Stream Classification System.
The channel was determined to have a bankfull cross-sectional area of 13.8 square feet, a width of
10.2 feet, and a mean depth of 1.3 feet. The channel is located in a Valley Type VIII, which is
characterized as a wide alluvial valley with a low slope gradient.
6.2 Whites Creek
Whites Creek is located on the north side of Lake James approximately 10 miles east-northeast of
Morganton, North Carolina near the intersection of Route 126 and Fish Hatchery Road. Based on the
Oak Hill 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle Whites Creek is a 1" order stream and the reference
survey was collected at a point at which the drainage area was calculated to be approximately 1.7
square miles. The headwaters of the stream originate from the slopes of Shortoff Mountain in the
Linville Gorge Wilderness Area. Approximately two thirds of the watershed area is within the
Wilderness Area and the remainder is privately owned. The predominant land cover within the
watershed is forest.
Stream data was collected in October of 2004. Information gathered included pattern and longitudinal
profile, cross-sectional area, slope, and pebble count data. Based on the data collected, Whites Creek
was determined to be an E4 channel type when utilizing the Rosgen Stream Classification System.
The channel was determined to have a bankfull cross-sectional area of 35.7 square feet, a width of
17.0 feet, and a mean depth of 2.1 feet. The channel is located in a Valley Type VIII, which is
characterized as a wide alluvial valley with a low slope gradient.
ONSE
10
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
6.3 S. Muddy Birchfield
South Muddy "Birchfield" is located approximately 1,000 feet upstream of its intersection with SR
1763 near the town of Patten. Patten is located approximately 3 miles south of exit 94 on Highway 40
near Morganton, North Carolina. This section of stream is an unnamed tributary that lies to the west
of South Muddy Creek. One relatively short section of this stream (approximately 240 feet) appeared
to be stable and was surveyed. A cross section was measured across a stable riffle location. Pattern
measurements were not obtained due the short straight nature of the reach.
Based on the Gen Alpine 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle South Muddy "Birchfield" is a 2nd order
stream and the reference survey was collected at a point at which the drainage area was calculated to
be approximately 1.3 square miles. The headwaters of the stream originate approximately 1.5 miles
northwest of SR 1763, which is characterized predominantly as forest. Land use near the reference
reach location transitions from forest to agricultural and residential.
Stream data was collected in October of 2004. Information gathered included longitudinal profile,
cross-sectional area, slope, and pebble count data. As stated previously, pattern data was not
collected. Based on the data collected, South Muddy Birchfield was determined to be an E4 channel
type when utilizing the Rosgen Stream Classification System. The channel was determined to have a
bankfull cross-sectional area of 20.7 square feet, a width of 10.8 feet, and a mean depth of 1.9 feet.
The channel is located in a Valley Type VIII, which is characterized as a wide alluvial valley with a
low slope gradient.
6.4 S. Muddy Tributary 4
South Muddy "Trib 4" is an unnamed tributary of South Muddy Creek. This unnamed tributary lies to
the east of South Muddy Creek, and is near the intersection of SR 1133 and Dysartville Road. The
reference reach is located approximately 2 miles south of exit 94 on Highway 40 near Morganton,
North Carolina. The headwaters of the stream originate from the nearby slopes of the watershed, east
of Dysartville Road. The predominant land use in the watershed is forest.
Stream data was collected in October of 2004. Based on the Gen Alpine 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle South Muddy "Trib 4" is a 1St order stream and the reference survey was collected at a
point at which the drainage area was calculated to be approximately 0.14 square miles. Information
gathered included longitudinal profile, cross-sectional area, slope, and pebble count data. Based on
the data collected, South Muddy "Trib 4" was determined to be an E4 channel type when utilizing the
Rosgen Stream Classification System. The channel was determined to have a bankfull cross-sectional
area of 9.1 square feet, a width of 7.3 feet, and a mean depth of 1.3 feet. The channel is located in a
Valley Type VIII, which is characterized as a wide alluvial valley with a low slope gradient.
7.0 Stream Channel Design
7.1 Natural Channel Design
The restoration design for Bailey Fork and the two unnamed tributaries is based on natural channel
design principles and techniques utilizing reference reach data sets and the existing conditions survey
data collected from the restoration site. Reference data that has been utilized to develop the restoration
design for the stream channel included the North Carolina Rural Piedmont Regional Curve (SRI
ONSE
11

Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
'
2000), Sal
s Branch reference reach data (collected by Doll and Jelenevsky in 2001), Whites Creek
reference reach data (collected by NSE in 2004), S. Muddy Birchfield reference reach data (collected
by NSE in 2004) and S. Muddy Tributary 4 reference reach data (collected by NSE in 2004), and to a
lesser degree past successful stream restoration designs.
The proposed stream design will restore the existing degraded channel to a naturally meandering,
ecologically functional E/C type stream channel. A bankfull bench or nested flood plain will also be
constructed adjacent to Bailey Fork and to a lesser degree UT1 and UT2. The resulting restored
stream channels will be approximately 5,500 linear feet (centerline distance) with an estimated
thalweg length of approximately 5,800 linear feet. The proposed design will increase the overall
channel length by approximately 800 linear feet using the approximate thalweg length. This
restoration is considered to be a Rosgen Priority I and Priority II type of channel restoration. Sections
of the design are designated Priority II type stream restoration since a bankfull bench (nested flood
plain) will be constructed adjacent to the proposed channel alignment and will be located at a lower
elevation relative to the existing flood plain. Where possible the invert of the UT1 and UT2 was
elevated and therefore will be reconnected to the existing flood plain at the proposed bankfull
elevation. This reduces disturbance to the native soil profile and creates a more environmentally
sensitive construction process because the amount of disturbance is greatly reduced. The existing and
proposed morphological characteristics are depicted in Tables 1 through 4 on the following pages.
The restoration design will result in a riffle-pool channel profile that will be reinforced utilizing in-
stream structures such as boulder cross-vanes, J-hook vanes, double drop cross vanes, step-pool
structures, and root wads. The new channel, flood plain and any disturbed areas within the
conservation easement will subsequently be vegetated with transplants, bare-root seedlings, live stakes
and seeded with temporary and permanent ground cover. Erosion control matting,
temporary/permanent seeding, and live stakes will be applied to the channel embankment immediately
following completion of each channel segment providing surface protection of the banks.
0
ONSE
12
t Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Table 1- Upper Bailey Fork Morphology
S. Upper Upper
Sal's Whites S. Muddy Muddy Bailey Bailey
Variables Branch Creek Birchfield Trib 4 Fork Fork
Survey Crew Doll/ NSE
Jelenevsky NSE NSE 4D Site NSE
Solutions
Survey Date 06/01 10/04 10/04 10/04 10/04 12/04
Parameter Reference Reference Reference Reference Existing Design
Stream Type E E4 E4 E4 G4/F4 E4/C4
Drainage Area (mi) 0.35 1.7 1.3 0.14 5.0 5.0
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) 10.2 17 10.8 7.35 23.2 28
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) 1.3 2.1 1.9 1.3 3.1 2.3
Width/Depth Ratio 7.6 8.1 5.6 6.0 7.8 12.0
Max Riffle Depth (Drt,aX) 1.9 2.8 2.5 1.8 4.8 4.2
Max Riffle Depth Ratio (Dmax/Dbkf) 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.8
Bankfull Cross-Section Area (Abkf) 13.8 35.7 20.7 9.1 69.5 65.0
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf) 3.8 4.8 4.7 7.1 3.9 3.5
Bankfull Discharge (Abkf) 51.6 194 98 64 268.5 227.5
Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa) 100 150 100 43 180 280.0
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf) 9.8 8.8 9.3 5.8 7.9 10.0
Min Meander Length (Lm) 35 49 NA 50 60 70.0
Max Meander Length (Lm) 43 54 NA 160 96 154.0
Min Meander Length Ratio (Lm/Wbkf) 2 2.1 NA 6.8 2.5 2.5
Max Meander Length Ratio (Lm/Wbkf) 4.2 2.3 NA 21.8 4.1 2.5
Min Radius of Curvature (Ro) 11 11 NA 10 18 42.0
Max Radius of Curvature (Ro) 21 16 NA 11 30 84.0
Min Radius of Curvature Ratio (RJWWbkf) 1 0.5 NA 1.4 0.78 1.5
Max Radius of Curvature Ratio (Rc/Wbkf) 2 0.7 NA 1.5 1.3 3.0
Min Belt Width (Wb,t) 20 60 NA 50 75 70.0
Max Belt Width (Wb,t) 62 80 NA 80 105 153.0
Min Meander Width Ratio (Wb,t/Wbkf) 2 3.5 NA 6.8 3.2 2.5
Max Meander Width Ratio (Wbt/ Wbkf) 6.1 4.7 NA 10.9 3.6 5.5
Sinuosity (stream length/valley length) 2 1.9 NA 1.6 1.1 1.3
Valley Slope (Sva,) 0.006 0.006 NA 0.025 0.0035 0.0033
Avg. Stream Slope (Save) 0.005 0.0044 0.006 0.0219 0.0024 _ 0.0025*
Min Riffle Slope (S,;f) 0.016 0.0068 0.035 0.0138 0.0086 0.002
Max Riffle Slope (S,;f) 0.036 0.0607 0.0042 0.07 0.086 0.0035*_
Min Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Snf/Save) 3 1.5 5.8 0.6 3.6 0.8
Max Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (S,f/Save) 6.9 13.8 0.7 3.2 35.8 1.4
Min Riffle Length (L,;f) 3 3.1 6 3.4 15 23.8
Max Riffle Length (L,;f) 28 16.1 26 26.4 67.8 68
Min Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (L,;r/Wbkf) 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.65 0.7
Max Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (L;fNWbkf) 2.7 0.7 2.4 3.6 2.92 2.0
Pool Slope (Spud) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Slope Ratio (Spoo,/Save) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Depth (Dpod) 2.8-3.26 4.92-6.15 3.06-3.89 1.42-3.63 2.6 5.0-6.7
Pool Depth Ratio (Dpoo/Dbkf) 2.2-2.5 1.9-2.4 1.8 1.1-2.9 0.8 2.2-2.9
Pool Area (Apod) 24 49.5 NA 16.9 91 100
Pool Area Ratio (Apoo/Abkf) 1.7 1.4 NA 1.9 1.3 1.5
Pool Length (Lpod) 21-35 32-60.1 6-12 5.5-41.3 90 45-96
Pool Length Ratio (LpoodWbkf) 2.1-3.4 1.4-2.6 0.83 0.7-5.6 3.8 1.6-3.4
Pool Width (Wpoo,) 10.2 NA NA 12 36 32
Pool-Pool Spacing (p-p) 51-66 26-73 16-43 17-70 81-211 95-224
Pool Spacing Ratio (p-p/Wbkf) 5.0-6.5 1.1-3.2 1.54.0 2.3-9.5 3.5-9.1 3-7
* excludes step-pool sections
ONSSE
13
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Table 2 - Lower Bailey Fork Morphology
s
Sal's Whites S. Muddy S. Lower Lower
Variables Branch Creek Birchfield Muddy Bailey Bailey
Trib.4 Fork Fork

Survey Crew Doll/
NSE
NSE
NSE 4D Site
NSE
Jelenevsky Solutions
Survey Date 06/01 10/04 10/04 10/04 10/04 12/04
Parameter Reference Reference Reference Reference Existing Design
Stream Type E E4 E4 E4 F4 C4/E4
Drainage Area (mV') 0.35 1.7 1.3 0.14 5.5 5.5
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) 10.2 17 10.8 7.35 37.4 30
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) 1.3 2.1 1.9 1.3 2.6 2.5
Width/Depth Ratio 7.6 8.1 5.6 6.0 14.7 12.0
Max Riffle Depth (Dmax) 1.9 2.8 2.5 1.8 3.33 4.5
Max Riffle Depth Ratio (Dmax/Dbkf) 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.8
Bankfull Cross-Section Area (Abkf) 13.8 35.7 20.7 9.1 95 75.0
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf) 3.8 4.8 4.7 7.1 4.2 4.0 -
Bankfull Discharge (Abkf) 51.6 194 98 64 395 302.0
Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa)
Entrenchment Ratio (WfpaNVbkf) 100
9.8 150
8.8 100
9.3 43
5.8 70
1.9 250.0
8.3
Min Meander Length (Lm) 35 49 NA 50 90 200
Max Meander Length (Lm) 43 54 NA 160 144 220 _
Min Meander Length Ratio (LmNVbkf) 2 2.1 NA 6.8 2.4 6
Max Meander Length Ratio (LmNVbkf) 4.2 2.3 NA 21.8 3.8 7.3
Min Radius of Curvature (Ro) 11 11 NA 10 24 45
Max Radius of Curvature (Ro) 21 16 NA 11 30 90
Min Radius of Curvature Ratio (Rc/Wbkf) 1 0.5 NA 1.4 0.6 _ 1.5
Max Radius of Curvature Ratio (R Mbkf) 2 0.7 NA 1.5 0.8 3 _
Min Belt Width (Wbit) 20 60 NA 50 54 98 _
Max Belt Width (Wbt) 62 80 NA 80 66 12_0_
Min Meander Width Ratio (WbItMbkf) 2 3.5 NA 6.8 1.44 3.2
Max Meander Width Ratio (WbtMbkf) 6.1 4.7 NA 10.9 1.76 4
Sinuosity (stream length/valley length) 2 1.9 NA 1.6 1.1 1.3
Valley Slope (Svai) 0.006 0.006 NA 0.025 0.0040 0.0037
Avg. Stream Slope (Save) 0.005 0.0044 0.006 0.0219 0.0030 0.0029*
Min Riffle Slope (S?f) 0.016 0.0068 0.035 0.0138 0.0042 0.0013_
Max Riffle Slope (Shf) 0.036 0.0607 0.0042 0.07 0.027 0.0029* rl
Min Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Shf/Save) 3 1.5 5.8 0.6 1.4 0.4
Max Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Shf/Save) 6.9 13.8 0.7 3.2 9 1
Min Riffle Length (Lhf) 3 3.1 6 3.4 15 _ 30
Max Riffle Length (L;f) 28 16.1 26 26.4 102 55
Min Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (LhfNVbkf) 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.4 1
Max Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (LofNVbkf) 2.7 0.7 2.4 3.6 2.72 1.8
Pool Slope (Spoo)
Pool Slope Ratio (Spoo,/Save) 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
Pool Depth (Dpooi) 2.8-3.26 4.92-6.15 3.06-3.89 1.42-3.63 N/A 5.5-7.0
Pool Depth Ratio (Dpooi/Dbkf) 2.2-2.5 1.9-2.4 1.8 1.1-2.9 N/A 2.2-2.8
Pool Area (Apoo,) 24 49.5 NA 16.9 N/A 112.5
Pool Area Ratio (Apooi/Abkf) 1.7 1.4 NA 1.9 N/A 1.5
Pool Length (Lpooi) 21-35 32-60.1 6-12 5.5-41.3 30-87 50-100
Pool Length Ratio (LpoolNVbkf) 2.1-3.4 1.4-2.6 0.83 0.7-5.6 .8-2.3 1.6-3.3
Pool Width (Wpooi) 10.2 NA NA 12 N/A 30
Pool-Pool Spacing (p-p) 51-66 26-73 16-43 17-70 68-292 110-140
Pool Spacing Ratio (p-pNVbkf) 5.0-6.5 1.1-3.2 1.5-4.0 2.3-9.5 1.8-7.8 3.6-4.7
* excludes step-pool sections
©NSE
14
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Table 3 - UT1 of Bailey Fork Morphology
UT of UT of
Sal's Whites S. Muddy S. Muddy Bailey Bailey
Variables Branch Creek Birchfield Trib 4 Fork Fork
Trib 1 Trib 1
Survey Crew Doll/
Jelenevsky NSE NSE NSE 4D Site
Solutions NSE
Survev Date 06/01 10/04 10/04 10/04 10/04 12/04
Parameter Reference Reference Reference Reference Existing Design
Stream Type E E4 E4 E4 G4/F4 E4/C4
Drainage Area (mi) 0.35 1.7 1.3 0.14 0.54 0.55
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) 10.2 17 10.8 7.35 10.8 14
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) 1.3 2.1 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.3
Width/Depth Ratio 7.6 8.1 5.6 6.0 7.2 11.2
Max Riffle Depth (DR,ax) 1.9 2.8 2.5 1.8 2.1 1.8
Max Riffle Depth Ratio (DR,aX/Dbkf) 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4
Bankfull Cross-Section Area (Abkf) 13.8 35.7 20.7 9.1 16.3 17.5
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf) 3.8 4.8 4.7 7.1 3.5 3.2
Bankfull Discharge (Abkf) 51.6 194 98 64 56.5 56.4
Width of Flood Prone Area (VVfpa) 100 150 100 43 23.8 65-120
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf) 9.8 8.8 9.3 5.8 2.3 4.6-8.5
Min Meander Length (Lm) 35 49 NA 50 48 55
Max Meander Length (Lm) 43 54 NA 160 60 100
Min Meander Length Ratio (L,,,/Wbkf) 2 2.1 NA 6.8 4.5 4
Max Meander Length Ratio (Lm/Wbkf) 4.2 2.3 NA 21.8 5.6 7
Min Radius of Curvature (Ro) 11 11 NA 10 9 15
Max Radius of Curvature (Ro) 21 16 NA 11 18 35
Min Radius of Curvature Ratio (R?Mbkf) 1 0.5 NA 1.4 0.8 1.1
Max Radius of Curvature Ratio (RJWbkf) 2 0.7 NA 1.5 1.7 2.5
Min Belt Width (Wbt) 20 60 NA 50 30 30
Max Belt Width (Wb,t) 62 80 NA 80 40 80
Min Meander Width Ratio (Wbt/Wbkf) 2 3.5 NA 6.8 2.8 2.1
Max Meander Width Ratio (WbIt/Wbkf) 6.1 4.7 NA 10.9 3.7 5.7
Sinuosity (stream length/valley length) 2 1.9 NA 1.6 1.2_ 1.4
' Valley Slope (Sva,) 0.006 0.006 NA 0.025 0.0086 0.0075
Avg. Stream Slope (Save) 0.005 0.0044 0.006 0.0219 0.0090 0.0049*
Min Riffle Slope (Snf) 0.016 0.0068 0.0042 0.0138 0.007 0.0025
Max Riffle Slope (Snf) 0.036 0.0607 0.035 0.07 0.0235 0.007
Min Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Snf/Save) 3 1.5 0.7 0.6 0.77 0.51
Max Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Snf/Save) 6.9 13.8 5.8 3.2 2.6 1.4
Min Riffle Length (Lnf)
Max Riffle Length (Lnf) 3
28 3.1
16.1 6
26 3.4
26.4 34.8
69.5 14
40
Min Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (Lnf/Wbkf) 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 3.2 1
Max Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (Lnf/Wbkf) 2.7 0.7 2.4 3.6 6.4 2.8
Pool Slope (Spud) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Slope Ratio (Spool/Save) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Depth (Dpod) 2.8-3.26 4.92-6.15 3.06-3.89 1.42-3.63 1.9 2.5
Pool Depth Ratio (Dpoo,/Dbkf) 2.2-2.5 1.9-2.4 1.8 1.1-2.9 1.3 1.9
Pool Area (Apod) 24 49.5 NA 16.9 25.9 26
Pool Area Ratio (Apod,/Abkf) 1.7 1.4 NA 1.9 1.6 1.6
Pool Length (Lpod) 21-35 32-60.1 6-12 5.5-41.3 27.2-60.0 20-45
Pool Length Ratio (Lpoor/Wbkf) 2.1-3.4 1.4-2.6 0.83 0.7-5.6 2.5-5.6 1.4-3.0
Pool Width (Wpod) 10.2 NA NA 12 13.4 16
Pool-Pool Spacing (p-p) 51-66 26-73 16-43 17-70 110 50-85
Pool Spacing Ratio (p-pMbkf) 5.0-6.5 1.1-3.2 1.5-4.0 2.3-9.5 10.2 3.6-6.0_
* excludes step-pool sections
ONSE
15
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Table 4 - UT2 of Bailey Fork Morphology

Variables
Sal's
Branch
Whites
Creek
S. Muddy
Birchfeld
Muddy
Trib 4 UT of
Bailey
Fork
Trib 2 UT of
Bailey
Fork-
Trib 2
Survey Crew Doll/
Jelenevsky NSE NSE NSE 4D Site
Solutions NSE
Survey Date 06/01 10/04 10/04 10/04 10/04 12/04
Parameter Reference Reference Reference Reference Existing Design
Stream Type E E4 E4 E4 G4/F4 E4/C4
Drainage Area (mi) 0.35 1.7 1.3 0.14 0.98 0.96
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) 10.2 17 10.8 7.35 8.2 16
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) 1.3 2.1 1.9 1.3 2.4 1.4
Width/Depth Ratio 7.6 8.1 5.6 6.0 2.7 10.6
_ Max Riffle Depth (Dmax) 1.9 2.8 2.5 1.8 3.5 2
Max Riffle Depth Ratio (Dmax/Dbkf) 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.3
Bankfull Cross-Section Area (Abkf) 13.8 35.7 20.7 9.1 20.1 23
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf) 3.8 4.8 4.7 7.1 6.4 2.78
Bankfull Discharge (Qbkf) 51.6 194 98 64 129 64
Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa) 100 150 100 43 12-150 60-180
Entrenchment Ratio (WfpaNVbkf) 9.8 8.8 9.3 5.8 1.5-18.3 3.75-11.25
Min Meander Length (Lm) 35 49 NA 50 66 56
Max Meander Length (Lm) 43 54 NA 160 78 104
Min Meander Length Ratio (LmNVbkf) 2 2.1 NA 6.8 8 3.5
Max Meander Length Ratio (Lr„/Wbkf) 4.2 2.3 NA 21.8 9.5 6.5
Min Radius of Curvature (Rc) 11 11 NA 10 15 24
Max Radius of Curvature (Rc) 21 16 NA 11 18 40
Min Radius of Curvature Ratio (R,/WWbkf) 1 0.5 NA 1.4 1.8 1.5
Max Radius of Curvature Ratio (R,/Wbkf) 2 0.7 NA 1.5 2.2 2.5
Min Belt Width (Wbt) 20 60 NA 50 30 34
Max Belt Width (Wb,t) 62 80 NA 80 33 91.2
Min Meander Width Ratio (Wbit/Wbkf) 2 3.5 NA 6.8 3.7 2.1
Max Meander Width Ratio (Wb,t/Wbkf) 6.1 4.7 NA 10.9 4 5.7
Sinuosity (stream length/valley length) 2 1.9 NA 1.6 1.1 1.4
Valley Slope (Sval) 0.006 0.006 NA 0.025 0.0048 0.0041
Avg. Stream Slope (Save) 0.005 0.0044 0.006 0.0219 0.0098 0.0030*
Min Riffle Slope (S6f) 0.016 0.0068 0.0042 0.0138 0.0072 0.002
Max Riffle Slope (Sq) 0.036 0.0607 0.035 0.07 0.065 0.0045
Min Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (SHf/Save) 3 1.5 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7
Max Riffle Slope/Ave Slope (Shf/Save) 6.9 13.8 5.8 3.2 6.6 1.5
Min Riffle Length (Lhf) 3 3.1 6 3.4 16 16
Max Riffle Length (Lhf) 28 16.1 26 26.4 42 44.8
Min Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (LhfNVbkf) 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.5 1.95 1
Max Riffle Length/Bankfull Width (L6fNVbkf) 2.7 0.7 2.4 3.6 _5.1 2.8
Pool Slope (Spool) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Slope Ratio (Spoor/Save) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pool Depth (Dpod) 2.8-3.26 4.92-6.15 3.06-3.89 1.42-3.63 N/A 3.8
Pool Depth Ratio (Dpoo,/Dbkf) 2.2-2.5 1.9-2.4 1.8 1.1-2.9 N/A 1.9
Pool Area (Apod) 24 49.5 NA 16.9 N/A 36.8
Pool Area Ratio (Apoojhkkf) 1.7 1.4 NA 1.9 N/A 1.6
Pool Length (Lpod) 21-35 32-60.1 6-12 5.5-41.3 N/A 22.4-48
Pool Length Ratio (LpooMbkf) 2.1-3.4 1.4-2.6 0.83 0.7-5.6 N/A 1.4-3.0
Pool Width (Wpool) 10.2 NA NA 12 N/A 18
Pool-Pool Spacing (p-p) 51-66 26-73 16-43 17-70 N/A 55-85
Pool Spacing Ratio (p-pMbkf) 5.0-6.5 1.1-3.2 1.5-4.0 2.3-9.5 N/A 3.4-5.3
* excludes step-pool sections
16
0
9
a
0
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
7.2 Dimension
Based on the survey data, the existing bankfull cross-sectional areas, measured in square feet
averaged 78.1 (Bailey Fork), 16.3 (UT 1), and 20.1 (UT 2). The bankfull widths, measured in
feet, averaged 27.9 (Bailey Fork), 10.8 (UT 1), and 8.2 (UT 2). Bankfull mean depths, measured
in feet, were 2.88 (Bailey fork), 1.51 (UT 1), and 2.4 (UT 2).
The proposed design width for Upper Bailey Fork is 28 feet with an average depth of 2.3 feet
while Lower Bailey Fork has a width of 30 feet and an average depth of 2.5 feet. The proposed
dimensions for UT 1 are a bankfull width of 14 feet wide with an average depth of 1.3 feet. The
proposed dimensions for UT 2 are a bankfull width of 16 feet wide with an average depth of 1.4
feet. The channel dimensions were determined utilizing the average measured width of the
existing stream, the North Carolina regional curve, reference reach data, existing site constraints
and the required shear stress to move the Dsa. The proposed dimensions result in an E/C channel
type. As the streams mature and vegetation begins to stabilize the embankments, the channel
should slowly convert to an E-type channel. This assumption is based on previous successful
project monitoring and is primarily caused by the increase in embankment rougliness resulting in
deposition on the banks which reduces the originally constructed channel cross-sectional area.
The depiction of the typical riffle and pool cross-section profiles are located on Figure 7,
Appendix A.
7.3 Pa ttern
The current pattern of the existing project reaches is essentially straight, with a measured
sinuosity of approximately 1.1 (stream length divided by valley length). Meanders are beginning
to form and are evident by the presence of eroding banks flanked by depositional features located
on the opposite bank.
As a result of the proposed channel re-alignment, channel sinuosity will be substantially
increased. The proposed sinuosity for the project streams as a result of the proposed alignment
will be approximately 1.3 for Upper and Lower Bailey Fork and 1.4 for UT1 and UT2. Meanders
have been integrated throughout the length of the project reach to the maximum extent possible
based on existing site constraints and the reference reach data. The integration of meanders into
the proposed restoration design reduces overall channel slope by increasing channel length and
decreasing shear stress, while providing a stable and diversified aquatic habitat. See Section 8 of
this report for detailed plan drawings.
7.4 Bed Form
Bed form along the project reaches is in extremely poor and unstable condition, primarily due to
the incised and entrenched nature of the channels. The majority of the longitudinal profile
resembles a riffle/run bed with very few observed pools. Bed form is in a degraded condition
because of several culminating factors. Flood flows are concentrated within the incised and
constrained channel and this water is typically laden with excess sediment as a result of bank
erosion and other potentially unknown upstream sediment sources. Excess sediment load, and
current site constraints have resulted in a channel that is in constant transition in an attempt to
ONSE
17
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
reach equilibrium and create an active flood plain at its bankfull elevation. Therefore, it is
unlikely that the bed form remains consistent. Bed form most likely fluctuates after each storm
event depending on storm intensity and duration.
The restoration design incorporates riffles, runs, pools, and glides into the longitudinal profile
providing bed form characteristics exemplified by the reference reaches surveyed. Riffles will be
located along straight segments of the channel, runs connect the riffles to the pools which are
located along the outside meander bends and glides connect the pool to the riffle. Riffles are
designed with a maximum depth typically 1.5 times less than the maximum pool depth. The
surveyed as-built profile may differ slightly because of unforeseen site constraints, limitations
that may be discovered during construction (i.e. bedrock), or slight shifts in the proposed
alignment. These bed features may be reinforced with in-stream structures to insure bed stability
and to maintain bed form. Structures may be omitted or added during construction due to
unknown site conditions or unconsolidated soils. At times, the designer may not install structures
that appear on the design sheets. This action is reserved for instances where the damge and
potential instability caused by installation is greater than the benefit installing a structure.
Structure placement is typically field adjusted to conform to the constructed stream alignment and
profile. Section 8 of this report contains detailed plan drawings of the proposed stream's
longitudinal profile.
7.5 Sediment Transport Analysis
A naturally stable channel has the ability to transport its sediment load without aggrading or
degrading the channel bed. Sediment load is comprised of suspended load, bed load and wash
load. Suspended load is comprised of sediment that is being transported in suspension by upward
momentum present in the channel. Bed load is comprised of bed material that is transported by
rolling, sliding, or skipping along the channel bed. Wash load is comprised of fine particles that
may remain in suspension indefinitely and have very low rates of settling. At high discharge
rates, a significant portion of the bed load and potentially the sub pavement may become
suspended, especially if the bed material is composed primarily of fine grained material and the
substrate is homogenous throughout such as sand-dominated channel.
Commonly used entrainment computations cannot be applied to accurately determine the
competency for the individual channels at the site to move a particular particle size. The
substrate of Bailey Fork and the unnamed tributaries is a mixture of sand and fine gravel.
Entrainment computations are applicable to gravel bed streams where the median diameter of the
riffle (1350) particle is two (2) millimeters (mm) or larger. The majority of the bed substrate
observed was coarse sand and fine gravel. Based on the collected substrate data and multiple
field observations it is conclusive that these channels are sand-dominated. The observed and
collected gravel-based riffle samples are believed to actually be representative sub-pavement
substrate that has been exposed during the degradation (headcutting) process. This coarser class
of material was not found outside of the location where this specific pebble count data was
collected and was truly uncharacteristic of the majority of the substrate class observed along the
entire length of Bailey Fork and the unnamed tributaries.
©NSE
18
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
To determine if the proposed channel has the competence to transport its current sediment load,
shear stress was calculated utilizing the dimensions of the proposed riffle cross-sections of each
designed channel utilizing the proposed bankfull slope. The calculated value was then compared
to the Shield's Curve (ASCE, 1975) to confirm that the designed channel could move the D84
particle of the riffle or bar pebble count, which ranged between 7 and 50 mm. The standard
relationships and resulting calculations are presented in this section. The example utilizes Lower
Bailey Fork design data. The remaining data is provided in tabular format.
' T = yRS (Wildland Hyrology, 1998)
T = Shear stress (lbs/ft2)

y = Specific gravity of water (62.41bs/ft3)
R = Hydraulic radius (ft)
S = Bankfull channel slope (ft/fl)
The hydraulic radius is calculated by:
R = A/WP
(Wildland Hyrology, 1998)
R = Hydraulic radius (ft)
A = Cross-sectional Area (ft)
WP = Wetted perimeter (ft)
1

LI
1

Where Wp = (2 * channel depth (mean)) + width = (2 * 2.5) + 30 = 35 ft
R = 75 ftZ (A)/35 ft (WP) = 2.14 ft
Therefore, shear stress was calculated to be:
T = 62.41b/ft2 (Y) * 2.14 ft (R) * 0.0029 ft/ft (S)
T = 0.39 lb/ft2
Shear stress was calculated to be 0.39 lb/ft2, and Shield's Curve predicts that the proposed stream
could move the 22 mm particle. Based on Revised Shields Diagram (Wildland Hydrology 2001),
which is the culmination of field collected data in stream channels containing heterogeneous bed
substrate, the channel should be able to move a particle up to 80 mm in size. Critical shear stress
varied from a minimum of 0.21 lb/ft2 for Tributary 2 to a maximum of 0.39 lb/ft2 for Lower
Bailey Fork. Therefore, the smallest particle that can be transported by this system of stream is
approximately 48 mm using the Revised Shields Diagram. Because the channels are
characterized as sand-dominated, the proposed channels should have the capacity to transport
current sediment loads based on the completed shear stress calculations and the interpretation of
the Revised Shields Curve. Maximum predicted particle size and calculated critical shear stress
values are presented in tabular format in this section. Note that bankfull slopes utilized to derive
the following results do not encompass the drop-pool sections of the proposed stream; therefore,
the values presented are conservative as they are based on minimal proposed slope values.
ONSE
19
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
t
Stream Critical Shear Stress Max. ParticleSize (Revised Shields Curve)
Upper Bailey Fork 0.31 lbs/ft 55 mm
Lower Bailey Fork 0.39 IbS/ft2 80 mm
Tributary 1 0.32 IbS/ft2 65 mm
Tributary 2 0.21 lbs/ft2 48 mm
7.6 Riparian Area
A riparian buffer area will be established immediately adjacent to the restored stream channel.
The riparian zone will include the entire bankfull bench (nested flood plain) and toe slope, which
will tie the surround existing grade with the proposed bankfull bench elevation. Typical width
will be no less than 30 feet on either side of the bankfull elevation of each stream bank. These
areas will be planted with the appropriate native riparian vegetation and will provide channel
stability, flood attenuation and a vegetated buffer that will intercept overland stormwater.
Species will consist primarily of native trees and small shrubs of the Piedmont with specific areas
dominated by shrubs and small trees where required by current site uses (i.e. power line right-of-
way). Refer to Section 9.0 Riparian Planting Plan for more details.
7.7 Stormwater
The only stormwater that directly affects the project originates from the NCDOT right-of-way
along Propst Road. Currently, an 18-inch plastic corrugated pipe discharges directly into UT 1
just above the confluence with Upper Bailey. This section of UT1 is proposed to be abandoned
following the construction of the designed channel; therefore, a small impoundment will be
created to partially treat, infiltrate and temporarily store stormwater. A small impoundment will
be created by blocking the terminus of the existing creek. Discharges that exceed the holding
capacity of this impoundment will be directed overland through a grassed swale, which will
connect to the riparian buffer and subsequently into Upper Bailey Fork.
The impoundment of this Stormwater will provide a level of treatment (total suspended solids and
total nitrogen removal) which is not currently provided. The passage of larger storm events
though the grassed swale will allow for some level of treatment which is an improvement of the
conveyance system currently in place. The benefits of the proposed arrangement include the
treatment of Stormwater prior to its discharge into Bailey Fork and the creation of open water
habitat (vernal pool) that currently does not exist within the project vicinity. This simple solution
should not require any type of prolonged maintenance once ground cover is permanently
established.
a
OiNSE
20
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
7.8 Stream Structures
To provide grade control following construction of the channel, boulder cross-vane, double step
cross-vanes, step-pool structures, J-hook structures, channel sill structures, and root wads have
been integrated into the design and will be utilized to reinforce and stabilize the proposed
channels. All structures will be constructed out of natural materials typically consisting of locally
quarried boulders. Existing natural grade control and stable channel sections will be incorporated
into the channel profile. Although, cross-vanes are typically depicted at the riffle/glide interface
and J-hooks are located in the run/pool interface, some of the depicted structures may be omitted,
or shifted during construction due to naturally occurring site attributes (i.e. bedrock, etc.). Also
structures may be added that are not shown on the proposed plan drawings. Typical structure
layouts, which are based on Rosgen designs (Rosgen, 2001), are provided in Section 8.
7.8.1 Boulder Cross-Vane
The boulder cross-vane structure plan and cross-section views are illustrated in Section 8. The
cross-vane is an in-stream grade control structure that concentrates stream energy toward the
center of the channel and away from the near-bank areas reducing shear stress along the banks
and preventing bank erosion. This structure reduces the potential of headcutting and creates a
stable width-to-depth ratio, while also promoting sediment transport capacity. The upstream side
of the structure will be lined with a non-woven fabric and backfilled with excavated channel
material and in some cases appropriately sized quarried stone aggregate due its placement in a
sandy loam substrate material. This modification is required due to the potential for the structures
to "pipe" following installation due to the voids created during the installation of the structure in
fine-grained substrate. Piping may eventually lead to structure failure and potentially
catastrophic stream bed and bank erosion.
7.8.2 J-Hook Vane
The J-Hook vane structure plan and cross-section views are also illustrated in Section 8. This
structure is typically used along outside meander bends where the near-bank shear stress is the
greatest. This structure will be utilized to reduce potential bank erosion by redirecting velocity
gradients toward the center of the channel and away from the near-bank area. This structure also
promotes sediment transport through the pools, maintains pools depths and provides aquatic
habitat. This structure occupies two-thirds of the bankfull channel cross-sectional area and is
constructed similarly to the cross-vane with footer boulders, non-woven fabric, and stone
aggregate as required.
7.8.3 Root Wads
Root wads will be utilized along the outer-most sections of the meander bends as determined
during the construction process. These structures are composed of available native trees with an
appropriately sized root fan typically 4 to 5 foot wide and an 8 to 12-foot long trunk section.
These structures are installed perpendicular to stream flow into the side of the stream bank with
the root fan exposed to the channel while the trunk section anchors the structure in place. If
required, logs or boulders can be installed immediately below the channel invert to serve as a
ONSE
21
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
footer on which the root wad is positioned. The root wad structure serves multiple purposes such
as providing protection of the outer bank from potential erosion, aquatic habitat, aquatic cover,
shade, and a source of detritus.
7.8.4 Channel Sill
The invert sill structure is typically utilized in lieu of the traditional boulder cross-vane due to the
compact dimensions of smaller tributaries. The structure functions primarily as a permanent
grade control feature that prevents channel degradation or headcutting. This structure can be
composed of stone or wood embedded if required in a bed of aggregate and wrapped with non-
woven filter cloth. The structure is typically used at the head of riffle or end of riffle.
7.8.5 Boulder Step-Pool Structure
The boulder step-pool structure essentially consists of several cross-vanes located in close
proximity of one another or stacked together to form one uniformed structure that creates a series
of steps broken up by pools. This structure is used to merge channels together that have large
variations in invert elevation. Each step is limited to six (6) inches or less allowing for the
migration of aquatic life.
7.8.6 Double Step Cross Vane
The double step cross vane is constructed and functions similarly to a cross vane except the vane
drops down approximately six (6) inches from the head rock elevation or the starting point of the
structure down to the step. This structure is used when there is a significant vertical change in the
valley and the designed channel must compensate without degrading.
8.0 Restoration Design Plan Sheets
(next page)
a
©NSE
22

e

0

I
PROJECT SUMMARY:
UPPER BAILEY LOWER BAILEY TRIBUTARY 1 TRIBUTARY 2 TOTAL
DESIGN STREAM TYPE CA C/E C/E C/E
DRAINAGE AREA (SQUARE MILES) 5.0 5.5 0.54 0.98
00STNG REACH LENGTH (FEET) 1383.0 11253 1648.1 898.9 5055.3
DESIGN REACH CENTERLINE LENGTH 1410.4 1174.1 1707.3 1181.8 547.14
DESIGN REACH THALWEG LENGTH 1480.9 1226.4 1792.7 1240.7 5740.7
UPPER BAILEY FORK
/

/?i

H
w
N
US 64
BAILEYFORK
STREAM RESTORATION
I
-I
G? I
/
/
/
/
TRIBUTARY 2 (UT2)
EXIT 103
BAILEY FORK
PROJECT STREAM
X SITE
VICINITY MAP wry sm
GENERAL NOTES:
\ -? 1. PREPARED FOR NO ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM,
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NO 27899-1652. ON
BEHALF OF WETLANDS RESOURCE CENTER, 3970 BOWEN ROAD,
CANAL WINCHESTER, OH 43110.
\ \ 2. SURFACE TOPOGRAPHY GENERATED FROM DATA?f//VIDED BY
/ 4D SITE SOLUTIONS INC.. 3898 JOHNSON MILI.ROAD. RAEFORD,
N.C. 28376, ON 10-27-04. ??
3. THE BASE MASS 'C* TDPOGRAPH??IC SURVEY WAS DRAWN
FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY ORMED UNDER SUPERVISION OF
CHRSTOPHO J LICENSE NUMBER L-4291: OF 4D
SITE SOLUIT D IIEE15 OR EXCEEDS THE NORTH CAROLINA
ADMN*MATIVE CODE 21.56.1605 AND 21.58.1606 STANDARDS
I EXACT RECORDS FOR THIS DIGITAL FIE CAN BE FOUND ON
PROPST ROAD FILE WITH 4D SOLUTIONS UNDER JOB NUMBER 118.
I \ LI BOUNDARY LINES NOT SURVEYED ARE SHOWN AS BROKEN
\ LINES FROM INFORMATION FOUND OUND ON DN THE FACE OF THIS PUT.
THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION WAS COLLECTED FROM RECORD
COUNTY COURTHOUSE DURING
TRIBUTARY 1 (UT1) EVIDENCE LOCATED AT THE
THE COURSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY. THIS PLAT PUT DOES
I j NOT CONFORM M G.S. 47-30 AND IS NOT INTENDED TO DEPICT
A BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR RECORDATION, TRANSFER, OR
\`!/ \ CONVEYANCE
I 1 S. A NATIONWIDE 27 PUNT, 401 WATER QUALITY PERMIT, AND
I LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT WILL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO THE
START OF CONSTRUCTION. EROSION CONTROL DETAILS AND
J PROCEDURES WILL BE PROVIDED M THE NO DIVISION OF LAND
QUALITY AS PART OF THE REQUEST FOR THE LAND DISTURBANCE
LOWER BAILEY FO PERMIT.
BASIS OF BEARINGS
NC GRID, NAD 83
SHEEN jhDEX:
SHEET 1 - INDEX SHEET SHEET 10 - LOWER BAILEY/UT2
SHEET 2 - LEGEND SHEET S-1 - STREAM STRUCTURE DETAILS
SHEET 3 - LOWER BAILEY/UT2 SHEET S-2 - STREAM STRUCTURE DETAILS
HEET 4 - LOWER BAILEY/UPPER BAILEY SHEET S-3 - STREAM STRUCTURE DETAILS
EET 5 - UPPER BAILEY/UT1 SHEET E-1 - STREAM STRUCTURE DETAILS
S EET 6 - UT1 SHEET P-1 - PLANTING DETAILS
SHEET 7 - LOWER BAILEY LONG. PROFILE
SH ET 8 - UPPER BAILEY LONG. PROFILE
SH T 9 - UT1 LONG. PROFILE
UI
?Z
W-
Ul
m
W a
N
0
W N
C
J
U
Q
- z
Z
E a
Z E3
° 1 fL
0
z o
Q o
° ZW
fZN
O m
m
C
I
a SEAL
29216
?9yFNGINE?Q????
/??? ?nr tni tY???\\\
DATE- Otf10N5
DESIGNED BY: P?
DRAWN BY.
Dsrnvmm
CHECKED BY: JMH
(PROJECT NO.: WRC0402
RLE: baley_bM 010705
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
C3 ?z
SHEET

W

N
W z
Qo

?
vi

d
0
U

z
z
Q
W ?

0
w

o
u

? Q ?
0
t
m
t
t
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
DETAIL KEY
U1
?Z
w_
N cb
m
W m
N
0
W n
N
C
Q Z N
U
Z
7
m
F-
QZo
0
ZW=
m
DETAIL NUMBER ?
S-1 DETAIL APPEARS ON SHEET
LEGEND
TOP OF BANK
(PROPOSED)
PROPERTY LINE
(NOT SURVEYED)
BOULDER CROSS- VANE
(SEE DETAIL 1 SHEET S-2)
STEP CROSS- VANE
(SEE DETAIL 2 SHEET S-2)
TREE LINE
- - - MINOR CONTOUR DOUBLE STEP CROSS- VANE
(PROPOSED) (SEE DETAIL 3 SHEET S-2)
- - - MAJOR CONTOUR "J" HOOK CROSS- VANE
(PROPOSED) (SEE DETAIL 1 SHEET S-3)
MINOR CONTOUR ROCK CHANNEL SILL
(EXISTING) (SEE DETAIL 2 SHEET S-3)
MAJOR CONTOUR LOG CHANNEL SILL
(EXISTING) (SEE DETAIL 2 SHEET S-3)
LOG CROSS- VANE TEMP. CONSTRUCTION
(SEE DETAIL 1 SHEET S-1) ENTRANCE
(SEE DETAIL 1 SHEET E-1)
ROOT WAD STREAM FORD
(SEE DETAIL 2 SHEET S-1) (SEE DETAIL 2 SHEET E-1)
66' PINE SINGLE TREE

C
LL POWER UTILITY
15' CMP STORM PIPE
oo"?? HEADWALL
DEBRIS ? EXISTING DEBRIS
STREAM BAR
v4
? EXISTING POOL
29216
?NGINE
////?? ? 1111111 ? 1?\\\`\
DATE: 0=05
DESIGNED BY. PAI
DRAWN BY. DSTnnva
ICHECKED BY. im"
PROJECT NO.:1YRC0wz
[FILE- ealey_mrk_010705
SCAL'E' NOTTOSCALE
z
0 Q

0
0
vFi U
W
ur
Lu
J ?
0
Z 0 0
w

Q ?
101
t
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
2
?RQQT WAD - YP-
-2 nni 101- 17 CTCD (`D(1CC-VAAIC (TVD
J,H'OOK TYP. _ S-1
l /
w
r
x
xsd ???` ` } x \ e x bxb
Z.* In \

--1G40-

3 Zw ? A \ o /
1r
? I
NSF GRAPHIC SCALE
CHARLES TALEERT
D©. 1322 PC. 157 60 0 30 so
P©. 4 PC. 29
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 60 fL
\
v
q
1 \ \
o•
En
29.

w_

N?cb

W?
N s
0
W n
N
J
Qz?
U

Z
a
F
a
:3
o
Cr
?
m
Q Z a
`
a
N
7
Z W 2
Z
o m
O
r

111
\\\111
CA
//
\\\\\
ss .ti

SEAL
29216
FN
9
y
GIN0
N\N

DATE olnoms
DESIGNED BY' pa
DRAWN BY' DSTnwm
CHECKED BY' ?MH
PROJECT NO.: Y;C ..2
FILE b0ey_fo* 070705
SCALE' NOT TO SCALE
04 z
°z

F
0
0
U
0

L U
J E~

m
U
W w
W

0 a
<?

SHEEP
t
t
a
i
i
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
\
1Y CONSTRITC ON`ENTRANCE TYP.)
\ \ GRAPHIC SCALE
C:'o? BD 0 310 80 ? yy \
\ ( IN FEET)
1 inch = 60 M
x y? ---
v% W \ \ of / - -? - .... v
i
><?
• _ Nr
JAYINES GLADYS / N/F
a 6 r?x 1r \\\ \ \ PRCPST DAVID STRCUP F
DB. 225 PG. 59 / DB. 225 PG. 53
\ \ \
g +' .- 1 of
W -
Cx) 1 ?? kb
? x
V .,
--;?.G \ . f? / V GP SAS QG• ?I l
?o.? C30 I +
??•
I
Q?? ? / ? ?? q?? VA\ VA ?\\ mom. ?<<
v? v I 6? +
66 a E
N
/ \ W VA \ ?? 0 ??? h µpSCH? 4
STEP BOULDER CROSS-VANE TYP. x \ 1;
o ?x
S-z
\ ??\ oo \\ x o
rl---)BOULDER CROSS-VANE TYP. A
I Ly? ?-2
N 17 E
?Z?
w_
NEB
W rn
N
0
W?
N
A
QZ
Z
F a
o L Cr
r
? Qzo
< N
Zw
fN m
a
o m
5
W
a SEAL
29216
%9,?FNGINE?????J
DATE: 61na?6
DESICNED BY: PAS
DRAWN BY: OSTAVVVR
CHECKED BY: dn1N
PROJECT NO.:wRCOaoz
FlLE: baley_ rk 010105
SCALE: NOTTOSCALE
B4
J

m 0
?
o
cFi?

U
0
J
o
z
Q
?

V)
?

0
z
?

o
U
w
a

a
?
I
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
9
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
GRAPHIC SCALE ' -
60 0 30 60 SAS \ - -
NO ?D? Are \ \ / - ` _ ?`
NIp \ \ / \ \
( IN FEET) v V A
1 inch = 60 f t. - " - -
cn \\\ \ o</ // \ \ r
O ,
x x /
Ax
Y. + + l+ pig \\ ° ??E .\
v? o ?s o o "A 2-
N?j Cp%
N/F 1 _
Avl?
x
BILLY a ANN SYITH
DB. 596 PG. 289
/,- rx rs+g , /
?? / ? 4 x EL+dI ?t x ? f L6+#
S 9 S+? Jt ?
/ 95
- I \ x S 94+ T px0 *8?c,
x W
MATCHLINE
SHEET 5 x + +
SHEET 6 Jpx 1 .

UN E
g.
?
Z
w_

Ul
A
?? m
w m
N
0
W?
N

Q Z

:J Z0
a
F
m
v
Z L3
o L
f m
Z o
o
Vo
41 Zw
m

0 0
a
W
zq/
ESS1 y

4 i
?• olA 0
SEAL
- 29216
q.FNcINE?Q ?.?
/
\
///
\\\\
?NIIIMI I III ??\

DATE: o1a°ms
DESIGNED BY; pa
DRAM BY- DST-;;;]
CHECKED BY.
MN
PROJECT NO.: WRC0402
FlLE' 6aBey_brk 010705
SCALE' NOTTOSCALE

O Q

D O
U

W
J
0

m
w zz
W o

a U

W

SHEET 5
cl-
N D
m m=
/ '- " ? ?6Far \ '
I _ / W Bfnr '?

t
e
t
i
0
i
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
/
o
1
t
NEB
?
z
w_

N?

W?
N
0
W N
J A
Qz?
U
o
_
Z
F a
o L
f m

12 Z
Q o
<
o C

v;
? Z W

m
m

5 M

- '• 29216
i9 FNGINE?? N

DATE 0120105
DESIGNED BY: va
DRA%N BY.
Dsrl
CHECKED BY: JMH
PROJECT NO.: WRC0402
I FILE: ba0ey_ark 010705
SCALE' NOT TO SCALE
zd
o?

?0
0
V) U

0

0
w U
w

a

SHEEP 6
/ r2'?'?FQRQ TYP. r1 /F
CHARLIE DUVAL
GRAPHIC SCALE Da. 841 PG. 1650
60 0 30 60 -
$m
R ( IN FEET) / _.-
b 1 inch = 60 ft. /
1 '15
NN
tA /F
/ CRYSTAL J.LSh1A ++
Co + +
/ DB. 59211TH
PG, 164/ 14 x + 814 x
x
S - - - +
8'9 +
+
?/ i? \ o5E x_

0

I

SYMBOL KEY:
RF = riffle BAILEYFORK
ST = step
R u STREAM RESTORATION
J
K = hook
j
PL = pool
CL =
GL = culvert
glide LOWER BAILEY FORK
BANKFULL
1044
i
1042; - - - --- - - - -- - --- ! -- -- -
..-_ ..._. d m W._ ?-'&--'m me
o - d- d o m _._ m _q __. ,° _ ry _ a rv rv m __ - R ry..
1D4D Oi 01
O N m m M m .. .? N M n-I m O OI-.__ n. __ 0? n' W O. n 01 m m N N N N N ?N
rv ? O___ ? ? N M N ry rvrv N rvl N N N N:N rv 0 0 O 0 0 00
O
J .
-j ?....J ! J J J J-_._ ^ v Ji ---JL __- d __ - J J_ .W._W _ W: J .. J '. J..
_i d w w u?-- w w -- w- w w--w .w- w?
10384 w d w w d w -w d w w w
- -- - d w
a
CE C; • m o
o
10360-0 0-0 mm
Q .. N_-7,_?_-?`-_---_._.__. N a-___.__N N?._. .?•ifL{p._.??J.?? ?__?..
U) U,
1034
J LL _j J J 1- J
-1 LL LL 2 LL
.-..._._._
I ' I I I i ? { --
1032 ----- - - - -
_ i
1030 - - - - -- -i _ - _ - _ _... - - -- - -- --
i I
1028
1026
DAI El&V -___ _--
1024.00
a+' o
CD R1
0 0
0+00
q Co t7
Co CS (71
0 0 0
1+00 2+00
v
N!, U7; m' YI %D N' a%, m' N1 Ln Co W' .. ..? .. ?? (T ?` n
a, d a) d' ai' d a r o N' r; m 0% Im ai n a; rn %6
N M N. (0 N N N N (U N N N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 o CD o o o. (D o, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00
THALWEG
?zg.
N?cb
n
} m
w m
N
w
N
m
C
Q Z „
U
J 2
(7 .T
F n
o
m
c
Z
0
Q
00
o Z W
C
N m
m
0 ?
w ® n
K
11 //
29215
'//???1f 1111 1?\\\\
DATE 0trz0ms
DESCNED BY: as
DRAWN BY. DSTAVWR
CHECKED BY. JMH
PROJECT NO.:WR;402
FlLE: baiey_tork_010705
SCALE NOTTOSCALE
En U
0 0
SHEEP
W
J
LL
0

a
0
a 0
z
o
?

J_
w
Q
m

? o

U
?

W
0 W
J

v

t
SYMBOL KEY:
RF = riffle
ST = step
RN = run
JK = j-hook
PL = pool
CL = culvert
GL = glide
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
UPPER BAILEY FORK
BANKFULL
1048 - -i-- -- -
1 1 I i I I -I?? I I I i j -I
1046
O
1044

1042 w d
o . _. O
1040 J'-_

1038
1036
1034
1032
1030
I I I ? ?_ I i _ ? ? N
m ? N y? N m m m ? N I m m
1.1 tN0 fmJ..l ° ? a-ON?_ N-?-p
m q c!
N
J ,? J J J '' J J J J J J W WW W W
W. _W_--?__ W w_ W.- W
m mrn d
i m ry ° ?.i n NO
U) U)
-? LL ; J J I J IL C LL 1 J J R Z?J LL Z J- LLH 1 J
I ( ? I I I I I- ? I I ??
i
----------- - - - - - - ------
-------------
DAMM ES" ----
- --- -- ---- ----
----
--- --- --
- - ---- ---- -

1027.00
?
i --
V)I v', 0+' N` WI o WI
M M
0 0 m M
0 0 m
0 0 M
0
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00
1048
1046-

1044-0--- -'pl-- o -N--
p -- -M-
00 O
-
.. - -?--
O O
? -'?
--0 I?
]?j J
1O42W'_W_.
__I?- W
W J
J
--WW-_W .
,_W W
W
0 o
10400-+--- - a e C; C; o
----It ?: o a
d-d-- -dF- d -1 d<-d-- --1-d-- d--- --d- ?
N y N N ?) y N N N N
10361--
1034---
DA nW E2
1027:00
rn1 a' I; r- m.
fn (n a: tU Q
M Cl) ('1: ll' C7.
0 0 0 0, o
i ~I
---- - 4+00 ------- 5+00 -----
- THALWEG
N .• Cu N' Cu .. Cu N P' m' pi.
Cn ?. m. m M M. l7 M () M11 a]
0 ' 0 0 CV) o CD
0 0 o 0 0 0
CD:
6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00
Ul n
?z
U1
? m
w
N
O
W n
N
J
Q Z
U
_ o
Z
t
lO
7
R
m
Q Z v
N
Z o
W ?
m
m
A
® m
dc.? ssio':y
a SE
SEAL?
19216
9'FN?INEEQ•?v,
I DATE olnoms
DESIGNED BY. PAJ
I DRAWN BY: .5T7WWR
CHECKED BY: JMH
PROJECT NO.: WRC..
FlLE: balayjbrU 010705
SCALE: NOTTOSCALE

?-
0 z
°

o ?
z
.1
a

Z F.
U
0
J

w
m

0 0
°
z

C
?
a W

g8
11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00

1

0

I

L!
SYMBOL KEY:
RF = riffle
BAILEY FORK
ST = step
RN
-
STREAM RESTORATION
K = j
hook
PL = pool
CL = culvert UT 1 TO BAILEY FORK
GL = glide
r BANKFULL -
I
105Bo _
^._...^_?.m_$.._q.. m_.__.^
IV.:'l N NIV N N?
--"'-
3
8
33 3 _818 8.88 3 8 338_3
1056 g
W_ J J 1- W d J--` J J J J---J__. J J J .JJI
d d d._ I d W W id W W d d - d W W d W W-d , W-d -W W d W. d .W- d- W d W-W d W - d d dddW W W d d-dd d-d-W-ddd-W d d_ 16- W W--W -d_..W- W--W WW?
1054$4 .N__0? O Q._O I._m-L44 6_ O.. __L?-tr poprt 0000 'i 0.d 'iO. O.GN m_OI ' O O O A a
Yn 9 _._- ry Y: n ? 0 i
f- (D
" Y'. ?.3 O N Y1 m m O N m m W q -N n N di " m m 0 n T- m N:p nr m n A O
._._?.: _,..? -. .._ ...__.._. ?_'. ?'- ?".?-_?..-?_h.....? .. $._,_..'., a.?' ?_.?...?..i_.?.-.?_.•t_?.._. ?_.. ..?__._n !. nA h!«.hlpm m q m m m N_ m n-q ? ???GGry __ 1 i h?
1052<<d of o 00 i? i' N N N ry N N ^ d d..-d'<-d 1 -d-d d--._d_...-d-d-dd ddddd d-add mdd d-d odm 'm m dA`_ d_ `_`_
N_N..G._N? N._N .N_.-.N..-N._ w _.h. N..-.-N-.N'_NV~l.__W...N_.NN_NNNV .. N.NN NN. _N.-._NN_N. ?N N N N f-y 1d- H H ld- 1d- a'H y r F H?Ii
• 1 IJ 1 Z J J LL I _I JI J J J LL J J ZI- Jh-1-nl- h 1- JF M. .. NV-F_ N F.F __..W.N .-._, 1-.. FF
J, J
1050 --
_
i i I I
1048 -- - - -
1046 -- - ------- ----- -
1044 - --- - -- -- ----.... - ------ - -- _ _ - .--- - _.- _, , _._. _ .. -
f -
1042 --

1040
1038
- - -
--- - ?

1036 -
- -
--
- -
-
- - . ....
- -- --
-----
----
- - - -- -- I
103A00 -- --, ---I -----
- ----
`----
- --- ---
m ni ti al m' o a,I m' - r-i
m
%D p
m
N
Cn
NI
Co n n rn. rn K! r:: %6 d %6 %6 N vi vi vi vi ali a
°
°
a
0 a
0 a:
0 a'
o? a.
o a
o a;
o' a a. a: aI a
o o. o o o a,
Co. al
0 a a,
0
O a

O' al a.

O' p a, V ai Z
a
r
O: O O O O' v

O
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00
- - f

m rory m ?.o?m ?rva _ ?.
1056 ss ? m o0 0 000 000000 0

J
W-
J JJ'J
W..WW
J -
-
J
.!
J
J J
J'

-
_d
J
...__

i
.JJ J J JJ JJJ -L -j j JJJ

J'
WW-La WW W.WWW WW1 W;W W
WW YH
-'1
- I

.'_ _._.:..._ _ - _. - ----`- ---- -- - -
-' -i-

. ..• _
.
>
? ----

'

A
1054
0 O O
nm m
x
O
YI
'o..-
A
n
D
-
-

N-?-
rl
_m
r
- ,.
O V)
..-?
M1 n O G YON OOm 000 m ' m m N0 :C1
.n--N -noQ m.
°
c
'

_
-

- :-

.-

-----.- . _
_.___,.
,__.__
.--.
1
-.-- I-----

i
$ n q
,o
??
. a
-N- $
-- n n
M__
-- *
__ 0
`•
- m
_f m
6
o
w n $ m 7Y" m
f
+
he
o I ' --
---
i --

d
1052
?
.
ddd'd
1-
N
d

d-
?
<
O
-d--
'
<-d-

w- r
?'?-
-d
?-
-<-

w-
_.
.
d ---
d
..
-m
n
l mmm mmmm -
m
- 1 --? -d d d _ _
..._ _

I

-
H H
-
F N

N
-

N r-

_N

-_N-

N. H r r r?r r-rr r-rF• r r- w- r? rr

NNNN_N NN -t MA N V) W-00 NN f
J li H F H J LL J J I+ h ? LL FH I F J ?- Fai - F I- 1- 1-V- V-F:
IDSD

1048
1046 - - :
- _ . - - - - - - - -- - .-
- - - - -- - - -- --- --
I - - - -- --- - -
1044
--
- I
- I
--
-
-
--
-
_...
-
-
- I
--
-
-
--
-
-
- I i - I

I

i --

i_ I -- --- I ?-i

-I , -

I

L I f
1042 - Z B LE7
1040 -- - - - - _ - -- -'- --,

1038 - - - -- - _ _ I ! ! I { I
I _
1036
, l
' ; - i
I I i -
I i -
--
i
DATUM ELEV
103A 00 ? l- - i I ( i l i I i ? !
m LO al I ..

. i 00 tr)
wm
o'
a
O! o
a
O of
a
O pV
i7
O'

i o
'
a!
p'

! o
a.
O m
t7
O

I 6' m m r z!
t7 M i7 m V)m
O,, O O O' 00
?I ..

I

I !

I !

i

I

;
I

I ?

I
? 1 ! II ! ; i I j ? ! I ? II
12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00
NEB
?z
W_
F-
N It
? m
W rn
N
0
W
N
J m
Z
Q U
-z
0
z :3 17
o L ?
f m
z Q
p 0
Z Z W
O ?+
W ® ?
o`••FESS? '?'
4 SEAL
29216
9y?NGINE???`?,
/FS M. NPa\N?
DATE C112=5
DESIGNED BY' vAJ
DRAWN BY. OSTAVWR
CHECKED BY. JMH
PROJECT NO.:WRC0402
Fly' baley_bzo10705
SCALE' NOT TO SCALE

J z
o
0 d
z
O
a 0
0
Cj
z
0
J z

W o
a ?D
1189 1
0
t
I
r
e
1
f
t
i
SYMBOL KEY:
RF =
riffle
ST =
step
RN
run
JK =
j—hook
PL =
pool
CL =
culvert
GL =
glide
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
UT 2 TO BAILEY FORK
BANKFULL
1050 f —r i 1 � ' '---- f I--- -
----- --- - -----
1048 ----
.�.-� �- ~ �.�'..�- .-�
1046—— —._ --�— �;——---— — ._.� _..-._—._ _—� i j M.—.` �.___.._ i m
,ri1 - ----�f --
o.o..o_...o_.-.._o ___o.__.._o __... o._ _.. 0._._... o____.... !.o ... ..-._0.._ ._o--_.�. _.-__._o_ _. o __._~ o.�
o - .. o --- - ^ _ _ __ 22
J. �__ ___ J .�_.___ .__. _.. JI._. J.__ A. -�._. _.__ -_.J-____^ __^-_._.J___�_—_._I_ .-+___I.o _ J __.. _._. -� .._._,._.J._ ^ __ J _/1__...^ _._ �-� _..J-_. 1 J i __ __ .J -�..J J� JJJJ- -j —j _-JJ.J..JJ^•-
_ _ o.... o .. o _
1044Li dw w C� w w Ci wr w ui w � d w uj d w w GI w d w r- GI -w- w d w w C�_ w w Gi w. w W w w uj w www -+u w -w --La
- I a -' a -ai d - rc rd . Ce
o 0 0
- m a o of c•i _ _ _
ro h - 4��
R"._. ._. m..__._o_... _ ... _._...=_ _ .._...__ ,_.. of _.___ _.__.._ -._ _� '_ _'. ._.rc - -- -... � - rn
p mr yy N O N. N N V A_.m 1 ry. _...-...N N-_._.._ .__..__._.Op. __....m__._.. exp- _.�f(ryy�.__._�.__ " _.-_m_.--.. ..d .. ...ry-.m._.____.fZ _ _ m ♦ p
^ N M N A �. N N O� ...�---.�---n---._-.N.-_`+.-.-_-.. i._-_.._._-._ . �.—__�_-__' 0 �- .....- r0 I m ._.._- m ._ N .... O t7 N .. n N _N.t�fi ��-p N y0
1042 + + ' �- --+—-- -. - -+ N + -
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ ^ ^ N N N N cq a I v n N ` .n o._ m I ._ .. ^ i.� _.-� --_._ _.�. -0 .�..._ .�. �..-q.._,oIZ! . o.. ol.....000 o. _
3
--N __. -"--N -.._rn ._.N N_.�.. rn.- ~ F fn. F- N N F- F- Fa- H Fd- Fd- y Fd- i N N Fd- Fd- N Fd- Fd- N.-.. ~ ~ m--- fd- Fd- Id-- Fd -I fHFd-Yd- Ma- 0 H f H Uxwxo
N N
N [n N N m
N m m
N ..!.. .. m- ... .. _._ N_- N__t0 N tnN N N N tnWVXA
1040
_ fn _m-
LL Z J Z_ J -1
..J -.-_ lL- - J LL J I J J J Z J' /- F J•
1038 — — — -- — — — — — — —
1036 — — -- -- —
r i
i
i I I
i
i
_
1034 --- -- -- — --- — -- — --- -- —
1032 ---- ----- --- — — — -- ------ ----- --.. --
1030
1028 -- —
DA7VM ELEV
1OZ5. 00
W
01 Cul
LQ
a
C'
,,OI If)'
M (7.
Ln
('7
0 7, V7
(7' (n ('I
Ui In
m (7
f�7 v.� Y� f7.
(Z 07 r) m
7; ai '�! V)
07 m Cn
fL (7
M. a] 6 O'�, p�'^.
(7 f7I (n
r
o'
(7
(�l (7
mI
m N
0 0 0' o (D C3
I
0+00
1+00
r
2+00
3+00
--�
4+00 5+00
6+00 7+00
8+00
� i
9+00 10+00 11+00
THALWEG
In E3
z
W _ �
N it c6
i'
W o0
In
W N
J
Q z
$U$
Z
F Lao
z E3
D L
r
QZ
0
0
N
V0
Z W
c
o
m
O o
A
Ix
#�"m 11 z
S �
W
O •' S
i
s.
• F o _
a� SEAL _
29216
GINE:
DATE: 01120/05
DESIGNED BY: PAJ
DRAWN BY. DSTAVWR
CHECKED BY: JMH
PROJECT NO.: wRCOaoz
F7LE: Da1ey_brk 010705
SCALE' NOT TO SCALE
SHEET 0
z
o �
a
w o
-� o
z � zO
L ��
0
o
J
N O U
�
11--
W
a

e

E

L

f

r

BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
1
S-1
LOG TO EXTEND 1/3 BANKFUL
LENGTH INTO EMBANKMEN'
FOOTER LOG OR CLASS 'II' STONE
(OPTIONAL
FLOW -ice
1/3 BANKFULL
2
S-1
ROOT WADS
PLAN NEW
NOT TO SME
BLLE
EEVATIOD
LOG CROSS-VANE
CROSS-SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
LOG CROSS-VANE
PROFILE VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
FLOW
TIONAL
TOOTER LOG
FLOW
ROOT WAD
FLOODPLAIN
1/2 TO 3/4 BANKFULL
BANKFULL STAGE
1-------L - -
FLOW -? 3-8%
CHANNEL BED

SCOUR CHANNEL
LOGS WILL BE FOOTER LOG HOLE SUB-GRADE
NOTCHED AND OR STONE
BETWEEN OR ON (OPTIONAL)
CROSS LOGS
ROOT WAD
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
OR STONE
(OPTIONAL)
,race revetment
i erosion control
/a transplants
FLOODPLAIN
NEB
?Z
w_
r
W in
N
0
W N
.? m
Q Z
u
z
a
F rn
z EO 'm
- m
o L ?
f-' m
Z o
o
ZW
z m
m
5 ® ?
1 II -y
SEAL
29216 =
///?? ?!1 11111111\\\\\
IDATE: 01RD,ro5
DESIGNED BY: pa
DRAWN BY: pyTW.
CHECKED BY.
JMN
PROJECT NO.: WRC0102
FILE: ba5eyJ6AC_1_;_
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
SHEEP S 1
-
?
z
0 Q

a
0
0

N ?
? o
U

W w
PLAN VIEW
LOG CROSS-VANE
NOT TO SCALE
SLOPE AND
/VEGETATE BANKS X1/2 TO 3/4 BANKFULL
t
t
m
t
t
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
1 2 _-
S - 2 BOULDER CROSS-VANE S _ 2 STEP BOULDER CROSS-VANE
PLAN NEW PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE
3
S-2
DOUBLE STEP
BOULDER CROSS-VANE
PLAN VIEW
Nor To SCALE
STEP NO MORE
THAN 6' DROP
SILL (OPTIONAL)
ELEVATION SHOULD
MATCH HEAD ROCK '
ELEVATION
SCOUR POOL
HEAD
BANIOTAL CHANNEL WOTH
Ip BNALOLILL 11/3 wonu 11/7 mmoa 1
,8 OZ NONWOVEN
FILTER FABRIC
APPROPRIATE CUSS
OF AGGREGATE STONE
TYPICAL BOULDER SIZE
APPROX. 3-4'x3'x2'
RANI( UIL CHANNEL WOTH STEP NO MORE
:'? THAN 6' DROP
8 OZ NONWOVEN
Z FILTER FABRIC
y APPROPRIATE CLASS
OF AGGREGATE STONE
SCOUR POOL
TYPICAL BOULDER SIZE
APPROX. 3-4'x3'x2'
HEAD ROCK
1/3 BANnI L 11/3 SAWMA L 11/7 SANOLLL
SCOUR POOL
SCOUR POOL
BOULDER CROSS-VANE STEP BOULDER CROSS-VANE
CROS -SEECTIO
N VIEW CROSS-SECTION VIEW
ON Nor TO SCALE
BANK•UIL CiANNEI. WOTH
--------- 00D PLAIN BANKrULL CHANNEL WDTH
---
OODPLAIN

m 8 OZ NONWOVEN
O
FILTER FABRIC o TER FABRIC
FI
FOOTER ROCKS APPROPRIATE CLASS FDOTER ROCKS
APPROPRIATE CLASS
OF AGGREGATE STONE OF AGGREGATE STONE
4
S-2
STEP POOL
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
)ER
CLASS
E STONE
FILTER FABRIC
HEAD ROCK
BANKFUIL CHANNEL WOTH
1/3 BAN*VLL 11/7 BAM3TILL 11/7 SAWFU L
STEP POOL
PROFILE VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
HEADER ROCK
OF AGGREGATE STONE
8 OZ NONWOVEN
--FlLTER FABRIC
APPROPRIATE
CLASS OF
AGGREGATE STONE
TYPICAL BOULDER
SIZE APPROX.
3-4'x3'x2'
1/2' MAXIMUM
(TYPICAL)
En
?Z
w_
EO
}
W a
N o
W
h
Q Z
0
z
F rrn
Z E3 u
m
o L cr.
Z o
o
m Z W
m
co
o ®E,
fh
S. ,
_ •a =
SEAL
29216
NGINE?•??NQ
//?/? IIIIMIIIII1j1\\\\\
DATE 012oa6
[DESIGNED BY. PAJ
I DRAWN BY. DsrnnvR
CHECKED BY. JMH
PROJECT NO.: wRCA402
FILE: baley_trk 122804
SCALE' NOTTO SCALE
U)
w ?
0 U
9NEET S ?
-//?
Z

z
0 Q
? v

U xU
x
°
? z

W

?
N

w
d

7
STREAM BED OR
CULVERT INVERT
STEP POOL
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
VEGETATE BANKS NOT TO SCALE
I COIR MATTING
re. rcn. a. ne,.r..n _ 1 M 7n n u i GLU{fn 11 l
I
1
1
9
l
1
1
f
1
1
I
I
t
1
1
i
1
1
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
1 2
S-3 "J" HOOK CROSS-VANE S-3
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
ROCK/LOG CHANNEL SILL
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
RIP-RAP OR ALLUVIUM
BANKTLL CHANNEL{ WIDTH
TYPICAL BOULDER SIZE ;
APPROX. 3-4"x3'x2'
B OZ NON-WOVEN
FILTER FABRIC 20-
APPROPRIATE CLASS
OF AGGREGATE STONE
1/3 BANKFULL11/3 BANKFU 11/3 BANKFULL
TOP OF
1/4 BANKFULL WIDTH
MINIMUM EMBEDDING ON
EACH SIDE OF STREAM
"J" HOOK CROSS-VANE
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
FLOW mm-
ROCK SILL SET AT
DESIGN INVERT
COMPACTEC
FLOOD PLAIN _ BANKFULL CHANNEL_
CHANNEL INVERT
8 OZ NONWOVEN J
FILTER FABRIC
APPROPRIATE CLASS FOOTER ROCKS
OF AGGREGATE STONE (OPTIONAL)
3 FT, MIS
STREAM BED
LOG SILL SET AT
DESIGN INVERT
TEXTILE
KS OR LOG
NDISTURSED EARTH
U1
?Zo
w_
Ul
In
W m
in
0
W n
N
A
C
Q Z e
U
E
_ o
z
c
7
L E3
m
f
Qzo
c
H
ZW
C3
SEAL =
29216
GI
11.111 ` \N
DATE 01rz0As
DESIGNED BY: p,
DRAWN BY: DSTAVWR
CHECKED BY.
JMH
PROJECT NO.:WRC0402
FILE: baley_kA 122604
SCALE NOTTOSCALE

a

?
F,
0

0
?

a
0

V
? r u
°z
U)

Lu

w 0
U
N

SHEET
S-3
ROCK/LOG CHANNEL SILL
PROFILE VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
FLOW
I
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
l
BAILEY FORK
STREAM RESTORATION
1
E -1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
50' MIN.
BUT SUFFICIENT TO KEEP
SEDIMENT ON SITE
25' MIN. FLARE END IF
DOSTING NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE
ROADWAY TWO-WAY TRAFFIC.
2•-3' STONE TO BE USED
(SURGE STONE OR RAILROAD BALLAST)
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
CROSS SECTION VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
BERM OPTIONAL
EXISTING 35' MIN.
ROADWAY
8' MIN. •• j •'.:?' :•>.;. ;•:?;:?...Y-r
15' MIN. NEW CONSTRUC110N?
\ 12' MIN.
FABRIC UNDER STONE
NOTES:
1. PUT SILT FENCE OR TREE PROTECTION FENCE UP
TO ENSURE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE IS USED.
2. IF CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE IS SUCH THAT
THE MUD IS NOT REMOVED BY THE VEHICLE TRAVEL-
ING OVER THE STONE, THEN THE TIRES OF THE
VEHICLES MUST BE WASHED BEFORE EN IRNG THE
PUBLIC ROAD.
3. IF A PROJECT CONTINUES TO PULL MUD AND DEBRIS
ON TO THE PUBLIC ROAD, THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY
WILL CLEAN THE AREA AND INVOICE THE FINANCIALLY
RESPONSIBLE PERSON AS INDICATED ON THE FINANCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY FORM.
2
E-1 PERMANENT/TEMPORARY FORD
ISOMETRIC VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
SURFACE FLOW
DIVERSION EXISTING
r STREAM CHANNEL
?so. FLOW
'I 1 1 i / 4' SURFACE FLAW E
- ?•_'\? I1 ?? k a DIVERSION
it
I ?
I I i1 ; STONE APPROACH SECTION
5:1 MAX. SLOPE ON ROAD I
CLASS B RIP RAP r
RON-WOVEN CEOTEXTI E
PERMANENT/TEMPORARY FORD
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
1. CLASS B RIP RAP - MINIMUM DEPTH OF 24'
2. UNDERCUT FOR STONE PLACEMENT
CUSS B RIP RAP
SURFACE FLOW
DN =N
CCST4G STRFMRBANK
NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
7_z
}
Nil 'm
N
0
W N
Qz2
u
L
z
L3
U ?
0
aZ0
0
ZW
u
co
r;
??_QFY?J? 9 i
a SEAL =
29216 =
9'FNGINE.
'///N ?!! I I I IIIU0\\\\\\
[DATE 01=105
DESIGNED BY: PAJ
DRAWN By. DST1111
CHECKED BY: JMH
PROJECT NO.: wRco4o2
IFILE: bailey_trk 122804
SUE' NOTTOS-E
J

W 0
E~

0
0

0

z
U
Z 0
In

0
U

0
z

0

0 w
SHEEP
E-1

C

I
f

I

Q

BAILEYFORK
STREAM RESTORATION
LIVE STAKE PLANTING
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
BANKFULL STAGE
.... RWPRWFM .... ?.... PPPPPPPWM ........... .
BASEFLDW ELE1!RT10fa;
ANGLE-CUT END
R MATTING
• LIVE STAKES INSTALLED IN BANK
WITH DEAD-BLOW HAMMER
3/4 OF STAKE IN GROUND
*AT LEAST 2 BUDS ORIENTED UPWARDS
• 2' CENTERS (APPROX.)
COIR MATTING AND VEGETATION
TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD
(RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE-MIN. 30')
JWI' IY 6 A ?T
LIVE STAKES'
2' CENTERS
BARE ROOT SEEDLINGS
10' - 10' CENTERS AND
TEMPORARY/PERMANENT SEEDING
BANKFULL STAGE
. '::
BELOW GROUND
MATTING
STAPLED IN PLACE
Live Stakes
PLANT SPECIES
Common Name Scientific Name
Silky dogwood Cornus amomum
Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
Black willow Salix nigra
* 2'x2' centers along outside meanders.
* 3'x3' to 4'x4' centers along riffle sections.
* Black willow shall not exceed 30%
of the species composition.
Trees
Common Name Scientific Name
Green ash
River birch
American sycamore
Tulip poplar
Swamp chestnut oak
Willow oak
Cherrybark oak
Box elder
Water oak
* Min. 10'x10' centers
Small Trees/Shrubs
Common Name
Painted buckeye
Silky dogwood
Flowering dogwood
Elderberry
Tag alder
Black willow
* Min. 8'x8' centers
General Notes:
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Betula nigra
Platanus occidentalis
Liriodendron tulipifera
Quercus michaxii
Quercus phellos
Quercus pagoda
Acer negundo
Ulmus americana
Scientific Name
Aesculus syivatica
Corpus amomum
Corpus florida
Sambucus canadensis
Alnus serrulata
Salix nigra
1. Species composition may vary depending on availability.
2. Planted material will consist of a minimum of 4 species
of trees and 2 species of shrubs.
NEB
?Z?
N
W_
Ul cb
W '
N
0
W ry
J
Q Z U
Z
Et_z
F a
Z n?
< m
Q Z
o
o
(] Z N
W ?
V 3
C3
p ® a
s
r:'FESS
ag'5SE
29216
NGINE?
uim? ``??\\\
DATE 01=5
DESIGNED BY: Pa
DRAWN BY. DSTAVVVR
CHECKED BY. JMR
PROJECT NO.: WRC0402
FILE: baley_ rk_M804
ISCALE: NOTTOSCALE
0 ? o
(9 ?z
z
aL>a
P- 1

J

Q z
o
E~

0 Q
?

0

U
W

Q

J
a 0

?

0
Q
ca ?
BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD
(RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE-MIN. 30')
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
9.0 Riparian Planting Plan
' The proposed riparian planting plan was developed by integrating the native plant species
observed on site along with selected species known to inhabit the Piedmont/Mountain bottomland
forest community type as described in Classification of the Natural Communities of North
' Carolina (Schafale and Weakley, 1990) to institute species diversity. According to the Schafale
and Weakley publication, "Very few bottomlands of any significant size remain. While many
bottomlands exist as successional forest grown up in abandoned fields, intact Bottomland Forests
are among the rarest of communities in North Carolina." Most of the bottomlands that have been
cleared or logged in the past are dominated by loblolly pine (Pins taeda), red maple (Ater
rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciua), or American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
The majority of the restored riparian zone will be located within the created bankfull bench and
toe slope areas. This area will be planted with bare root seedlings consisting of bottomland
hardwood species as outlined in Schafale and Weakley. Native trees and shrubs that are currently
located within the channel clearing and excavation limits will be removed with as much of the
root ball intact and transplanted adjacent to the restored creek channel or bankfull bench when
possible. Trees as large as 4-inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) and approximately 20 feet
tall will be transplanted and integrated into the buffer restoration when available. The bare root
seedlings will be planted during the fall or early spring seasons, as soon as possible after the
completion of the earthwork associated with constructing the new stream channel. During the
following fall, supplemental shrub and tree species will be planted if survival rates of previously
planted seedlings are below target densities as determined in late summer (August-September).
Plant species that will be utilized within the restoration site are listed in the table presented in this
section.
The restored active channel will be planted with the appropriate channel bank species in the form
of live stakes, bare-root seedlings, and transplants consisting primarily of black willow (Salix
nigra), silky dogwood (Corpus antonurm), and elderberry (Sambucus canadensis). If quantities
from on site sources are not plentiful the live stakes will be supplemented by locally identified
plant sources (i.e. existing power line right-of-ways (ROWs), adjacent properties, etc.) or
purchased from locally reputable nurseries. Black willow will not consist of more than 40
percent of the stream bank plantings.
The planting plan consists of individual hardwood tree species as listed in the table provided in
this section. The planting plan is provided on the design sheets in Section 8. The goal is to plant
400 to 600 bare-root seedlings per acre, with an approximate 8-foot to 10-foot spacing. Plant
composition will consist of at a minimum of at least four (4) of the tree species and two (2) of the
shrub species list.
ONSE
23
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Plant List
Scientific Name Common Name
Trees
Fraxinus enns Ivanica Green ash
Platanus occidentalis Americansycamore
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak
Betula ni ra River birch
uercus michauxii Swam chestnut oak
Quercus hellos Willow oak
Acer ne undo Box elder
Ulmus americana American Elm
Liriodendroiz tuli i era Tulip tree
Small Trees and Shrubs
Corpus amomum Silky dogwood
Corpus orida Flowering dogwood
Alnus serrulata Tag alder
Aesculus s Ivatica Painted buckeye
Salix ni ra
F
_ Black willow
Sanibucus canadensis
_ Elderberry
* Species composition may be adjusted based on local availability.
Temporary and permanent seed will be applied simultaneously to the disturbed areas and channel
embankments. Temporary seed will provide cover until the permanent seed applied becomes
established. Temporary cover will consist of millet (Echinochloa crusgalli), rye grain (Secale
cereale), and crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum). Permanent ground cover will consist of
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), deertongue (Panicum clandestinnzan), black-eyed susan
(Rudbeckia hirta), riverbank wildrye (Elymus riparius), and will also include silky dogwood
(Corpus amomtnn). Silky dogwood will only be applied along the channel embankments.
10.0 Monitoring Plan
The restoration site will be monitored for five consecutive years or until the required success
criteria has been met as determined by NC DWQ and the USACE. Monitoring activities will
begin immediately following the completion of the stream construction in order to alleviate any
potential problems as they occur. Planting will likely not occur until Fall of 2005; therefore, the
riparian buffer restoration will be monitored the following growing season projected to be
summer of 2006. Monitoring activities will follow the guidelines presented in the request for
proposals for this project.
Parameters that will be included in the annual stream monitoring to ensure the success of the
restoration activities will include stream channel surveys (longitudinal and cross-sectional
profiles), pebble counts, photographs, and plant surveys.
Following the submittal of the monitoring reports to the appropriate agency representatives, the
recipients of the report will be contacted for the purpose of discussing the monitoring data,
required success criteria and whether or not the site is functioning as expected. If the site is not
functioning as expected a site visit will be scheduled with the review agencies so that a
©NSE
24
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
remediation plan can be created and implemented. The remediation plans, if required, will
directly reflect the requested alterations as discussed with the regulatory agencies.
10.1 Stream Channel
Stream channel stability will be physically monitored by establishing permanent cross-sections
located approximately every 500 to 600 feet that will comprise of a nested riffle and pool
segment. Each cross-section will be monumented for future identity and survey. All of these
cross-sectional surveys will also be utilized as photographic points. Cross-section locations to be
monitored will be established immediately following construction during the completion of the
"as-built" survey. The "as-built" report will include the constructed stream channel dimension,
pattern, and longitudinal profile. This data will be utilized as a baseline to compare future
monitoring surveys and subsequently to determine channel stability and transition. Other data
collected will include pebble counts, stream pattern data, and stream side plant conditions.
Annual inspection of in-stream structures will also occur to verify proper function and channel
stability. Stream channel monitoring surveys will be completed annually for five consecutive
years, starting one (1) year after the completion of the project.
10.2 Riparian Buffer
Vegetation within the restored riparian buffer will be monitored for five consecutive years. Ten
by ten meter square plots will be permanently established following completion of the planting
phase and at least two opposing corners will be permanently installed and surveyed for future use.
The plant species, density, survival rates, and the cause of mortality if identifiable will be
recorded within each plot. Vegetation plots will be sampled annually and reported on every year
along with the data collected during the physical monitoring of the channel. The primary focus
of the vegetative monitoring will be solely on the tree and shrub stratum, although herbaceous
species encountered may also be recorded. The target density for the riparian buffer is to
establish a minimum of 360 stems per acre after 3 years with a minimum of 260 stems per acre at
the end of the 5-year monitoring period. Vegetation monitoring will occur between August and
October.
11.0 Success Criteria
Success criteria will determine if the mitigation project is meeting its prescribed goals as listed in
Section 2.0. A determination will be made regarding the success of the project following the
collection and evaluation of ecological and physical monitoring data, photographs, site
observations, and the performance of the streams during storm events. Monitoring components
that will be evaluated include vegetation survival, channel bed and bank stability, and in-stream
structure performance.
I Tree survival should consist of at least 320 trees per acre for the first 3 years after construction
with no more than 10% mortality in subsequent years or a minimum of 260 trees per acre after 5
years.
OiNSE
25
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
Channel stability will be reflected in the surveyed permanent cross-sections, longitudinal profile,
evaluation of bank stability and cover, evaluation of in-stream structure performance and to a
lesser degree pebble counts compared to the as-built and any previously collected monitoring
data. The general trend should reflect a stable or slightly decreasing riffle cross-sectional area
whereas pools may increase and yet be considered relatively stable. The longitudinal profile will
typically adjust depending on the frequency of bankfull or greater storm events. Normally the
constructed channel profile will adjust (especially in a sand dominated bed) but it will need to
function without significant degradation (bed scour), aggradation (mid-channel bars), or bank
erosion.
12.0 References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1975. Sedimentation Engineering, Manuals and
Reports on Engineering Practice No. 54, Vito A. Vanoni, ed., New York.
Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon, and B.L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream Hydrology. John Wiley &
Sons Ltd. West Sussex, England.
Harmon, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R.
Everhart, R.E. Smith. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North
Carolina Streams.
http://www5.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wqg/sri/rural_pied_paper.html
Leopold, L.B., M.G. Wolman, and J.P. Miller. 1992. Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology.
Dover Publications, Inc. New York, NY.
Leopold, L.B., 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. June 2003. Basinwide Assessment
Report: Catawba River Basin. Division of Water Quality.
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. December 2004. Surface Water
Classifications. http://dem.ehnr.state.nc.us/csu/swc.html
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. March 2001. Catawba River Basin
Priority Subbasins and Targeted Local Watersheds.
NSE. 2004. NSE field data collection within Burke County, North Carolina.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs,
Colorado.
ONSE
26
' Bailey Fork Restoration Plan • Catawba 03050101
Burke County, North Carolina • January 2005
1 Rosgen, D.L. and Silvey, Lee. 1998. Field Guide for Stream Classification. Wildland
Hydrology.
Rosgen, D.L. 2001. The Cross-Vane, W-Weir, and J-Hook Vane Structures... Their Description,
Design and Applications for Stream Stabilization and River Restoration. 2001 ASCE
t Conference Proceedings. Reno, NV.
Schafale, Michael P. and Weakley, Alan S. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina Third Approximation. NC Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources.
Stream Restoration Institute (SRI). 2000. NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve.
http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wgg/sri/rural_pied_regcurves.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Burke County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,
and Federal Species of Concern.
http://nc-es.fivs.gov/es/cntylist/burke.html.
United States Geological Survey. 1974. North Carolina Hydrologic Unit Map.
United States Geological Survey. 1993. Glen Alpine, North Carolina 7.5-minute series
topographic map.
United States Geological Survey. 1993. Morganton South, North Carolina 7.5-minute series
topographic map.
Ward, Andy D., Stanley W. Trimble. 2004. Environmental Hydrology, Second Edition. Lewis
Publishers.
Webster, W.B., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Wildland Hydrology. 1998. The Reference Reach Field Book. Wildland Hydrology.
Wildland Hydrology. 2001. Revised Sheilds Diagram (Colorado data included). River
Restoration and Natural Channel Design Manual. Wildland Hydrology.
ONSE
27

of'
3*
N
all
BASIS OF BEAPoNGS:
' J ? , ?? i, } ?," /, j( r'? ?' •? S t i NC Q1% NAD 93
•
w
? ??.'`?' ?' ,, ?„¢.. ? 1, ?,.."'= ; ?. ,?' \ ,,??`
? ? c
1
•
`
a
?
?
'F.?
il,
? __ ?"F" J? } t, r' t t • o ?? ? ? Y

C4

,J

,
•
1
r
e„
1
/
r (
e
t ch 4 1 }?` : Id
fi
- ,. ?i? l! i F •.i • x? '.h a 'c .:
\l !
ff
'C' ': 111 JJ
./

17
' ,?„? ?.? ?. ( ,.-? •'?? = U ' ? b• qtr. ?.'\ ??r• f ?.. ?" C ? • •?? r ?/ ?. • C ly - j'... •'t

w,
j
-
X
d. ,
a
,
.
r,-
/ r
.
••
-..? ?
'
?.
? .
•`
? ?? ,
•
--. •
?
A
-_'
i
- '
?
.
?'?} M.? . ? ?
'
??,.. rte` `
\?
t
?
, tel. .
?f ? S.
rte- ;
_ f K /rte ?
l i ?.• ?iy
.,:t
d +9/ it `}? f•'7 /? 1 4
/
7 J r„? !'?,-•S" 6, -
e Y ?:.> Y}?n • • •~..
14-
.
?.
•Z ••'??• ,• • .
r ?` ,rt N?,,..?.../ "-.. ?.. -? f ?;i ?, pct- • * i?,'
, o• t
?
•
J
... ?
?
J
•'47 __
.. tt{C1r„JJijj ?"?•..1

X JD

-,-. J y J- wusa•-+u:? ,a?f'` j ` • ` / , r .. - 1 '?? _ t
s k O
. f
10
.+.'+ ? l -.
! is .
-?' - ? ?:. l j 1
{'
.:. ?,.
3
y.
• • • -< j •r Y
4 d' S ; l~1
f 1 ...t J() .. O ll I. 4?
5'? •
t/
f +
} „
i
'
'
i
`l
•
J
?
Y,
`
D li .•y..
: _/
a1l....r
- ?? / ?, ? • ' -:r, a 111/// \ v. ?, •4r i
_ "V f r-" . ?? - ? ?
r?+ r? ' o
w
?e
c:' . • ! / r
.
\
3
?

I
?__ /
??
_ /o, • % / 1, b
?'
f
ul 0
m C)
t
(D (0
(A W X

VICINITY MAP DATE: DECEMBER 2004

PROJECT NO.:WRC0402 LOCATION:

ORRKE C
OUNW NATURAL SYSTEM S

E N G I N E E R i N a
BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORATION SCALE: 1'=2000' CO
N 3719 Benson Drive- Raleigh, North Caroline 27809• (919) 878540 www.neepc.com

,r ?N € Ate. ?.
l ' (j +. . r; i 1`?, sir p w rte- JeI
lR. SITE
?y
f
,4?, ? PR .
.. Qpal. RO
r
fSR 111?)
.IIrWWr j l
yw S t t ? }"i
`
?s s
SCALE: 1" _ 1000'
1000, 0 500 16oo
FIGURE 2
NATURAL S Y S T E M S SITE MAP
E N G I N E E R i N G BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORATION
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Raleigh, North Carolina [phone] www.nsepc.com DATE: DECEMBER 2004
eb
TE
'� 1000, 1
500 11000
51911M ACI'9
FIGURE 3
N AT U R A L S Y S T E M S SITE MAP WITH TAX PARCELS
u — E N G I N E E R i N G BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORA
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROL
Raleigh, North Carolina [phone] www.nsepc.com DATE: DECEMBER 2004

I

I
I

I

s{.., i`r7? .)?rpYtr?ht. ? ?,.f ?!` :. ?' t} n \ ', // ?•Y .. ? 1 ??a F.,.'??',? „?. _ -` ' ?µ.' ?g?\,\\ ?, t [r ,??? ?'?? I Or,? / / - ' y?
r i ?
3 f >y...5, 5 . .. - - L } '- .
_ .. a -y?' i i BASIS OF BEAPoN4'SC - ? -. ? ? ?'•
`
•
NC CPoBI NAB 83 3 Y 1 4 ,1 :j
_ ±.?_/' ?`"? s,y ? •r k
l:t ?
??/ ,? '?'. ?
I_\ ??O.i
.''?k
'?'Nfr, i y`/ I ^ j

?
?
•
?
volts
?.
o
?
1
.
\ ?` ? J -:?1ti'? .1 is ?`•?i J e ' s ? ' f
- ? ?v
y car f/
?? Z C,
j .r. K. 7 \ J ° JM y??TDtj

- .. ?,
r
00
vlk_
3

l
'
h
rrl
m cu
•
A
:IJ

.,v-, °e%+'' 4 one I \4
%
O ?.
3
?
•
?
/
?
?
:r` - ?
>j .J
. A t'?.
?t•
.n ?' •
l
r?
` ' r ? ?, V??? /
DPI
cn O
r`1 F• ?.! .
?• I sad r. ?
., m D
I
4
x
D (n ?,
D
'g A
?
/+
? \
'
?• •
P y
" Iv'
? 1.
? ? ?•
O } •

C
A r- KIN
9c
n l A.
1? ''.1
eT
.-- i f t o
r
r
l
?
1 ,l
!

?
i
s
- ? ?
?ti
?
r f"?J fi f
ti? -°s, I t
?
09 LI)
VK P.
.-x « j ?l • '"• /
'?J ??
e r '
FY
???. ??
•
-
-
?
-
..
.?
j
?
00

/ C
Q 0 J yi .1 ?OV 1 -- -.. ?. .J •f? .y?7
.Zl •i, ?_ r N°-- 1,., ? - ?' ) 1 f,.•- ' - o,? .• ..r ?FL } r Y ? \ •AAt 'r ? ` Y f

x
V. I
';1 t? ?• ?`??< .rte.' /.1'0'"^'.^ 3:0 y1O l?'1 ?_- J ?! ? 1 !} LV / 7 JE ? S i-u. 4?, r ?"" \ ? ) \'.
J
i
WATERSHED MAP rPR : DECEMBER2004 LOCATION: NATURAL SYSTEM S
ECT NO.: W RC0402 O
AR? E N a I N E E R I N o
R
HE
E
BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORATION
R
T
C
E: 1 "=3000` 3719 Benson Drive- Ralelph, North Caroline 27809• [phone] www.neepc.com

m ?
? m m m m

VARIES Wbkf + VARIES --SLOPE
STEEPER
O ax STREAMBANK SLOPE NO T2.1
BASEFLOW ELEVATION (TYP.) STEEPER THAN 2:1
TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS SECTION
VARIES Wbkf
VARIES --?
BANK SLOPE
NO STEEPER
THAN 2:1
STREAMBANK SLOPE NO Dmax
STEEPER THAN 2:1 ON
OUTSIDE OF MEANDER BEND
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
(LEFT POOL SHOWN)
ELEVATION (TYP.)
TYPICAL CROSS TRIB 1 TRIB 2 UPPER BAILEY LOWER BAILEY
SECTION DATA TABLE
RIFFLE POOL RIFFLE POOL RIFFLE POOL RIFFLE POOL
BANKFULL WIDTH 14 16 16 18 28 32 30 34
(Wbkf, ft)
MAXIMUM DEPTH 1.8 2.5 2 3.8 4.0 6.7 4.2 7.0
(Dmax, ft)
BANKFULL AREA 17.5 26 23 36.8 65 100 75 112.5
(Abkf, sq ft)
MEAN DEPTH 1.3 1.6 1.4 2.0 2.3 3.1 2.5 3.3
(Dmean, ft)
WIDTH TO DEPTH RATIO 10.8 10.0 11.4 9.0 12.2 10.3 12.0 10.3
(Wbkf/Dmean)
NOTE: CORNERS OF DESIGN CHANNEL SHALL BE ROUNDED AND A THALWEG SHALL BE SHAPED DURING CONSTRUCTION, PER
THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
FIGURE 7
NATURAL SYSTEMS TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
E N G I N E E R I N G BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORATION
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Raleigh, North Carolina [phone] www.nsepc.com DATE: DECEMBER 2004
14A - Colvard sandy loam, 0 - 3 % slopes
4A - Arkaqua loam, 0 - 2 % slopes
Soil units Interpreted from:
"Soil Survey Field Sheet - Burke County,
North Carolina Advance Copy Subject to
Change. Survey has not been compiled
nore correlated. Names may be changed
and areas may be combined." Provided by
Burke County Soil and Water'
Conservation District, 2004
FIGURE 8
NATURAL SYSTEMS SITE MAP WITH SOIL SERIES
® E N G I N E E R I N G BAILEY FORK STREAM RESTORATION
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Raleigh, North Carolina [phone] www.nsepc.com DATE: DECEMBER 2004

Rural Piedmont Regional Curves
L
Q
Cn U-
x?
_Cn
CV
CO
1000.0
100.0
10.0
1.0
0.1 1 10 100
Watershed Area (Sq. Mi.)
1000
--- Lower 95 %
SRI Reference Data
Power (SRI Reference Data
Upper 95%
NSE Reference Data
B ailey Fork Stream Restoration -Existin Conditions Data Summa

Channel

X-section
Bankfull
Width
Mean
Depth Bankfull X-
sectional
Area
Width/Depth
Ratio
Maximum
Depth
Flood-prone
Width
Entrenchment
Ratio Water
Surface
Slope
Channel
Sinuosity

Velocity

Discharge
Upper Bailey Fork 2b 26.47 2.71 71.69 9.77 4.96 180.00 6.80 0.0024 1.10 3.72 266.49
2c 19.90 3.38 67.37 5.88 4.55 180.00 9.04 0.0024 1.10 4.01 270.41
Average 23.19 3.05 69.53 7.83 4.76 180.00 7.92 0.0024 1.10 3.87 268.45

Lower Bailey Fork 3a 37.42 2.55 95.26 14.70 3.33 70.00 1.87 0.0030 1.10 4.15 395.00
Includes Upper Average 27.93 2.88 78.11 10.12 4.28 143.33 5.90 0.0029 1.10 3.96 310.63
and Lower Bailey

Tributary 1 1a 10.99 1.56 17.11 7.06 2.26 25 2.27 0.0086 1.14 4.79 81.96
lb 11.98 1.44 17.26 8.31 1.88 17 1.42 0.0086 1.14 4.66 80.37
l d 9.39 1.54 14.46 6.09 2.53 23 2.45 0.0086 1.14 4.65 67.26
Average 10.79 1.51 16.28 7.15 2.22 21.67 2.05 0.0086 1.14 4.70 76.53

Tributary 2 1 8.4 2.2 18.7 3.8 3.6 150.0 17.9 0.0098 1.10 6.2 116.1
2 7.6 2.7 20.8 2.8 3.6 150 19.7 0.0098 1.10 6.4 133.5
3 8.5 2.4 20.8 1.4 3.2 12 1.4 0.0098 1.10 6.6 137.9
Average 8.2 2.4 20.1 2.7 3.5 104.0 13.0 0.0098 1.10 6.40 129.17
Tributary 1 X-section 1a

1051.5
1051
1050.5
1050
1049.5
C 1049
c?
m
w 1048.5
1048
1047.5
1047
1046.5
1046

0+00.0 0+05.0 0+10.0 0+15.0 0+20.0 0+25.0 0+30.0 0+35.0 0+40.0
Station
-0 Tributary 1 X-section 1a
m m m m m m s m m m r m m m m m m m m
a
0 =r
I
0
U) i 0 i i p 0--

(f W Gn IV --? -? N (D W O (n
i A A (D W 00 O CO V O

v

0

G1
CJ

d
O --? N N N N ? i i 0
W U7 r i i i (D ? O i
O O (D V (D (D Ul (D V
D
CD
G

.i
i O N N N N --? O
O co 0 Cn A V V Ul i N
Q) 0 - (D Ul to CD A V Ut
;u m?mEgmg Dona
O<n) 2?o
CL 5. 11 = -? CL (O') O C? El (?D G (D 7' Q 0)) d O. :E X
W _. (n C 0 Q ? .0 = 'O (D (D
V CL -0
CD ::r 0 0
3 :3 3 :r
O O O
7
J
_ O
(n i
i A i A N -+ V i O N
(D V N -+ N N O O U) (D N
0 O - O V M O O 0 (D O)
Tx
N
(D
r. ?
Ut Ut Ut Ut 0 Ut (r (T1 (J) (J) (I) CJ) CJ? CJ) Ut U) Ut 0 0 p'
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i i i ..-1 -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO V 0 U) A CO N" O (D CO V 0 U) A W N- -'
N
z_
V V V V V V-4 -4 -4 -4 -( V V V V V -4?
N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N M 0
i i i i i i i. i i i i N i i i i i co -
0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O i 0 0 0 0 0
U) A A A co W W W w w W W O W W IV N N
Ato AO(DM00 V (D U7AA W N)"Co U,N
V ADU0CO V NNACA V-?wcnNA(O?n
V V A 0 U) O Ul (D N V A U) U) V V N N U7
A - N O N W N Ut N O N - O N O 0 V N
V W W N 0 W V 0 00 (D 0 U) W W (D N i V
m -?
cn 0-
i
(D co (D (O (0 (D (D (D (D (D (D co (D (D (O (D (D i (D
AAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAA(D `Z
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W A i
i i N N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W
U)NO W AAU1U)0 V OD(D(000- N W
DuNAA OD (O-IAAi0 (DOUn W
OACO A(DA W N" -lANA V - 0N0o
i i Ul V (D A U) P. W Ul V V W W 0 W -? W
m
(D
i i i i i i i i i i i v
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Ui U, (n A A A A A A A A A A A A A cn -
000(D00 V 00 W 000000000000
AoO0iA6(OUn V 60(DmA W V OM
A W 0 V N O O W A (D W 0 V 0 0 -1 .
A W A D i (D W V" V N (D i W U7 0) N O
0 U) W W N U) W 00 M A i 00 V co 0 A co A
(D (D (D (0 0- 0 CD 0 0 0 (D 0 0 Cr CO CO (0 ?
7 7 7 7- S 7C' 7C' 7c =r =r - 7 D D (D
U)
_'
o'
0
v
Ut Ut --? --? O -+ -+ -+ O O -+ -+ N N W 0
OD i W in N -+ -+ IV CO 0 O t)) bW w Q) 0
A N O i A A CD W W O W V O Cn W N O
V)
N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o
+ + t t t + + + + + + t t + + + + + 7
W W (J N N 0 0 0 0
V -? 0 i 0 (D W V 0 A W N i 0 (D O W O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 V D P. W 0 U1 N i (D V N (D M A Ul O 0
w ?w wr s? w wr w w? w w w w w iw w w w w w
Tributary 1 X-section lb
1050.5
1050 -- -
1049.5 - - --
1049 - - --- -- --
1048.5 --- - - --
c 1048 - -- - -- - - -
w
c?
d
w 1047.5 - -- --- -- - -
1047 --- - ---
1046.5 - --- --
1046 -
1045.5 --
1045
0+00.0 0+05.0 0+10.0 0+15.0 0+20.0 0+25.0 0+30.0 0+35.0
Station
Tributary 1 X-section 1 b
fl

t
X-section 1 b (Riffle) Tributary 1
Point No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5019 720995.8402 1194208.209 1049.8853 gn 0 0+00.0
5020 720999.8633 1194208.165 1049.1029 gn 4.02 0+04.0
5021 721001.3659 1194207.981 1048.3411 gn 1.51 0+05.5
5022 721002.9057 1194208.047 1047.6663 gn 1.54 0+07.1
5023 721004.8827 1194207.919 1047.4874 bf 1.98 0+09.1
5024 721005.7938 1194207.893 1046.9652 ch 0.91 0+10.0
5025 721006.5553 1194208.364 1046.227 ch 0.90 0+10.9
5026 721006.9189 1194207.701 1045.8575 ew 0.76 0+11.6
5027 721007.6348 1194207.592 1045.6815 ck 0.72 0+12.3
5028 721008.7582 1194207.474 1045.6796 ck 1.13 0+13.5
5029 721010.1312 1194207.398 1045.7517 ck 1.38 0+14.9
5030 721011.7503 1194207.05 1045.7516 ck 1.66 0+16.5
5031 721012.8059 1194207.152 1045.6503 ck 1.06 0+17.6
5032 721014.1091 1194207.092 1045.6041 tw 1.30 0+18.9
5033 721014.507 1194206.929 1045.8832 ew rt 0.43 0+19.3
5034 721014.8324 1194206.906 1046.1294 ch 0.33 0+19.6
5035 721015.2588 1194206.719 1046.4939 ch 0.47 0+20.1
5036 721016.1961 1194206.61 1047.5571 bf 0.94 0+21.0
5037 721017.4391 1194206.736 1049.9892 gn 1.25 0+22.3
5038 721020.6274 1194206.908 1049.7535 gn 3.19 0+25.5
5039 721024.942 1194207.776 1049.8694 gn 4.40 0+29.9
5040 721027.4897 1194207.734 1049.7636 gn 2.55 0+32.4
Width Depth Area max depth 1.88
0.91 0.26 0.24 Bkfl.width 11.98
0.90 0.89 0.80 Ave depth 1.44
0.76 1.45 1.09 w/d 8.31
Floodprone
0.72 1.72 1.24 Elevation 1049.37
Floodprone
1.13 1.81 2.04 Width 17
Entrenchment
1.38 1.77 2.44 Ratio 1.42
Wetted
1.66 1.74 2.87 perimeter 14.86
Hydraulic
1.06 1.79 1.89 radius 1.16
1.30 1.86 2.43 Velocity 4.66
0.43 1.74 0.75 Discharge 80.37
0.33 1.48 0.48
0.47 1.18 0.55
0.94 0.46 0.44
Cross-sectional area 17.26

Tributary 1 X-section 1c-Pool
1052
1051
1050
1049
0
w
a?
w
1048
1047
1046
1045 4-
0+00.0
0+05.0 0+10.0 0+15.0 0+20.0 0+25.0 0+30.0 0+35.0 0+40.0 0+45.0
Station
1--*-Tributary 1_X-section 1c-Pool
t
X-section 1c (Pool) Tributary 1 X-section 20 feet upstream of X-section 1a
Point No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5041 721024.3319 1194345.659 1050.486 gn 0 0+00.0
5042 721027.1612 1194344.836 1050.1573 gn 2.95 0+02.9
5043 721028.857 1194344.452 1049.5558 gn 1.74 0+04.7
5044 721033.4098 1194343.092 1049.0612 bf 4.75 0+09.4
5045 721034.4261 1194342.713 1046.3886 ch 1.08 0+10.5
5046 721035.173 1194342.357 1045.8015 tw 0.83 0+11.3
5047 721036.0316 1194342.116 1045.8949 ck 0.89 0+12.2
5048 721037.0285 1194341.696 1046.3394 ck 1.08 0+13.3
5049 721037.7874 1194341.42 1046.5883 ck 0.81 0+14.1
5050 721038.499 1194341.213 1046.7301 ew rt 0.74 0+14.9
5051 721039.1228 1194341.021 1046.9252 ch 0.65 0+15.5
5052 721039.9255 1194340.745 1047.002 ch 0.85 0+16.4
5053 721040.7868 1194340.536 1046.9302 ch 0.89 0+17.3
5054 721041.7076 1194339.978 1047.556 ch 1.08 0+18.3
5055 721044.0784 1194338.319 1047.8609 ch 2.89 0+21.2
5056 721045.4765 1194337.562 1048.8296 bf 1.59 0+22.8
5057 721047.1061 1194336.41 1049.7491 gn 2.00 0+24.8
5058 721049.0526 1194335.666 1051.1553 gn 2.08 0+26.9
5059 721050.6579 1194335.196 1051.2502 gn 1.67 0+28.6
5060 721057.9476 1194331.298 1050.7531 gn 8.27 0+36.8
5061 721062.024 1194329.07 1050.515 gn 4.65 0+41.5
Width Depth Area max depth 3.26
1.08 1.34 1.45 Bkfl.width 13.38
0.83 2.97 2.45 Ave depth 1.94
0.89 3.21 2.87 w/d 6.90
1.08 2.94 3.18
0.81 2.60 2.10
0.74 2.40 1.78
0.65 2.23 1.46
0.85 2.10 1.78
0.89 2.10 1.86
1.08 1.82 1.96
2.89 1.35 3.91
1.59 0.72 1.14

Cross-sectional area 25.94
0

Tributary 1 X-section l d
1046
1045
1044
1043
0
d
w
1042
1041
1040
1039 -4-
0+00.0
0+05.0 0+10.0 0+15.0 0+20.0 0+25.0
Station
I-©-Tributary 1_X-section 1d
I X-section 1d (Riffle) Tributary 1 Downstream-most X-section
Point No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5109 721066.4992 1193716.407 1044.1597 gn 0 0+00.0
5110 721069.4192 1193723.194 1045.0045 gn 7.39 0+07.4
5111 721070.2696 1193726.508 1045.0976 gn 3.42 0+10.8
* 1042.6 bf 0.50 0+11.3
s 5112 721070.9656 1193726.966 1040.3634 ew It 0.83 0+12.1
5113 721070.5667 1193727.373 1040.0664 tw 0.57 0+12.7
5114 721070.9721 1193728.606 1040.3085 ck 1.30 0+14.0
5115 721071.2387 1193729.499 1040.1053 ck 0.93 0+14.9
5116 721071.2844 1193730.275 1040.1454 ck 0.78 0+15.7
5117 721071.6366 1193731.056 1040.3515 ew rt 0.86 0+16.6
5118 721071.5837 1193731.905 1041.1652 ch 0.85 0+17.4
5119 721071.8862 1193732.72 1042.0174 ch 0.87 0+18.3
5120 721071.4091 1193732.817 1042.3835 bf 0.49 0+18.8
5121 721071.6383 1193734.715 1042.5737 gn 1.91 0+20.7
5122 721071.6719 1193736.768 1042.4082 gn 2.05 0+22.7
Width Depth Area max depth 2.53
0.83 1.12 0.93 Bkfl.width 9.39
0.57 2.39 1.36 Ave depth 1.54
1.30 2.41 3.13 w/d 6.09
Floodprone
0.93 2.39 2.23 Elevation 1045.13
Floodprone
0.78 2.47 1.92 Width 23
Entrenchment
0.86 2.35 2.02 Ratio 2.45
Wetted
0.85 1.84 1.57 perimeter 12.47
Hydraulic
0.87 1.01 0.88 radius 1.16
0.49 0.40 0.19 Velocity 4.65
1.91 0.12 0.23 Discharge 67.26
f Cross-sectional area 14.46 Highly eroding and migrating ch annel reach

Bailey Fork X-section 2a-Pool
1044
1043.5-
1043
1042.5
1042
1041.5 -- -
1041
1040.5 -
1040 -
1039.5
C 1039
1038.5 - -
w 1038
1037.5 -
1037
1036.5
1036
1035.5
1035
1034.5-
1034
1033.5
1033
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Staiton
--*-Bailey Fork _X-section 2a Pool
70 80 90 100
X-section 2a (Pool) Upper Bailey Fork
Point No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5087 720888.3828 1193501.028 1040.3522 gn 0 0
5062 720922.583 1193483.764 bf 38.31 0+38.3
5063 720925.8838 1193482.547 1037.8221 ch 3.52 0+41.8
5064 720928.216 1193481.54 1036.7539 ch 2.54 0+44.4
5065 720928.8216 1193481.064 1036.331 ch 0.77 0+45.1
5066 720930.4482 1193480.458 1035.3421 ch 1.74 0+46.9
5067 720931.4999 1193480.207 1034.9231 ch 1.08 0+48.0
5068 720932.5956 1193479.636 1034.5517 ew It 1.24 0+49.2
5069 720934.3065 1193479.634 1034.4582 ck 1.71 0+50.9
5070 720935.5931 1193479.213 1034.493 ck 1.35 0+52.3
5071 720936.7251 1193478.99 1034.5622 ck 1.15 0+53.4
5072 720938.0159 1193478.551 1034.3562 ck 1.36 0+54.8
5073 720939.3328 1193478.248 1033.7627 ck 1.35 0+56.1
5074 720940.8902 1193477.81 1033.5839 tw 1.62 0+57.7
5075 720942.5174 1193477.358 1034.379 ck 1.69 0+59.4
5076 720945.9556 1193475.611 1034.4522 ew rt 3.86 0+63.3
5077 720947.9014 1193474.982 1035.841 ch 2.05 0+65.3
5078 720950.8671 1193474.675 1036.5906 ch 2.98 0+68.3
5079 720953.9775 1193474.925 1036.864 ch 3.12 0+71.4
5080 720956.3473 1193475.26 1039.0317 bf 2.39 0+73.8
5081 720958.1319 1193475.157 1038.7383 gn 1.79 0+75.6
5082 720959.8611 1193475.021 1039.9248 gn 1.73 0+77.4
5083 720961.155 1193474.363 1040.3878 gn 1.45 0+78.8
5084 720962.1961 1193474.114 1042.9188 gn 1.07 0+79.9
5085 720972.5362 1193473.899 1043.2709 gn 10.34 0+90.2
5086 720977.6835 1193474.129 1043.3932 gn 5.15 0+95.4
Width Depth Area max depth 4.67
3.52 0.22 0.76 Bkfl.width 35.52
2.54 0.97 2.46 Ave depth 2.55
0.77 1.71 1.32 w/d 13.94
Wetted
1.74 2.42 4.20 perimeter 40.61
Hydraulic
1.08 3.12 3.38 radius 2.23
1.24 3.52 4.35 Velocity 3.70
1.71 3.75 6.42 Discharge 334.57
1.35 3.78 5.12
1.15 3.73 4.30
1.36 3.80 5.18
1.35 4.20 5.67
1.62 4.58 7.41
1.69 4.27 7.22
3.86 3.84 14.81
2.05 3.11 6.36
2.98 2.04 6.08
3.12 1.53 4.77
2.39 0.31 0.74
Cross-sectional area 90.52

Upper Bailey Fork X-section 2b
1044
1043 ----- -
1042 - -- ---
1041
1040
C 1039
.2
c?
w 1038
1037 - -
1036 ---- --- -
1035 -
1034 --- --
1033
0+00.0 0+10.0 0+20.0 0+30.0 0+40.0
Station
-*-Upper Bailey Fork X-section 2b
0+50.0 0+60.0 0+70.0

I

X-section 2b (Riffle)
Point No. Northing
5087 720888.3828
5088 720890.4835
5089 720892.62
5090
5091
5092
5093
5094
5095
5096
5097
5098
5099
5100
5101
5102
5103
5104
5106
5107
5108
720893.5658
720894.3125
720894.4781
720895.3051
720895.6783
720895.0303
720895.2749
720894.6447
720894.6875
720894.7197
720895.1753
720895.3882
720895.2257
720896.117
720896.3702
720896.1791
720898.0941
720898.896
Upper Bailey Fork
Easting Elevation Description
1193501.028 1040.3522 gn
1193511.912 1040.3181 gn
1193517.519 1040.2577 gn
1039.2436 gn
bankfull 1038.9406 bf
1193520.727 1038.2074 ch
1193520.936 1037.5389 bf
1193522.84 1036.4858 ch
1193524.183 1035.5708 ch
1193524.306 1034.8146 ew It
1193525.132 1034.5052 ck
1193526.429 1033.9849 tw
1193529.32 1034.1001 ck
1193532.726 1034.3911 ck
1193534.037 1034.9343 ew rt
1193535.908 1036.0928 ch
1193537.556 1037.3624 ch
1193539.145 1038.2962 ch
1193542.256 1038.9406 bf
1193543.287 1039.2436 gn
1193544.249 1042.7812 gn
1193557.461 1043.2174 gn
1193561.706 1043.1607 gn
Distance
0
11.08
6.00
2.00
0.30
3.34
0.78
1.91
1.58
0.39
1.05
1.32
2.96
3.41
1.31
1.93
1.66
1.60
3.24
1.06
0.98
13.35
4.32
Width Depth Area max depth 4.96
3.34 0.37 1.23 Bkfl.width 26.47
0.78 1.07 0.83 Ave depth 2.71
1.91 1.93 3.68 w/d 9.77
Floodprone
1.58 2.91 4.60 Elevation 1043.90
Floodprone
0.39 3.75 1.47 Width 180
Entrenchment
1.05 4.28 4.50 Ratio 6.80
Wetted
1.32 4.70 6.20 perimeter 31.89
Hydraulic
2.96 4.90 14.49 radius 2.25
3.41 4.69 15.99 Velocity 3.72
1.31 4.28 5.61 Discharge 266.49
1.93 3.43 6.60
1.66 2.21 3.68
1.60 1.11 1.77
3.24 0.32 1.04
Cross-sectional area 71.69
Station
0+00.0
0+11.1
0+17.1
0+19.1
0+19.4
0+22.7
0+23.5
0+25.4
0+27.0
0+27.4
0+28.4
0+29.8
0+32.7
0+36.1
0+37.4
0+39.4
0+41.0
0+42.6
0+45.9
0+46.9
0+47.9
0+61.2
0+65.6

m 0111111111 M LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IMI 11011111111 ow INIIIIIIIII = m m m IM "m m 1111=1 m m
Upper Bailey Fork X-section 2c
1046
1044
1042
C
0
w.
1040
a?
w
1038
1036
1034 -4-
0+00.0
0+10.0 0+20.0 0+30.0 0+40.0
Station
-o- Upper Bailey Fork X-section 2c
0+50.0 0+60.0
X-section 2c (Riffle) Upper Bailey Fork Upper-most X-section
Poir,t No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5123 720849.2408 1193517.124 1041.954 gn 0 0+00.0
5124 720849.4436 1193519.564 1041.3407 gn 2.45 0+02.4
5125 720848.6144 1193522.708 1040.0077 gn 3.25 0+05.7
5126 720848.6142 1193524.796 1039.9006 gn 0.50 0+06.2
5127 720848.3652 1193527.323 1039.1834 bf 4.62 0+10.8
5128 720848.3465 1193529.371 1037.8077 ch 2.05 0+12.9
5129 720848.4078 1193530.67 1036.8265 ch 1.30 0+14.2
5130 720848.1101 1193531.866 1035.1744 ew It 1.23 0+15.4
5131 720848.6809 1193532.995 1035.0651 ck 1.27 0+16.7
5132 720848.1842 1193534.854 1034.9917 ck 1.92 0+18.6
5133 720848.2834 1193538.045 1034.635 ck 3.19 0+21.8
5134 720849.2341 1193540.795 1034.6323 tw 2.91 0+24.7
5135 720849.2786 1193543.285 1034.8042 ck 2.49 0+27.2
5136 720849.6192 1193543.967 1034.9016 ew rt 0.76 0+27.9
5137 720849.755 1193544.835 1036.5309 ch 0.88 0+28.8
5138 720849.8981 1193545.52 1038.2513 ch 0.70 0+29.5
extrapolated 1039.1834 bf 1.20 0+30.7
5139 720849.7686 1193548.278 1040.2816 gn 2.76 0+33.5
5140 720849.5671 1193553.543 1042.8191 gn 5.27 0+38.8
5141 720850.3412 1193559.485 1043.7735 gn 5.99 0+44.7
5142 720853.2352 1193571.06 1043.3836 gn 11.93 0+56.7
Width Depth Area max depth 4.55
2.05 0.69 1.41 Bkfl.width 19.90
1.30 1.87 2.43 Ave depth 3.38
1.23 3.18 3.92 w/d 5.88
Floodprone
1.27 4.06 5.14 Elevation 1043.73
Floodprone
1.92 4.15 7.99 Width 180
Entrenchment
3.19 4.37 13.95 Ratio 9.04
Wetted
2.91 4.55 13.24 perimeter 26.67
Hydraulic
2.49 4.47 11.12 radius 2.53
0.76 4.33 3.30 Velocity 4.01
0.88 3.47 3.05 Discharge 270.41
0.70 1.79 1.26
1.20 0.47 0.56
Cross-sectional area 67.37
Iii ¦? ? I? ?¦¦? ? ? ? I? ? ? lid Iw ? ? I. ? Illllil? ?
Lower Bailey Fork
1039
1038
1037
1036
1035
0
> 1034
d
n
1033
1032
1031
1030
1029 ' i
0+00.0 0+10.0 0+20.0 0+30.0 0+40.0 0+50.0 0+60.0 0+70.0 0+80.0 0+90.0 1+00.0
Station
-?+- Lower Bailey Fork
0
11
t
u

u

n

I
X-section 3a (Riffle) Lower Bailey Fork
Point No. Northing Easting Elevation Description Distance Station
5143 722167.2098 1193314.279 1036.6993 gn 0 0+00.0
5144 722154.9965 1193327.933 1037.8146 gn 18.32 0+18.3
5145 722143.7441 1193339.386 1038.3726 gn 16.06 0+34.4
5146 722143.0659 1193340.284 1035.606 bf 0.50 0+34.9
5147 722142.7849 1193340.189 1034.8358 ch 1.25 0+36.1
5148 722141.2764 1193341.709 1033.8518 ch 2.14 0+38.3
5149 722140.8776 1193342.172 1033.699 bf 0.61 0+38.9
5150 722140.1395 1193342.496 1032.6302 ch 0.81 0+39.7
5151 722139.6607 1193343.102 1031.8241 ch 0.77 0+40.5
5152 722138.2642 1193344.402 1031.1606 ch 1.91 0+42.4
5153 722136.3168 1193346.631 1030.6642 ew It 2.96 0+45.3
5154 722135.3189 1193347.064 1030.2194 ck 1.09 0+46.4
5155 722134.01 1193348.499 1029.982 tw 1.94 0+48.4
5156 722131.8291 1193350.543 1029.9964 ck 2.99 0+51.3
5157 722129.7297 1193352.088 1030.0372 ck 2.61 0+54.0
5158 722128.425 1193353.672 1029.867 ck 2.05 0+56.0
5159 722127.461 1193355.011 1030.2441 ck 1.65 0+57.7
5160 722126.8713 1193355.658 1030.6418 ew rt 0.88 0+58.5
5161 722125.6971 1193356.959 1031.0275 ch 1.75 0+60.3
5162 722123.2439 1193359.112 1031.5833 ch 3.26 0+63.5
5163 722120.4336 1193361.873 1031.7843 ch 3.94 0+67.5
5164 722117.1869 1193365.515 1032.2617 ch 4.88 0+72.4
5165 722114.8825 1193367.34 1032.579 ch 2.94 0+75.3
5172 722114.1279 1193368.65 1033.3151 bf 1.00 0+76.3
5166 722113.6746 1193368.6 1033.513 bf 1.74 0+78.0
5167 722111.7005 1193370.006 1034.5005 gn 2.42 0+80.5
5168 722111.3325 1193370.367 1035.0549 gn 0.52 0+81.0
5169 722110.999 1193370.979 1036.4147 gn 0.70 0+81.7
5170 722108.5792 1193372.215 1037.627 gn 2.72 0+84.4
5171 722102.9424 1193376.435 1038.2131 gn 7.04 0+91.4
Width Depth Area max depth 3.45
0.81 0.53 0.43 Bkfl.width 37.42
0.77 1.47 1.14 Ave depth 2.55
1.91 2.21 4.21 w/d 14.70
Floodprone
2.96 2.79 8.25 Elevation 1036.88
Floodprone
1.09 3.26 3.54 Width 70
Entrenchment
1.94 3.60 6.99 Ratio 1.87
Wetted
2.99 3.71 11.09 perimeter 42.52
Hydraulic
2.61 3.68 9.60 radius 2.24
2.05 3.75 7.69 Velocity 4.15
1.65 3.64 6.01 Discharge 395.00
0.88 3.26 2.85
1.75 2.86 5.02
3.26 2.39 7.81
3.94 2.02 7.94
4.88 1.68 8.18
2.94 1.28 3.76
1.00 0.75 0.75
Cross-sectional area 95.26

Office Use Only: Forni Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: 2
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Wetlands Resource Center, Mr. Cal Miller
Mailing Address: 3970 Bowen Road
Canal Winchester, OH 43110
Telephone Number: 614-327-7034 Fax Number: 614-759-7988
E-mail Address: c1tt1218 0ol.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Mr. Peter Jelenevsky
Company Affiliation: Natural Systems Engineeriniz
Mailing Address: 3917 Benson Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Telephone Number: 919-878-5444 Fax Number: 919-872-8444
E-mail Address: Rielenevsky a nsepc.com
Page 5 of 13
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Project
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
' 3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 179214237497, 179218324353, 179218317127,
179218329391
4. Location
County: Burke Nearest Town: Morganton
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Take I-40 to Morganton, take
US64 South to Pronst Road (SR 1112) turn right onto Pronst Road and the nroiect site is
north and south of the road approximately 1,800 feet from the US64/Propst Road Intersection
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35°42' 10.82"N 81 °43'4.89"W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): approximately 75
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Bailey Fork
8. River Basin: Catawba
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://li2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Site is currently used for agricultural purposes- hayfield.
I Page 6 of 13
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Project
will restore over 5,500 linear feet of highly degraded and eroding streams, consisting of three
separate perennial streams. Project will utilize natural channel design techniques and
principles to restore the streams to a stable state along with the establishment of a permanent
riparian area of at least 30-foot in width. Equipment that will be used on site during
construction includes hydraulic excavators, track tricks, front-end loaders, etc.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Restore stream channel function and form while
also eliminating existing bed scour and bank erosion. Mitigation credits generated will be
utilized by Ecosystem Enhancement Program to offset compensatormitigation requirements
within Catawba 01 drainage basin, Contract No. D04006-2.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No. Project site is protected in perpetuity ya legally binding _protective agreement.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
Page 7 of 13
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: No impacts are proposed.
Implementation of the restoration plan will actually increase overall channel length by
approximately 600 linear feet
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
acres Located within
100-year Floodplain**
es/no Distance to
Nearest Stream
linear feet
Type of Weiland***
N/A

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.eov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: None observed
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please secif
N/A

I
i i I i
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
Page 8 of 13
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.1151?5.cov. Several interact sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com.
www.mapquest. com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 0.0
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* ja of
ct
s
(if Name applicable) wat) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.
N/A

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
VII.

5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
No nermanent impacts to waters of the U.S. are being nronosed. Temnorarv impacts may
occur due to the placement of temporary erosion control measures (i.e. check dams, temporary
crossings, etc.) but once the proiect is completed there will be a net gain of approximately 600
linear feet of restored stream .
Page 9 of 13
1
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
' freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
' including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
' functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
' If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
' incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strni.,ide.html.
' 1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
' and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
' description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Proposed stream restoration project will restore 5500 linear feet of stream channel
(centerline distance) within the Catawba River Basin. A conservation easement will preserve
the site in perpetuity. See Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Plan for specific details and
information.

Page 10 of 13
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
' [phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wm/index.litni. If use of
' the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federaUstate) land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 213 .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 213 .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Page 11 of 13
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
XI.
XII.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 213.0242 or.0260.
N/A
Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
N/A No proposed impervious surfaces
Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
Page 12 of 13
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A
Jg i, zo Z oo.?,
Applica?rf/ gen ' ignature Date
(Agent's signat is id only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 13 of 13
01/17/2005 14:25 6147597986 SYNAGRO PAGE 02
,,,, .., ?uw lY. 47 Ltb43G3d44? NA I LHAL SYSTERS ENGR PAGE 02
I
Wetlands Resource Center
3970 Bows; Road
Canal Winchester, OH 431.10 j
January 10, 2005

U5 Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue !
Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
RE: Agent Aiuthoriutlon
Dear Sir or Madam:
The purpose of this lener is to inform the US Army Corpa Of Engineers that Oe respairsibtc
ply. .
Wetlands Resource Center
3970 Bowen Road I
Canal Winchester. 4H 43110
Telephone Number. 614-327.7034
Fax Number: 614-759-7988
Email: cittl2l8Caol.com
!
Designates:
Natural Systems )engineering I
3719 Benson Arive
Raleigh, NC 27609
Telephone Number: 919-878-5444
Fax Number: 919-872-8444
Email: pjelenevsky5a,,nsepc corn
I
i
As the responsible partv's authorized agent for the Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Project
located in Burke County, North Carolina.
Pl eo"tart me with any questions (614) 327-70.14. I
Cal Miller
Wetlands Resource Center
i

01/17/2005 14:25 6147597988
SYNAGRO
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMEN'T'
PAGE 03
This Agreement, made this 'day of &j:h? , 2004, between Ernest Stroup
hereinafter designated as Grantor, and th etlands Resource Center, LLC,for the
State of North Carolina, acting by and through the Ecosystem Euhancement
Program, hereinafter designated Grantee, does hereby grant unto the Grantee, its
successors, assigns, agents, contractors, subcontractors and employees the exclusive right
to perform those certain construction activities necessary to perform a stream restoration,
enhancement and/or wetlands restoration, enhancement or creation project, herein after
designated Project, along with the right of reasonable ingress and egress to the Project
along Bailey Fork and its Unnamed Tributaries in Burke County for the benefit of the
Grantor.
Ernest Stroup, Grantor, for the true and actual consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and
other considerations does convey to Grantee, by and through Wetlands Resource
Center for the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, its successors and assigns, a Temporary Construction
Basement, hereinafter Easement, for a specified work area on the property identified as
PIN # 179218324353, Burke County Tax Office and recorded in Deed Book 174 at page
585 recorded in the Burke County Registry. Said project will extend approximately One
Thousand Two Hundred (1,200) linear feet along the stream and the temporary
construction easement will have a width of 150 feet from the top of bank on both sides of
the stream and contain approximately 4.5 acres for the purpose of said Project.
Grantor agrees the consideration recited herein is just compensation for the Easement,
including any and all damages to Grantor's remaining property, if any, which may result
from the acquisition or use of said property and said Project.
The Grantor also grants to the Grantee, its successors, assigns, agents, contractors and
employees the right to erect and use construction equipment at the site of the Easement
herein described.

IT IS UNDERSTOOD that the Easement rights herein granted shall automatically
terminate 2 years from the date rendered hereof or upon completion of the above
referenced Project, whichever is sooner.
,OR R£OISTRATION REGISTER OF DEEDS
EtIZASETH T COOPER
CURKE COUNTY NC
2044 SEP 09 02:t4:02 PM
BK:1395 P0:451-454 FEE120.00
IIJSTM # 2N40IN
45 ?

01/17/2005 14:25 6147597988
SYNAGRO
PAGE 04
IT IS ALSO UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that the Easement herein granted further
allows, binds by mutual agreement, that the Grantor shall convey and the Grantee shall
receive a Conservation Easement in the for attached hereto to perpetually protect the
intent of said Project. The conveyance of the conservation easement shall occur at
completion of the Project and will be based upon a metes and bounds description
rendered by a Professional Land Surveyor. Said conservation easement will run as the
stream meanders, extending landward from the bankfull elevation on each side of the
stream a distance of 30 feet where physically possible, as per the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines for North Carolina Mountain
Counties.
The Grantee, its successors, assigns, agents, contractors, and employees agree to the
following conditions of this Easement:
1- DAMAGE TO PROPERTY: Shall exercise care to avoid damaging the property
. in any manner not consistent with the purpose for which this agreement is issued.
2. COOPERATION WITH GRANTOR, Shall at all times cooperate with
Grantor and comply with reasonable requests not inconsistent with the purpose
for which this agreement is issued
3. CLEARING: If necessary, shall perform felling, bucking, and decking of
merchantable timber according to acceptable logging practices with a minimum of
breakage, damage and waste. Utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill and
prepare the soil, including modification of hydrology of the site.'
4. CLEANUP: At a minimum, Grantee shall spread material uniformly over the
construction site for uniform topography and seed with grass. Includes possible
planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, and fertilize all areas. Upon
completion of the Project, shall clean all the ground occupied of all rubbish,
excess material, temporary structures, and equipment.
5. ACCEPTANCE: All parts of the Project site shall be left in acceptable
condition.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal
the day and year first above written, On g•",
ttir.oo '-•. d
(SEAL) _? IFJ;ne;?w
y
45;L--,
Ul/1(/LCJU, 14. L5 bl4/5y/Jb8 SYNAGRO PAGE 05
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF f
I, -JA a Notary public in and for t
County and Stat aforesaid, do =ereb ?certif?ythat
Grantor personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the eQu
of the foregoing instrument, Fn.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and ' ot* ,' a1 ryt
this the day of 4. s 2004. (?..
Notary blic
My commission expires:
3-d l- 0&
4?3
Ul/ 1 I/ GOUT] 14: Lo
b14 ray 1'Jdd
SYNAGRO
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT

I

v
1
PAGE 05
This Agreement, made this, ?day of , 2004, between Bill and Ann
Smith hereinafter designated Grantor, atidtheWetlands Resource Center, LLC for
the State of North Carolina, acting by and through the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, hereinafter designated Grantee, does hereby grant unto the Grantee, its
successors, assigns, agents, contractors, subcontractors and employees the exclusive right
to perform those certain construction activities necessary to perform a stream restoration,
enhancement and/or wetlands restoration, enhancement or creation project, herein after
designated Project, along with the right of reasonable ingress and egress to the Project
along Bailey Pork and its Unnamed Tributaries in Burke County for the benefit of the
Grantor.
Bill and Ann Smith, Grantor, for the true and actual consideration of One Dollar ($1.00)
and other considerations does convey to Grantee, by and through Wetlands Resource
Center for the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, its successors and assigns, a Temporary Construction
Easement, hereinafter Easement, for a specified work area on the property identified as
PIN # 179218317127, Burke County Tax Office and recorded in Deed Book 596 at Page
289 recorded in the Burke County Registry. Said project will extend approximately Three
Thousand One Hundred (3,100) linear feet along the stream and the temporary
construction easement will have a width of 150 feet from the top of bank on both sides of
the stream and contain approximately 5.5 acres for the purpose of said Project.
Grantor agrees the consideration recited herein is just compensation for the Easement,
including any and all damages to Grantor's remaining property, if any, which may result
from the acquisition or use of said property and said Project.
The Grantor also grants to the Grantee, its successors, assigns, agents, contractors and
employees the right to erect and use construction equipment at the site of the Easement
herein described.
' IT IS UNDERSTOOD that the Easement rights herein granted shall automatically
terminate 2 years from the date rendered hereof or upon completion of the above
referenced Project, whichever is sooner.
' FOR REFGIISTRAr?IONrRE00S RR OF DEEDS
BURKE COUNTY NC
20N4 SEA 09 02: ?5: D2 PM
80395 M455-459 FEE320.00
INF UPIENT # MUM
- 4-5'?s
++, ., ?+++ i-r. ?.? OlY (;J7 (7CS t3 SYNAGRO PAGE 07
IT IS ALSO UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that the Easement here'
allows, binds by mutual agreement, that the Grantor shall conve
y in granted further
receive a Conservation Easement in the for attached hereto to p et and the Grantee shall
intent of said Project. The conveyance of the conservation ease
y protect the
rp a
ment shall occur at
completion of the Project and will be based upon a metes and bounds description
rendered by a Professional Land Surveyor. Said conservation easement will run as the
stream meanders, extending landward front the bankfull elevation on each side of the
stream a distance of 30 feet where physically possible, as per the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines for North Carolina Mountain
Counties.
The Grantee its successors, assigns, agents, contractors, and employees agree to the
following conditions of this Easement:
1. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY: Shall exercise care to avoid damaging the property
in any manner not consistent with the purpose for which this agreement is issued.
2. COOPERATION WTTH GRANTOR: Shall at all times cooperate with
Grantor and comply with reasonable requests not inconsistent with the purpose
for which, this agreement is issued
3. CLEARING: If necessary, shall perform felling, bucking, and decking of
merchantable timber according to acceptable logging practices with a minimum of
' breakage, damage and waste. Utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill and
prepare the soil, including modification of hydrology of the site.
4. CLEANUP: At a minimum, Grantee shall spread material uniformly over the
' construction site for uniform topography and seed with grass. Includes possible
planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, and fertilize all areas. Upon
completion of the Project, shall clean all the ground occupied of all rubbish,
excess material, temporary structures, and equipment.
5. ACCEPTANCE: All parts of the Project site shall be left in acceptable
condition.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal
the day and year first above written,
? F
??? (SEAL)
450
01/17/2005 14:25 6147597988 SYNAGRO PAGE 08
' NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF k g7
' I CIRCA-Q- kka .1 A,A
, a Notary blic ' and ' r the
County and States aforesaid, do hereby certify that , M '?
Grantor personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution
of the foregoing instrument.
IN WnNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal
this the 14"day of 2004.
?GZ CM
' Notary Public
``,1?,t?q?n n?q?p
My commission expires:
•?4r.{.
9, C-? 06 4P
61 U 10
I

1

? 4 51
C

n

I
1
I
I
0

I

.. ,? ?---- ate.<., u ti3fJOO
SYNAUH0
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
PAGE 09
V ?
This Agreement, made this C ?-"-day of? J 2004, between Charles Edwin
Talbert hereinafter designated as Grantor, and the Wetlands Resource Center, LLC
for the State of North Carolina, acting by and through the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, hereinafter designated Grantee, does hereby grant unto the Grantee, its
successors, assigns, agents, contractors, subcontractors and employees the exclusive right
to perform those certain construction activities necessary to perform a stream restoration,
enhancement and/or wetlands restoration, enhancement or creation project, herein after
designated Project, along with the right of reasonable ingress and egress to the Project
along Bailey Fork and its Unnamed Tributaries in Burke County for the benefit of the
Grantor.
Charles Edwin Talbert, Grantor, for the true and actual consideration of one Dollar
($1.00) and other considerations does convey to Grantee, by and through Wetlands
Resource Center for the Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program, its successors and assigns, a Temporary
Construction Easement, hereinafter Easement, for a specified work area on the property
identified as PIN # 179218329391, Burke County Tax Office and recorded in Deed Book
1322 at Page 157, and PIN # 179218329391, Burke County Tax Office and recorded in
Deed Book 1828 at Page 990 recorded in the Burke County Registry, Said project will
extend approximately One Thousand Two Hundred (1,200) linear feet along the stream
and the temporary construction casement will have a width of 150 feet from the top of
bank on both sides of the stream and contain approximately 4.5 acres for the purpose of
said Project..
Grantor agrees the consideration recited herein is just compensation for the Easement,
including any and all damages to Grantor's remaining property, if any, which may result
from the acquisition or use of said property and said Project.
The Grantor also grants to the Grantee, its successors, assigns, agents, contractors and
employees the right to erect and use construction equipment at the site of the Easement
herein described.
IT IS UNDERSTOOD that the Easement rights herein granted shall automatically
terminate 2 years from the date rendered hereof or upon completion of the above
referenced Project, whichever is sooner.
IT IS ALSO UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that the Easement herein granted further
allows, binds by mutual agreement; that the Grantor shall convey and the Grantee shall
receive a Conservation Easement in the for attached hereto to perpetually protect the
intent of said Project. The conveyance of the conservation casement shall occur at
completion of the Project and will be based upon a metes and bounds description
rendered by a Professional Land Surveyor. Said conservation easement will run as the
stream meanders, extending landward from the bankfull elevation on each side of the
stream a distance of 30 feet where physically possible, as per the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers April 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines for North Carolina Mountain
Counties.
The Grantee, its successors, assigns, agents, contractors, and employees agree to the
following conditions of this Easement:
DAMAGE TO PROPERTY: Shall exercise care to avoid damaging the property
in any manner not consistent with the purpose for which this agreement is issued.
COOPERATION W1rM GRANTOR: Shall at all times cooperate with
Grantor and comply with reasonable requests not inconsistent with the purpose
for which this agreement is issued
CLEARING: If necessary, shall perform felling, bucking, and decking of
merchantable timber according to acceptable logging practices with a minimum of

tij
Wg??
??
W UYU? ?[O}
2¢2?+ m V
62yy?5 „??t
Q i0
W?r??

.,.• ri<uu? av.<? oavi??i goo bYMUKU PAGE 10
breakage, damage and waste. Utilization of heavy uA ment to grade, ' prepare the soil, including modification of hydrology of the site. grade, fill and
4. CLEANUP: At a minimum, Grantee shall spread material uniformly over the
construction site for uniform topography and seed with grass. Includes possible
' planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, and fertilize all areas. Upon
completion of the Project, shall clean all the ground occupied of all rubbish,
excess material, temporary structures, and equipment.
5. ACCEPTANCE: All parts of the Project site shall be left in acceptable
' condition.
IN TESTIMONY WIIEREOP, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal
the day and year first above written,
NORTH CAROLINA
a • t?. ?e'? A!
q . P U 3 : I4,OUNTY OF A- r Ke-
„' ?v9?ECO/
RV/-A P iUA A'7 P, v a Notary Public in and for the
County and States aforesaid, do hereby certify that
Grantor personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution
of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal
this the _ 4 day of? 2004.
Notary Pu is
Nfy commission expires:
?-J) 0 ?
(SEAL)
41`?,
s M STAT[ a
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
December 20, 2004
Mr. James M. Halley, PE
Natural Systems Engineering
3719 Benson Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609
Reference: Propst Road (SR 1112) Right of Way Encroachment Agreement
Dear Mr. Halley:
This office has reviewed the above-mentioned right of way encroachment package
at your request. Per that review and our conversation on December 20, 2004 it has been
determined that due to the nature and location of the work and the parties involved in the
mitigation that an executed agreement between you and the North Carolina Department of
Transportation would not be necessary.
If you have any questions or need further information, I may be contacted at (828)
652-3344.
Sincerelarg?j
D. R. McNeal, PE
District Engineer
DRM:shk
cc: Mr. J. J. Swain, Jr., PE
3931 NC 226 S, Marion, North Carolina 28752
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
12/30/2004 THU 11:04 KU 81447UUbbu
PARKS & RECREATION Fax:[phone] Nov 16 2004 15:25 P.02
CDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Lkxj UU1/ UU1 `
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretory

November 16, 2004

Ms. Melissa A. Queen
EMH&T, Inc.
170 Mill Strcct
Gabanna, OH 43230.3036
h M
B
F
C
k
ib
S
b
i
dd
k
d
ject:
ley
Sout
ree
Tr
u
or
u
y
a
an
utaries Project; Burke County, NC
Dear Ms. Queen:
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
' priority natural areas at the two sites nor within a mile of the project arcas..Although our maps
do not show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not necessarily
mean that they are not present. It may simply mean that tho area has not been surveyed. The use
of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if
the project area contains suitablo habitat for rare species, significant natural conununitics, or
priority natural areas.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Prog= database website at
<www.ncsg s.ne se rc . t 1> for a listing of rare plants and animals and significant
natural communities in the county and on the topographic quad map. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information,
Sincerely,
"?X-7 <,
I Harry E. LoGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Natural Heritage Program
HEI.Jhel

¦ 1601 M23 Service Center, Raleigh. North Carolina 27699.1601
Phone: [phone] • FAX; 919.7153060 + Internet MEL2U,s tate nc us N-P C Ca oiina
M Equal OPP=nty • hT=iane Ac9on FrrplcW- -FO % RMcW 110 `A Past Cantumer Paper Aaluiirall y
}

Photo 1 - Feb 04, UTl (left foreground), Bailey Fork (right
background)
Photo 4 - Feb 04, Bank erosion at approximate proposed
station 1+50, Upper Bailey
M NATURAL SYSTEMS
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan, January 2005 E N G 1 14 E E R I N G
Photo 2 - Feb 04, UT1 at base of hillside
Photo 3 - Feb 04, UT1 (foreground), Bailey Fork
(background), Note invasive vegetation
P? W2
r
1 ? ? t Y.t A?1 .w .1?? ?? ?1. J ?. r=te ?,6
t? ? k
2 t4 :'?? .
<io r ?.Y-mss ? j Zvi 1.
Y22.
}
Photo 7 - Feb 04, Three pipe culvert under Propst Road
Photo 8 - Oct 04, Severe bank erosion, approximate station
1+50, Lower Bailey
Eq,NATURAL SYSTEMS
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan, January 2005 E N 0 1 N E E R 1 N G
Photo 5 - Oct 04, Bank erosion at approximate proposed
station 2+00, Upper Bailey
Photo 6 - Oct 04, Bank erosion at approximate proposed
station 5+50, Upper Bailey

46.
x
Photo 12 - Feb 04, Bank erosion along UT2, at confluence
of Lower Bailey and UT2
O NATURAL SYSTEMS
Bailey Fork Restoration Plan, January 2005 E N 13 1 N E E R 1 N G
Photo 10 - Oct 04, Severe bank erosion, approximate
proposed station 2+14, Lower Bailey
Photo 9 - Oct 04, Severe bank erosion, approximate
proposed station 2+14, Lower Bailey
Photo 11 - Oct 04, Fence fallen into stream from bank
erosion, approximate proposed station 7+00, Lower Bailey
Triage Check Dist
Date: 1/21/05 Project Name: Bailey Fork Stream Restoration Project
DWQ#: 05-0098
County: Burke
To: Kevin Barnett, Asheville Regional Office
30-day Processing Time: revised 1/21/05 to 2/19/05
From: Cyndi Karoly Telephone : [phone]
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
? Cumulative impact concern
1-1 Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
procedure as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!