20050408 Ver 1_Project 403 Complete File_20050217

Ui
Ivlichacl F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
March 10, 2005
DWQ# 05-0408
Randolph County
Mr. Jeff Jurek
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1619
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Jurek:
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program has our approval to conduct stream restoration,
enhancement, and preservation activities, in accordance with the attached conditions, along a total of 2,590
linear feet of three unnamed tributaries to Sandy Creek located on the Williams Farm and the Rising Meadow
Farm, near Liberty, Randolph County, as described in your application received by the Division of Water
Quality on February 17, 2005. After reviewing your application, we have determined that this activity is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3495, which can be viewed on our web site at
http:I/112o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetIands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 27
when it is issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applicable
federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those
required by Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also,
this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General
Certification.
This approval is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us in writing, and you maybe required to send us a new application for a
new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification, as well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all other specific and general conditions of this
Certification are met. No other impacts, including incidental impacts, are approved:
Amount Approved Plan Location or Reference
Streams 2,590 linear feet Three unnamed tributaries of Sandy Creek
located on Williams and Rising Meadow
Fanns, Liberty, Randolph County

One
NotthCarolina
,il atura!!Y
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 )`tail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX [phone]
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet httpl/:h2o.enr.state.nc.us/newetlands
Customer Service Number: 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Jeff Jurek, NCEEP
Page 2
March 10, 2005
2. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual or the
North Carolina Surface Mining Manual (available from the Division of Land Resources at NCDENR
regional offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
maintained properly to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by DWQ; 25 NTUs in all saltwater classes
and all lakes and reservoirs; IONTUs in DWQ Classified trout waters). Such measures must equal or
exceed the requirements specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and
Erosion Control Manual. These measures must be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites,
and waste pile (spoil) sites, including contractor owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated
with the project.
3. 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 measures in wetlands or 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.
4. 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.
5. Upon finishing the project, the Applicant shall fill out and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been completed.
This certificate should be returned to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water Quality at the
address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion, please send photographs showing
all restored stream reaches.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, 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 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 Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-
771-4600 or Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Mr. Jeff Jurek, NCEEP
Page 3
March 10, 2005
AWK/cdl
Attachments
cc: Andrea Wade, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
Wetlands/401 File Copy
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Daryl Lamb
Stpyp. Tpddpr
Facility Name UT to Sandy Creek (Williams Farm & Rising County Randolph
Project Number 05 0408
Recvd From APP
Received Date 2/17/05
Project Type Stream restoration
Recvd By Region
County2
Region Winston-Salem
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
F27 ? O Y O N F 12-100-2 F? 30,704. I
F___F_ O Y O -NF-- F__ F__F__ F__ F__
s
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? ®0 Y 0 N Did you request more info? 0 Y O N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y O N Recommendation: 0 Issue @ Issue/fond 0 Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 355018.69 Longitude (ddmmss) 793927.19
Comments:
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name UT to Sandy Creek (Williams Farm & Rising County Randolph
Project Number 05 0408 Regional Contact: Daryl Lamb
Date: 3/10/2005
Comments (continued from page 1):
permanent conservation easement will be established to protect the restored. enhanced, and
preserved reaches from impacts due to current and future land uses. The restoration and
enhancement work will involve changes to the streams' current dimensions at
' tern, and profile.
Because of surrounding agricultural land use. streams in the area have generally been straightened
and channeliz d. The r .storation design utilizes morphological data from the reference reach,
piedmont rural regional curves. regime equations, and the existing channel morphology. The
reference reach lies along a perennial stream which is immediately north of the restoration site and is
confluent with the one of the perennial streams to be restored. Invasive vegetation will be removed
from the riparian zones and replaced with native species. Selection of native species is based on
published vegetation guidelines and native species lists for the Piedmont region.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 2
O?0,? W A T ?9QG
>
Mr. Jeff Jurek
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1619
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
O
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
\vQ'\nv Division of Water Quality
??? ? V ^v
N U?V March 10, 2005
DWQ4 05-0408
a Randolph County
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Jurek:
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program has our approval to conduct stream restoration,
enhancement, and preservation activities, in accordance with the attached conditions, along a total of 2,590
linear feet of three unnamed tributaries to Sandy Creek located on the Williams Farm and the Rising Meadow
Farm, near Liberty, Randolph County, as described in your application received by the Division of Water
Quality on February 17, 2005. After reviewing your application, we have determined that this activity is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3495, which can be viewed on our web site at
http://112o.enr.state.ne.us/ncwet]ands. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 27
when it is issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should secure any other applicable
federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project, including (but not limited to) those
required by Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also,
this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General
Certification.
This approval is valid only for the purpose and design that you have described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us in writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a
new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification, as well as the additional conditions listed below:
1. The following impacts are hereby approved as long as all other specific and general conditions of this
Certification are met. No other impacts, including incidental impacts, are approved:
Amount Approved Plan Location or Reference
Streams 2,590 linear feet Three unnamed tributaries of Sandy Creek
located on Williams and Rising Meadow
Farms, Liberty, Randolph Count

North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Certification Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Phone [phone] FAX (91
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Internet httpl/:h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwet'
Customer Service Number: 1-877-623-6748

An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled1100,a Post Consumer Paper
Mr. Jeff Jurek, NCEEP
Page 2
March 10, 2005
2. Appropriate sediment and erosion control measures which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual or the
North Carolina Surface Mining Manual (available from the Division of Land Resources at NCDENR
regional offices or the central office), whichever is more appropriate, shall be designed, installed and
maintained properly to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by DWQ; 25 NTUs in all saltwater classes
and all lakes and reservoirs; IONTUs in DWQ Classified trout waters). Such measures must equal or
exceed the requirements specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and
Erosion Control Manual. These measures must be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites,
and waste pile (spoil) sites, including contractor owned and leased borrow pits, which are associated
with the project.
3. 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 measures in wetlands or 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.
4. 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.
Upon finishing the project, the Applicant shall fill out and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401 Certification has been completed.
This certificate should be returned to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water Quality at the
address listed on the form. Along with the Certificate of Completion, please send photographs showing
all restored stream reaches.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, 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 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 Daryl Lamb in the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office at 336-
771-4600 or Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,

Alan W. Klimek, P.E.

Triage Check List
Date: 3110105 Project Name: ut to Sandy Creels
DWQ#: 05-0408
County: Randolph
Daryl Lamb, Winston-Salem Regional Office
To.
30-day processing time: 2/17/05 3/18/05
Note that application was sent to your attention by EEP. This is to
apprise you of regulatory clock.
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 (Neuse, 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
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!
-; I
E 3 E i
YILOGKAh1
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Cyndi Karoly
FROM: Jeff Jurek
SUBJECT: Permit Application- UT to Sandy Creek
DATE: February 16, 2005
0 JOr0$
2@@@Ov@y
FE B 17 2005
ltcTIA,OSkos WATER TAI.ITY
FR ©RAtni
Attached for your review are 2 restoration plans (1 sent to Winston-Salem Regional Office) for
the UT to Sandy Creek stream restoration and wetland enhancement/creation project in Randolph
County. Please feel free to call me with any questions regarding this plan (715-1157).
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Attachment: Restoration Plan (2 originals)
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Hail Service Canter, Raleigh, NC 27699-1692 l 919-7154176 / wwGV.ncEep.net
FEB 1 7 2005
DENR -WATER QUALITY
Office Use Only: `EWIDSNVSTOi' A7ATER-6RN
O ? Fq ?VeOrsion October 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. U S
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 27
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 (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Mailing Address: 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Telephone Number: 919-715-1157
E-mail Address: [e-mail].
Fax Number: 919-715-2219
2. Agent 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:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 5of12
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.
Name of project: Unnamed Tributary to Sandy Creek (Williallts Farm and Rising
Aleadofvs Farm Tracts)
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): _
4. Location
County: Randolph Nearest Town: Liberty
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): The site is located adjacent to
Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), approximately 5.5 miles west of Liberty, Randolph County,
North Carolina.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long):
(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.)
Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application: Pastures
grazed by cattle and sheep, forested land
7. Property size (acres): 10.1 acres
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Sandy Creek
9. River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/.idmin/maps/.)
Page 6 of 12
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: JVetland restoration, stream restoration
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Track Hoes, loaders
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: Abriculture
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.
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:
None
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
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.
Page 7 of 12
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditch ing/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://%vww.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.85 acres
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0 acres (project enhances those wetlands)
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams (SEE PLANS)
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 seci )

* 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),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wail, 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.uses.gov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., aww.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 0.0 LF
Page 8 of 12
Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name Waterbody
)
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. 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.):
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:
VII. 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.
The Droiect involves stream restoration, wetland enhancement and creation to fulfill mitigation
needs of the program. There are not impact for streams and wetlands. For information about
restoration. refer to the attached restoration renort.
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.
Page 9 of 12
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/strmgi,de.litm1.
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.
The mitigation plan is attached with the PCN per your request. The project area has been
designated as a conservation easement in perpetuity to allow for permanent restoration
effort s.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htin. 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):
Page 10 of 12
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
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 (DWQ Only)
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 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .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:
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.
Page 1 I of 12
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 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
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.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
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.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
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):
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).

/05
Applicant/Agent's/ Signature ; Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
;Pleasa t Gar e tITP Kimesvi le
o°c? Ranao/ i t? .A' A N C 1
`-
- Ra ?0 ? 1
x?.tillc a? t
R le an Gray Chapel beTt?
0 2.5 5
--As e oro Ramie r I ; boles ft
i o? i
l
3'

Imo-- a 1
Reference Reach `

G?
I AndreW tf;i,ir-clan„k
i

Rising Meadows'Farm ea

?a
i 4 I
I
i Williams Farm
?a.
o?

' f
° o
M

0 1,000 2,000 i
r Feet
Title Quad Map (USGS Quad Grays Chapel, North Carolina 1974)
Prepared For:
Project
UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Randolph County, North Carolina

Date SCO Project Number Figure
. 1/23/05 040611601 2

Rana OAh
j a - ----------
I ?1Onda Rd
Reference Reach Watershed t-oce°e f
1.1 Square Miles -
f Reach Two Watershed
4.2 Square Miles r
o i
Benny l?06 S
reV
I Reach Ono Watershed ' I)I
0.8 Square Miles I
i
o'Farm d
Pond Tributary Watershed
PI Legend 0.05 Square Miles
i
Property Boundary
r . o ?I Creek Church R?
"3
Reach Two Watershed z -
I f••'?•! ? I
111 Reach One Watershed Williacns?
.+•• K sWMR
9
Pond Tributary Watershed
Re 0 1,500 3,000
ference Reach Watershed y
i
Feet}
Title Watershed Topo (USGS Quad Grays Chapel 1974)
Prepared For:
UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
{ + tli _. Project Randolph County, North Carolina
Date SCO Project Number Figure
CoSY'st-'l11
1/28/05 040611601 4
A
Q?@ PModF p
FEB 1 7 2005
DENR.- WATER QUALITY
V',ETW4DS AND STOMAYATER ER .V1
co
o , ?g
OF WATF?4
QG

Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form
For Section 404 and/or Section 10 Nationwide, Regional and General Permits, Section 401
General Water Quality Certifications, and Riparian Buffer and Watershed Buffer Rules
This form is to be used for projects qualifying for any of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE)
Nationwide, Regional or General Permits as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and for the North Carolina Division of Water Quality's
(DWQ) associated General 401 Water Quality Certifications. This form is also to be used for any
project requiring approval under any Riparian Buffer Rules implemented by the N.C. Division of Water
Quality. This form should not be used if you are requesting an Individual 404 Permit or Individual 401
Water Quality Certification. The USACE Individual Permit application form is available online at
http:Hwivw.saw.usace.arniv.niiI/wetlands/Penn app.htm.
The USACE is the lead regulatory agency. To review the requirements for the use of Nationwide,
Regional or General permits, and to determine which permit applies to your project, please go to the
USACE website at littp://wivAv.saw.usace.annv.miI/wetlands/reatour.htm, or contact one of the field
offices listed on page 3 of this application. The website also lists the responsible project manager for
each county in North Carolina and provides additional information regarding the identification and
regulation of wetlands and waters of the U.S.
The DWQ issues a corresponding Certification (General or Individual), and cannot tell the applicant
which 401 Certification will apply until the 404 Permit type has been determined by the USACE.
Applicants are encouraged to visit DWQ's 401/Wetlands Unit website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands to read about current requirements for the 401 Water Quality
Certification Program and to determine whether or not Riparian Buffer Rules are applicable. The
applicant is also advised to read the full text of the General Certification (GC) matching the specific 404
Permit requested. In some cases, written approval for General Certifications is not required, provided
that the applicant adheres to all conditions of the GC. Applicants lacking access to the internet should
contact DWQ's Central Office in Raleigh at [phone].
Trout Waters Coordination - Special coordination with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) is required for projects occurring in any of North Carolina's twenty-five
counties that contain trout waters. In such cases, the applicant should contact the appropriate NCWRC
regional coordinator (listed by county on page 4 of this application).
Page 1 of 12
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Coordination - If the project occurs in any of North Carolina's
twenty coastal counties (listed on page 4) the applicant should contact the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management (DCM). DCM will determine whether or not the project is within a designated
Area of Environmental Concern, in which case DCM will act as the lead permitting agency. In such
cases, DCM will require a CAMA Permit and will coordinate the 404/401 Permits.
The applicant may also choose to coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure
that the proposed project will have no impact upon any endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat as regulated by the Endangered Species Act, and the State Historic Preservation Office, North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources to ensure that the proposed project will have no impact upon
any properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Compliance with
these regulations is required to be eligible for any Department of the Army permit. The addresses for
both agencies are listed on page 3 of this application.
USACE Permits - Submit one copy of this form, along with supporting narratives, maps, data forms,
photos, etc. to the applicable USACE Regulatory Field Office. Upon receipt of an application, the
USACE will determine if the application is complete as soon as possible, not to exceed 30 days. This
PCN form is designed for the convenience of the applicant to address information needs for all USACE
Nationwide, Regional or General permits, as well as information required for State authorizations,
certifications, and coordination. Fully providing the information requested on this form will result in a
complete application for any of the USACE Nationwide, Regional or General permits. To review the
minimum amount of information that must be provided for a complete PCN for each USACE
Nationwide permit, see Condition 13, 65 Fed. Reg. 12893 (March 9, 2000), available at
http://w-,vw.saw.usacc.arniv.niiI/wetlands/nwl2t7inalFedReg_pdf. Processing times vary by permit and
begin once the application has been determined to be complete. Please contact the appropriate
regulatory field office for specific answers to permit processing periods.
401 Water Quality Certification or Buffer Rules - All information is required unless otherwise stated
as optional. Incomplete applications will be returned. Submit seven collated copies of all USACE
Permit materials to the Division of Water Quality, 401/Wetlands Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. If written approval is required or specifically requested for a 401
Certification, then a non-refundable application fee is required. In brief, if project impacts include less
than one acre of cumulative wetland/water impacts and less than 150 feet cumulative impacts to
streams, then a fee of $200 is required. If either of these thresholds is exceeded, then a fee of $475 is
required. A check made out to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, with the specific name of
the project or applicant identified, should be stapled to the front of the application package. For more
information, see the DWQ website at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/fees.iitm1. The fee must be
attached with the application unless the applicant is a federal agency in which case the check may be
issued from a separate office. In such cases, the project must be identifiable on the U.S. Treasury check
so that it can be credited to the appropriate project. If written approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules,
the application fee does not apply, and the applicant should clearly state (in a cover letter) that only
Buffer Rule approval is sought in writing. Wetlands or waters of the U.S. may not be impacted prior to
issuance or waiver of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Upon receipt of a complete application
for a 401 Certification, the Division of Water Quality has 60 days to prepare a written response to the
applicant. This may include a 401 Certification, an on-hold letter pending receipt of additional
requested information, or denial.
Page 2 of 12
US Army Corps Of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Caldwell Haywood McDowell Swain
US Army Corps of Engineers Alleghany Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
151 Patton Avenue Ashe Cherokee Iredell Mitchell Union
Room 143 Avery Clay Jackson Polk Watauga
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 Buncombe Cleveland Lincoln Rowan Yancey
Telephone: [phone] Burke Gaston Macon Rutherford
Fax: [phone] Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alamance Franklin Nash Surry
US Army Corps Of Engineers Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Chatham Granville Orange Wake
Suite 120 Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Raleigh, NC 27615 Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Telephone: [phone] Durham Johnston Rockingham Wilson
Fax: [phone] Edgecombe Lee Stokes Yadkin
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones Pitt
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bertie Dare Lenoir Tyrrell
Post Office Box 1000 Camden Gates Martin Washington
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico Wayne
Telephone: [phone] Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
Fax: [phone] Craven Hyde Perquimans *Croatan National Forest Only
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Anson Duplin Onslow
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bladen Harnett Pender
Post Office Box 1890 Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Carteret Montgomery Robeson
Telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
Fax: [phone] Cumberland New Hanover Scotland
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Restoration Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
State Historic Preservation Office
Department Of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
US Fish and Wildlife Service / National Marine Fisheries Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service US Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Service
Raleigh Field Office Asheville Field Office Habitat Conservation Division
Post Office Box 33726 160 Zillicoa Street Pivers Island
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726 Asheville, NC 28801 Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone]
Page 3 of 12
CAMA and NC Coastal Counties
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertie Craven Hyde Pender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Currituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gates Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ashe Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Surry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe Henderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] Haywood McDowell Yancey
APPLICATION FORM BEGINS ON PAGE 5. PLEASE DO NOT SUBMIT PAGES 1 - 4.
Page 4 of 12
00.108
0
Restoration Plan

Unnamed 't'ributary to
Sandy Creek (Williams
Farm and Rising Meadows
Farm Tracts)
Randolph County, North Carolina
Project No. 040611601
Prepared for:
NCDENR- Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
January 2005
Q Kirnley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2004
1 Kimley-Horn
O ? y and Associates, Inc.
D ???D l r!
EB 1 72005
44k,%'V- IVA_ QU
?titi?? sue,
Restoration Plan
Unnamed Tributary to Sandy Creek
(Williams Farm and Rising Meadows Farm Tracts)
Project ID No. 010547501
Prepared for:
NCDENR- Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
3001 Weston Parkway
Cary, North Carolina 27513
January 2005
Contents
1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................ 4
3.0 Site Identification and Location ................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Site Location ......................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Watershed Classification ...................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Surface Waters Classification ............................................................................................... 5
4.0 Watershed ................................................................................................................................. 5
4.1 Watershed Drainage .............................................................................................................. 5
4.2 Soils of the Watershed .......................................................................................................... 5
4.3 Land Use of the Watershed ................................................................................................... 5
4.4 Future Land Use .................................................................................................................... 6
5.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................... 6
5.1 Existing Hydrological Features ............................................................................................. 6
5. 1.1 Streams ..........................................................................................................................6
5. 1.2 FEMA ........................................................................................................................... 6
5. 1.3 Wetlands .........................................................................................................:............. 6
5.2 Soils .......................................................................................................................................7
5.3 Terrestrial Plant Communities .............................................................................................. 7
5.4 Rare and Protected Species ................................................................................................... 7
5.5 Stream Geomorphology ........................................................................................................ 8
6.0 Restoration Studies ................................................................................................................. 10
6.1 Stream Restoration Studies ................................................................................................. 10
6. 1.1 Reference Streams ...................................................................................................... 10
6.2 Wetland Restoration Studies ............................................................................................... 10
6.3 Reference Vegetation .......................................................................................................... 11
7.0 Restoration Plan ...................................................................................................................... 11
7.1 Bankfull Verification .......................................................................................................... 11
7.2 Stream Restoration (Restoration Plan is attached) .............................................................. 11
7.2.1 Dimension ................................................................................................................... 11
7.2.2 Pattern ......................................................................................................................... 12
7.2.3 Bedform ...................................................................................................................... 12
7.2.4 Structures .................................................................................................................... 12
7.2.5 Fencing and Watering Systems ................................................................................... 13
7.3 Sediment Transport ............................................................................................................. 13
7.4 Hydraulic Modeling ............................................................................................................ 14
7.5 Wetland Restoration ............................................................................................................ 16
8.0 Typical Drawings (See Attached Restoration Plan) ............................................................... 16
9.0 Stream Riparian Planting Plan (See Attached Restoration Plan for Species List) ................ 16
9.1 Stream Bank Vegetation ..................................................................................................... 16
9.2 Riparian Buffer ................................................................................................................... 17
10.0 Stream Monitoring Plan .......................................................................................................... 17
10.1 Reference Photographs ....................................................................................................... 17
10.2 Visual Inspection of Channel Stability ............................................................................... 17
10.3 Plant Survival Analysis ....................................................................................................... 17
11.0 Stream Success Criteria .......................................................................................................... 18
z 0 ® Kimley-Horn
[oJ IA and Associates, Inc.
11.1 Reference Photos ................................................................................................................ 18
11.2 Visual Inspection of Channel Stability ............................................................................... 18
11.3 Plant Survival Analysis ....................................................................................................... 18
11.4 Geomorphic Assessment ..................................................................................................... 18
12.0 References ...............................................................................................................................19
Tables
Table 1 Drainage Areas
Table 2 Land Use of Watershed
Table 3 Species of Concern - Randolph County
Table 4 Summary of Existing Cross Sectional Data
Table 5 Summary of Shear Stress Calculations
Table 6 D50 of Channel Materials
Table 7 Peak Discharges
Table 8 Bankfull Shear Stresses from Hydraulic Model
Table 9 Stream Power
Figures
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Quad Map (USGS Quad Grays Chapel, North Carolina 1974)
Figure 3 Watershed Aerial (1998 Color Infrared Photography - Source: NCCGIA)
Figure 3a Site Aerial of Existing Vegetation
Figure 4 Watershed Topo (USGS Quad Grays Chapel 1974)
Figure 5 Soils Maps
Figure 6 North Carolina Rural Piedmont Regional Curve
Figure 7a-7d Proposed Typical Cross-Sections
Figure 8a-8b Site Photos
Appendices
Appendix A Wetland Delineation Forms
Appendix B Existing Conditions Data
Appendix C Morphology Characteristics
Appendix D Correspondence
Attachment
Restoration Plan
p Kimley-Horn
0 ® and Associates, Inc.

® 1.0 Introduction
® Three unnamed tributaries in the Sandy Creek watershed have been identified as potential stream
® restoration areas. The tributaries are located on two adjoining properties 5.5 miles west of Liberty,
® North Carolina on Old Liberty Road (Figure 1). The 28-acre Henry property (Rising Meadows

40 Farm) contains the upper 1,000 feet of an unnamed tributary and two wetland seeps. The 20-acre
Williams property (Williams Farm) contains the lower 870 feet of this unnamed tributary, 290 feet
of another small unnamed tributary that flows from a pond, 450 feet of a larger unnamed tributary
that flows onto the property from the north (Figure 2), and a wetland seep. The total existing length
® of the streams identified for restoration is 2,590 feet.
411
4111 2.0 Goals and Objectives
® This project has the following goals and objectives (See Attached Restoration Plan - Key Sheet for
® location of each "reach"):
® Restore Reach One (pattern, dimension, and profile) of the unnamed tributary flowing
® through both the Rising Meadows Farm and Williams Farm, and Reach Two of the larger
unnamed tributary (2,220 feet)
¦ Restore the Pond Tributary (pattern, dimension, and profile) flowing into Reach One on the
Williams Farm (370 linear feet proposed, 295 linear feet existing).
® Exclude livestock from stream and riparian buffer through fencing and controlled stable
® crossings.
¦ Protect areas with conservation easement

® 3.0 Site Identification and Location
!d
® 3.1 Site Location
® The project site is located adjacent to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), approximately 5.5 miles west of
® Liberty, Randolph County, North Carolina (Figure 1). Approximately 2,750 linear feet of stream is
proposed for restoration. The project area is located on two adjoining properties. A USGS 1:24,000
® quad map showing the location of the site and watershed is provided in Figure 2.

® 3.2 Watershed Classification
® The project watershed (Figure 3), with its outlet point located at the downstream terminus of the
® project stream, lies in the northern central portion of the NCDENR-Division of Water Quality
® (DWQ) Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-09 and the central western portion of United States
® Geological Service (USGS) 14-digit Cataloging Unit # 03030003020010 that makes up a portion of
the USGS Deep River Sub-basin (03030003) and Cape Fear Basin. Reach Two, a third-order stream,
® receives flow from three primary tributaries that have headwaters positioned between 1.4 to 3.2
miles upstream of the project reach. Reach Two flows into Sandy Creek one mile downstream of the
® southern project boundary.

® 4 0 Kimley-Horn
®
® and Associates, Inc.
EZ3

3.3 Surface Waters Classification
All project streams flow into Sandy Creek (WS I11), a designated Water Supply stream. DWQ
® classifies Water Supply III streams as supplying water in generally low to moderately developed
watersheds. Sandy Creek supplies water to the town of Ramseur, and DWQ has designated Sandy
49 Creek a critical area about 5.5 miles downstream of the project area north of NC 22.
a
4
4D
ID
4D
49
4D
S
S
S
4D
49
ID
49
49
49
49
49
49
40
4D
4D
40
40
49
4.0 Watershed
4.1 Watershed Drainage
The project watershed drains approximately 4.2 square miles of mostly agricultural and forested land
of the southern outer piedmont (Figures 3 and 4). Valley slope values between 0.3% and 0.5%
typify the topography of the project watershed. The project reach mostly lies within a broad valley
floodplain spreading from 150 to 200 feet in width. However, some areas of valley constriction have
floodplain widths less than 50 feet. Pastures actively grazed by cattle and sheep dominate the
landscape surrounding the project streams. A thin (less than 10 feet) strip of woody vegetation
buffers a single side of Reach One and Reach Two at two distinct portions of the project.
The watershed for Reach One, a tributary to Reach Two, drains 0.8 square miles of forest and
farmland. The headwaters form approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the project reach.
Table 1
Draina a Areas
Reach Draina a Areas . mi.
Reach One at Williams Dairy Road 0.8
Reach Two (downstream end of project at property line) 4.2
Pond Tributary, at confluence with Reach One 0.05
4.2 Soils of the Watershed
Most of the upper watershed consists of Vance-Cecil-Appling soils-described as gently sloping to
steep, well-drained soils that have a loamy surface layer and predominantly clayey subsoil. These
soils often lie atop broad ridges on convex summits and side slopes and form from the weathering of
felsic high-grade metamorphic or igneous rocks. Within the Vance-Cecil-Appling soils, Helena soils
are positioned near the heads of drainage ways. Near the bottom of the watershed, Chewacla loam
soils are located within the floodplains. Chewacla loam soils are described in section 5.2.
4.3 Land Use of the Watershed
Agriculture (farmland and pasture) and forest dominate the land use within the project watershed.
Forested areas buffer most of the drainages in the watershed except for the project reaches and
approximately 5,000 linear feet of headwater streams. The table below shows the distribution of land
use within the project watershed.
Table 2
Land Use of the Watershed
p'1 = ? Kimley-Horn
[?! and Associates, Inc.
Land Use . Acreage Percentage
Transitional 21 1%
Deciduous Forest 1186 44%
Evergreen Forest 170 6%
Mixed Forest 171 6%
Pasture/Ha 787 29%
Row Crops 342 13%
4.4 Future Land Use
There was no visible evidence that land uses were changing in the watershed. Based on
conversations with the Williams family and the Henrys (Rising Meadows Farm), the project site is
expected to continue being used as it is today, except for those changes proposed as part of this
restoration project.
5.0 Existing Conditions
5.1 Existing Hydrological Features
5.1.1 Streams
The upper portion of Reach One flows through Rising Meadows Farm into the lower portion of
Reach One within the Williams Farm (See Restoration Plan Sheets). The lower portions of Reach
One, Reach Two, and the Pond Tributary flow through the Williams Farm. Within both properties,
cattle and/or sheep graze the land with full access to the stream channel and banks. Existing
groundwater-supplied stations can supply drinking water to cattle and sheep in locations scattered
throughout the grazing areas.
5.1.2 FEMA
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) designate the floodplains surrounding Reach One and Reach Two as Zone A - areas of
100-year flood where base flood elevations and flood hazard factor have not been determined.
5.1.3 Wetlands
Three separate wetland seeps currently exist on the project site. Two are located on the Rising
Meadows Farm and one on the Williams Farm. These wetlands are referred to in this report as
Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 (See Restoration Plan). These existing wetlands total approximately 0.84 acres.
Cattle currently have access to all three wetlands. This access reduces the variety of wetland
vegetation. It is also likely that the incised stream channel is having an adverse affect on the
groundwater table in these wetlands and is affecting the frequency of out of bank flooding. Wetland
delineation forms are contained in Appendix A.
1 72-
6 0 Kimley-Horn
l ® and Associates, Inc.

0 5.2 Soils
49 Chewacla loam soils cover the floodplain of the Williams Farm and the eastern portion of Rising
49 Meadows Farm (Figure 5). The Chewacla soil series typically cover Piedmont streams and drainage

19 ways with relatively low slopes and frequent flooding. Chewacla loams have a very deep soil profile,
somewhat poor drainage, moderate permeability, and a very shallow depth to the season high water
table. Because of associated wetness and flooding, Chewacla loams poorly support crops, pasture, or
49 urban development. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) considers Chewacla loam a
49 hydric soil (NRCS 1995). The Chewacla floodplain should support efforts to restore stream stability.
Vance soils lie within the stream valley of the remaining portion of Rising Meadows Farm. Vance
® soils typically reside on gently sloping narrow and broad ridges and sloping to moderately steep side
slopes in the Piedmont. Vance soils are well drained with slow permeability.
5.3 Terrestrial Plant Communities
NRCS aerial photography shows that the riparian buffers along Reach One and Reach Two have had
® a slight increase in woody vegetation since the late 1930s. An aerial photo taken in 1937 shows no
4D discernable buffers along the stream corridors. Successive aerials taken in 1966, 1986, 1993, and
® 2003 show discontinuous and sparsely wooded riparian buffer (Figure 3a).
® In areas where continuous woody buffers exist, the buffers extends only 5 to 10 feet off the top of
® both the left and right banks. Typical plants found within the buffers include:
® Canopy
¦ Chinese privet (Ligustrann sinese)

® ¦ Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Hackberry (Celtis spp.)
¦ Black walnut (Juglans nigra)
Ground cover
¦ Orange jewelweed (Inipatiens capensis)
¦ Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica)
4D ¦ Microstegium (Microstegium vintinewn)
® Active pastures featuring fescue (Festuca spp.), smartweed (Polygonum spp.), and cocklebur
® (Xanthiunt struntarium) dominate much of the riparian buffer. Pockets of soft-stem rush (Juncus
® effuses) and sedges (Carex spp.) also occur within the pasture.
® 5.4 Rare and Protected Species
®
During the feasibility study (January 2002), the previous consultant searched the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) websites
and identified two federally endangered species residing in Randolph County, North Carolina: the
Cape Fear. Shiner (Notropis mekistrocholas) and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
Based on comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) and habitat
requirements, the previous consultant determined that stream work within the project area should
have NO EFFECT on either the Cape Fear Shiner or the Schweinitz's sunflower. NCDOT provided
® biological surveys in the project corridor. According to the January 29, 2003 USFWS internet

7 l PJ KimleyHorn
0 and Associates, Inc.

listing, no additional federally endangered or threatened species have been listed since the
completion of the feasibility study.
The following table shows federal species of concern listed in Randolph County, North Carolina
(NCNHP database: updated May 2003). Federal species of concern are not afforded federal
protection under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. The previous
consultant did not identify habitat for any of the species within the project area.
Table 3
Species of Concern - Randolph County
Common Name Scienti Federal. NC Habitat Present
"'Scientific Name within.Project
Status Status
Area
Fish
Carolina Darter ?Etheostoma collis collis FSC No
Carolina Redhorse
_ M_ oxo_s_ tana s p. Invertebrates
FSC N/L No
j Pee Dee Crayfish Ostracod
Ar tlantic Pigtoe Dact loct there eedeensis ?
Fusconaia masoni - FSC* -
FSC N/L
E - NouA ?
No
Carolina Creekshell Villosa vatighaniana FSC E No
Brook Floater Alasmidonta varicose FSC E No
I Yellow Lam mussel Lam sills cariosa FSC E No
Triangle Floater Alasmidonta zatdulata N/L T No
Carolina Fatmucket Lam silis radiata cons icua N/L T No
`Squawfoot Strophitus undulata N/L T No
Note: N/L - No listing
FSC - Federal Species of Concern
E - Endangered
T - Threatened
*Historic record - species last observed in county more than 20 years ago
During a mussel survey performed June 2003, NCDOT found non-listed mussels within the lower
project reach. Per NCWRC's recommendation, the mussels will be removed from the channel
reaches to be restored and placed in the on-site reach that will not be modified. This should be done
prior to construction.
5.5 Stream Geomorphology
Field surveys of the existing stream channels and surrounding floodplain were conducted from
March 2003 to May 2003 (See Appendix B). Cross sections and longitudinal profiles were taken
along Reach One, Reach Two, and the Pond Tributary at varying locations (see Restoration Plan -
Key Sheet). Pebble counts, bar samples, and subpavement samples were also taken in each reach.
Field data collected was sufficient for Rosgen Level II classification.
e Kimley-Horn
0 ® and Associates, Inc.
w
While conducting the stream survey, observations of existing stream and riparian buffer conditions
were noted. Rack lines, high water marks, bedrock, locations of scour, culvert conditions, wetland
seeps, cattle crossings, and any other unique stream or floodplain features were noted.
The proposed' stream channels for restoration are best described as three separate reaches (see
Restoration Plan - Key Sheet):
¦ Reach One consists of the unnamed tributary beginning at the double culverts (Photo 1)
under SR 2450 (Williams Dairy Road) at Rising Meadows Farm, continuing to its confluence
with the larger stream on the Williams Farm.
• Reach Two begins at the confluence of Reach One with the larger stream and extends south
to the Williams Farm property boundary.
¦ A tributary connecting a pond (located on Rising Meadows Farm) to Reach One is referred to
in this report as the Pond Tributary.
Reach One and Reach Two are incised sand bed channels with low sinuosity. Their average slope is
0.4 % except for a section of channel located near the property line between the Rising Meadows
Farm and the Williams Farm properties in Reach One. Bedrock in this reach is preventing a head cut
from moving upstream but it has increased the local slope to 1.9 %. The bankfull width along the
length of Reach One varies from 8.7 feet to 18.6 feet, and the mean bankfull depth varies from 1.1
feet to 1.4 feet. The bankfull depth of Reach Two is 2.3 feet, and the bankfull width is 14.4 feet. The
Pond Tributary is a sand bed channel with low sinuosity and a channel slope of 0.9 %. This reach
has an existing bankfull width of 4.7 feet and a mean bankfull depth of 0.7 feet.
Representative cross sections were taken at riffles along the project reaches. Four cross sections
were taken on Reach One, one on Reach Two, and one on the Pond Tributary (See Appendix B). In
the methodology used for this report, bank height ratios between 1.1 and 1.3 are regarded as
"moderately unstable," ratios between 1.3 and 1.5 as "unstable," and bank height ratios greater than
1.5 are "highly unstable." Low width/depth ratios (XS 1, XS3, and XS6) signify high shear stresses.
The table below summarizes the data obtained from the cross sections taken. (See Figure 5 for cross
section locations.)
Table 4
Summary of Existing Cross Sectional Data

Reach
Cross
Section Area

(BKF)
Width
(ft)
Width/Depth'
Ratio
Entrenchment .
Ratio
Bank Ht.
Ratio
Stream
Type,
One XS 1 12.3 8.7 6.2 2.8 1.5 E --? G
One XS2 20.5 14.8 10.6 8.8 1.2 E
One XS3 17.5 12.4 8.7 14.6 1.3 E
One XS4 21.2 18.6 16.3 2.4 1.7 C -? F
Two XS5 33.1 14.4 14.4 9.7 1.6 E -? G
Pond Trib. XS6 3.3 4.7 4.7 15.9 1.6 E
See Figure Restoration Plan - Key Sheet for cross section locations.
The following describes the current characteristics of the existing reaches (See Appendix B -
Existing Conditions Data and Appendix C - Morphology Characteristics):
KI ] Kimley-Horn
I ® and Associates, Inc.

¦ The upper half of Reach One (on Rising Meadows Farm) has a bankfull width varying from
® 8.7 to 14.8 feet, a mean depth of 1.4 feet, and cross sectional area varying from 12.3 to 20.5
square feet. Most of this reach classifies as an incised E channel. The upstream end of this
reach has a bank height ratio of 1.5 and appears to be transitioning to a G channel. The two
® culverts at the upstream end of this reach are perched approximately 1 foot above the plunge
® pool water surface.
¦ The lower half of Reach One (on the Williams Farm) has a bankfull width of 18.6 feet, a
® mean bankfull depth of 1.1 feet, and a bankfull cross sectional area of 21.2 square feet. This
® channel classifies as a C channel but, with a bank height ratio of 1.7, it appears to be
transitioning to an F channel.
¦ Reach Two has a bank-full width of 14.4 feet, a mean bankfull depth of 2.3 feet, and a
bankfull cross sectional area of 33.1 square feet. A bank height ratio of 1.6 signifies that this
channel is significantly incised. This reach of the channel classifies as an E channel but is not
far from classifying as a G channel.
¦ The Pond Tributary has a bankfull width of 4.7 feet, a mean bankfull depth of 0.7 feet, and a
cross sectional area of 3.3 square feet. Bank height ratios on this reach are typically 1.6. This
channel classifies as an incised E channel but has down-cut almost to the point of being a G
channel.
6.0 Restoration Studies
6.1 Stream Restoration Studies
6.1.1 Reference Streams
The reference reach for this project is located on an upstream segment of the larger channel that
flows onto the Williams Farm from the east. The reference is located on the Amick Property within
the Cape Fear River Basin and Southern Outer Piedmont physiographic region. The reference is
classified as an E4 channel and has a drainage area of approximately 0.97 square miles (Figures 3
and 4). Land uses in the watershed for this channel appear to be approximately 50% agriculturale,
40% forested, and 10% residential. The bankfull width of the reference channel is 12.1 feet and its
average water surface slope is 0.58%. This channel has a bank height ratio of 1.0 and an
entrenchment ratio of 6.6. The reference reach information was provided by NCDOT and field
verified by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA). This reference reach has previously been used
by NCDOT in a mitigation plan and has been approved by DWQ (Dave Penrose). The detailed
morphology and dimensionless ratios of the reference channel are located in Appendix C.
I&W
6.2 Wetiand Restoration Studies
® The EEP decided that insufficient potential wetland resources exist to pursue purposefully wetland
restoration or enhancement. However, it is anticipated that the activities associated with the stream
restoration will strengthen the wetland hydrology and create opportunity for the existing wetlands to
re-vegetate and possibly expand.
10 p'1=3 VJ KimleyHorn
®J 0 and Associates, Inc.
49
u
® 6.3 Reference Vegetation
® The reference vegetation communities for the streams were noted to develop the vegetative plan for
® the project. This information was supplemented with North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
® Program (EEP) and other published vegetation guidelines and native species list for the Piedmont.
The attached Restoration Plan contains the detailed vegetation plan.

® 7.0 Restoration Plan
® The design of the proposed channel reaches involved utilizing the morphological data from the
reference reach, piedmont rural regional curves, regime equations, and the existing channel
morphology. Stable reaches of the existing channel were considered in designing the proposed
channel. These parameters were used in determining the proper dimension, pattern, and profile of the
proposed channels. The morphological data collected has been summarized in Appendix D.

® 7.1 Bankfull Verification
The North Carolina Piedmont Rural Regional Curves were used to check bankfull dimensions
(width, depth, and cross-sectional area) determined from the existing condition geomorphic survey.
In addition, the regional curves were used as a base to establish a range of design discharges since
the site is ungauged. A local curve showing the relationship between channel dimensions and
drainage areas was developed using data from the reference reach discussed in section 6.1. The
® bankfull dimensions for the design were derived by comparing the regional curves, reference reach
® curve, and bankfull dimensions of stable reaches of the existing channels. The bankfull mean depth
was verified by the use of entrainment calculations and Shields curve as being able to move particle
® sizes taken from the sub-pavement. The cross-sectional area of the reference reach is plotted on the
Rural Piedmont Regional Curve of North Carolina developed by North Carolina State University
(NCSU) Water Quality Group, 2000 (Figure 6).
®
7.2 Stream Restoration (Restoration Plan is attached)
Stream restoration is proposed to restore the impaired stream channel's dimension, pattern, and
® profile. Reconnecting the channel with its abandoned floodplain will increase the frequency of over-
bank flooding, increase hydrology to the riparian wetland seeps, and reduce shear stress, thus
increasing stability.
The proposed channels will have banks constructed at a 3:1 slope to ensure stability until deep
® rooted vegetation can become established. To ensure proper bed width using these slopes, the
® proposed channels for this project are C Type channels. Increasing sinuosity on all channels
® proposed for restoration will decrease average stream slopes and will provide the proper pool and
riffle sequencing found in natural reference stream systems. Bed material samples were taken, and
sediment transport calculations were performed to ensure that the proper profile was designed for the
channel dimensions proposed.
® 7.2.1 Dimension
The upper portion of Reach One classifies as an incised E Type channel. The proposed stable
® bankfull area was determined to be 20.5 square feet. Using this cross sectional area, a channel was
EZ3 Kim'eyHorn
E ® and Associates, Inc.
designed with a width/depth ratio of 15 (Figure 7a). The current width of the channel varies from
8.7 to 14.8 feet. The proposed channel width is 17.5 feet.
The lower portion of Reach One (on the Williams Farm) classifies as an incised C Type channel.
The proposed stable bankfull area was determined to be 20.7 square feet. Using this cross sectional
area, a channel was designed with a width/depth ratio of 15 (Figure 7b). The current width of the
channel is 18.6 feet. The proposed channel width is 17.5 feet.
Reach Two classifies as an incised E Type channel. The proposed stable bankfull area was
40 determined to be 40 square feet. Using this cross sectional area, a channel was designed with a
® width/depth ratio of 15 (Figure 7c). The current width of the channel is 14.4 feet. The proposed
channel width is 24.5 feet.
The Pond Tributary classifies as an incised E Type channel. The proposed stable bankfull area was
determined to be 3.5 square feet. Using this cross sectional area, a channel was designed with a
width/depth ratio of 15 (Figure 7d). The current width of the channel is 4.7 feet. The proposed
channel width is 7.3 feet.
7.2.2 Pattern
Sinuosity was increased to the extent possible on the proposed channels (see attached plans). The
limiting factor in increasing sinuosity is a narrow valley in some locations and existing wetlands
bordering the streams. The proposed sinuosity of the channels allows the proper pool to pool spacing
and riffle locations restored improving aquatic habitat. The proposed sinuosity provides the
appropriate slope to transport the material coming into the reach so the channel does not
significantly aggrade or degrade.
7.2.3 Bedform
The bedform is based on the data obtained from the reference reach and will incorporate the rural
piedmont regional curves and regime equations. The bedform of the proposed channels is made up
of properly spaced riffle and pool features. The pools will be located in the outside of meander bends
with riffles located between the pools in the tangent portions of the channel. Glides and runs will
connect the pools and riffles. In-stream structures will be used to provide grade control, ensure stable
bed and bank features, and maintain the overall design slope (See Appendix C, Morphology
Characteristics).
7.2.4 Structures
In-stream structures will be used to protect stream banks, increase aquatic habitat diversity and
provide grade control. The types of structures incorporated into the restoration project include rock
cross vanes, root wads, and log vanes. Root-wads will be used only for the purpose of providing
habitat and their use will be kept to a minimum. A double rock cross vane (`A' Vane) with a step
pool is proposed at the outlet of the culverts under Williams Dairy Road. This structure will be
designed to eliminate the perched conditions of the culvert and restore natural aquatic passage
upstream of Williams Dairy Road. A sill is proposed in one of the two culverts to achieve normal
flow depth through the remaining culvert.
2 0 Kimley-Horn
=3 ® and Associates, Inc.

7.2.5 Fencing and Watering Systems
In order to protect the stream, riparian buffers, and wetlands from cattle, fencing will be provided
along the perimeter of the conservation easement. Two cattle crossings (See Restoration Plan for
Typical) are required to ensure connectivity of the remaining farmland. The conservation easement
will contain a minimum buffer of 50 feet on each side of the streams (measured from the proposed
stream banks) and will encompass the existing wetland seeps and other wetlands. An exception to
this is on the Williams Farm where the left side of the proposed channel will only have a 30-foot
buffer for 470 feet. This modified buffer was requested by the property owner in order to reduce the
amount of land taken by the easement on this side of the channel. This reduced easement was
supported by the agencies at the November 6, 2001, on-site meeting (See Appendix D). The fencing
will protect approximately 10.4 acres of conservation easement. Approximately 6,100 linear feet of
fencing will be required.
An alternate water supply will be required for livestock on the Williams Farm. Rising Meadow Farm
will not require the installation of a watering system. The Williams Farm will require drilling a well
since there are none on the site. A pump, watering troughs, piping, and source of electricity are
required to provide an alternate water supply. It is proposed that EEP will pay the property owner or
NRCS to install the watering systems.
7.3 Sediment Transport
to A stable stream channel should be capable of transporting its sediment load without aggrading or
49 degrading. Shear stress calculations were used to verify that the designed channel would be able to
transport its bedload. The two physical characteristics of the channel design which affect the shear
stress on the channel bed are the slope of the channel and its hydraulic radius.
45
40
4D
40
ID
i = yRs
Where: 2= shear stress (lb/ft2)
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
s = water surface slope (ft/ft)
The hydraulic radius equals the cross sectional area divided by the wetted perimeter.
R=A/P
Where: R = hydraulic radius
A = cross-sectional area (ft2)
P = wetted perimeter (ft)
The following table contains the critical shear stress results for the four proposed channel
configurations. Particle ranges were determined using Shield's curve.
13
G''I KimleyHorn
®J 1 and Associates, Inc.
Table 5
Summary of Shear Stress Calculations

Reach Proposed
WS Slope
(ft/ft) Proposed
Hydraulic
Radius (ft)
She
Stress (Iblfe) Particle
Range
(mm)
Reach One (Upstream) 0.0080 1.12 0.56 35 to 76
Reach One Downstream 0.0056 1.14 0.40 23 to 46
Reach Two 0.0016 1.59 0.16 10 to 17
Pond Tributary 0.0190 0.47 0.49 31 to 69
The largest particles found in the bar samples and sub-pavement samples fall within the range of
particles shown in Table 5 for the proposed channels. The proposed channel slope and dimensions
are principally based on the reference reach and data collected from the existing channels. The above
particle ranges serve to ensure that the proposed channel will transport the material currently being
transported by the stream channels. The bar samples taken at the cross sections were sieved to
determine the D50 of the channel material. The following table contains the results from that
analysis.
Table 6
D50 of Channel Material
Reach D50 mm Category
Reach One 0.8 Medium Sand
Reach Two 4.8 Fine Gravel
Pond Tributary 7.6 Fine Gravel
7.4 Hydraulic Modeling
The streams located on Rising Meadows Farm and the Williams Farm are not FEMA detail studied
streams. However, hydraulic modeling of the channels was performed to ensure no significant rise in
the 100-year floodplain elevation. Hydraulic modeling was also used to calibrate the proposed
bankfull channel dimensions, to verify shear stress calculations, and to help select temporary erosion
control matting for design.
The hydraulic model was performed using HEC-RAS Version 3.1. The peak flows for the bankfull,
2, 10, 25, and 100-year storms were modeled for the existing and proposed conditions. These flows
were calculated using the North Carolina rural flood-frequency equations for the Blue-
Ridge/Piedmont hydrologic region (USGS WRIR-96-4084). The peak flows calculated are
summarized in the following table.
4 0 Kimley-Horn
1` =3n and Associates, Inc,
Table 7
Peak Discharges
Reach Area
ac. Area
s .mi. 2yr Q
cfs 10yr Q
cfs 25yr Q ".
cfs 100yr Q '
cfs
Reach One 512 0.80 116 289 413 649
Reach Two 2688 4.20 370 864 1202 1827
Pond Tributary* 30 0.05 17 44 63 100
* The pond was not routed.
The model for Reach Two and the majority of Reach One show insignificant rise in the 100-year
elevation. The middle portion of Reach One (including XS4) shows greater than one foot in rise.
This increase in the 100-year floodplain does not affect any structures located within the valley. This
increase in water surface elevation will not cause backwater above the two 72-inch CMPs under
Williams Dairy Road since they are an inlet control for existing and proposed conditions. Backwater
on the Williams Farm due to raising the channel bed through Reach Two will not affect any
structures on the property. The anticipated increase in the 100-year floodplain in Reach Two is 0.1
feet.
Currently the stream channels are incised so that greater than bankfull events are contained within
the channel banks. This results in greater shear stress being exerted on the channel bed. Priority 1
restoration will provide relief at and above the bankfull stage, lowering the shear stress on the
proposed channel bed and banks. This will result in a decreased mean and max depth and will
prevent channel degradation and bank erosion. The following table reflects shear stresses calculated
at bankfull flow.
Table 8
Bankfull Shear Stresses from Hydraulic Model
Reach Existing Shear Stress' Ib/ft2 ° Pro osed Shear Stress Ib/ftZ
Reach One 0.72 0.64
Reach Two 0.65 0.455
Pond Tributary 0.39 0.28
Decreasing the shear stress combined with reducing the velocity by increasing sinuosity and
decreasing slope will result in restored channels with lower stream powers (Table 9).
Table 9
Stream Power

Reach
Existing Stream Power (Ib/ft sec) Proposed Stream Power (Ib/ft-
sec
Reach One 3.32 2.40
Reach Two 2.60 2.08
Pond Tributary 0.77 0.63
5 KimleyHorn
0 ®
O and Associates, Inc.
® Z5 Wetland Restoration
49 No purposeful wetland restoration or enhancement will be performed; however, existing wetland and
45 potential restoration sites will be protected by fencing. It is anticipated that the stream restoration
activities will allow these areas to eventually return to reference conditions on their own. Restoration
of the stream channel will bring the water table up to the wetlands, possibly enhancing the existing
49 wetlands and expanding the area that is currently delineated as wetland.
8.0 Typical Drawings (See Attached Restoration Plan)
on 9.0 Stream Riparian Planting Plan
49 (See Attached Restoration Plan for Species List)
40 Prior to planting the riparian buffer, efforts will be made to eradicate fescue. These efforts should
40 include herbicide use (Roundup or Rodeo plus a pre-emergent such as Plateau) during the spring and
49 a follow up spraying (Roundup or Rodeo) in early fall to eliminate any fescue that was not-killed in

® the spring. A permanent seed mix can be used after application of the pre-emergent. Planting can
follow during the dormant season. Ripping the site prior to planting is recommended.
40 Vegetation planted within the floodplain and along the stream banks provides stability to the stream
49 channel by reducing scour and runoff erosion. The usual progression of vegetation growth on cleared
riparian habitats begins with pioneer species that both provide stream stabilization functions and
create an environment suitable for latter species common in mature riparian habitats. The contractor
will plant the stream bank with pioneer species that provide immediate bank stabilization. Species
l5 common in mature riparian habitats will be planted in the floodplain.
® The vegetation plan will use reference bottomland hardwood forest found within the region to
develop a list of plants for the planting scheme. Immediately after construction, the contractor will
® seed the stream banks and all disturbed areas with a permanent seed mix. The contractor will plant
live stakes and bare roots around structure installations and the outside of meander bends to provide
an area of high density root mass. Coir fiber matting and live stakes will be used along the entire
reach of the restored channels to provide stabilization until vegetation can be established. The
contractor will plant trees and shrubs using live stakes, bare root, or container stock along the tops of
® the channel banks.
®
9.1 Stream Bank Vegetation
® The contractor will immediately seed newly constructed reaches and plant live stakes and/or bare
roots within the floodplain especially along high stress areas such as the outer meander bends with
the species listed in the Restoration Plan.
40
411
4111
The contractor will plant woody vegetation between November and March so that the vegetation
may stabilize during the dormant season and set roots during the spring season. .
ie
G? O KimleyHorn
t^?.10 ® and Associates, Inc,
9.2 Riparian Buffer
Most of the existing floodplain consists of actively grazed pasture. The contractor will plant the
species listed in the Restoration Plan. In areas of the floodplain where channel restoration does not
remove woody vegetation, the contractor will preserve the desirable woody vegetation. The desirable
woody vegetation will be flagged or fenced off with safety fencing prior to the beginning of
construction. The contractor.will plant a minimum of 680 stems per acre.
10.0 Stream Monitoring Plan

® Upon completion of the restoration project, as-built surveys will be conducted to document the
dimension, pattern, and profile of all restored reaches. Documentation shall be made of any changes
in the dimension, pattern, profile, vegetation plantings, and structures installed, of the constructed
® channel from the proposed design.
j
49
The monitoring plan should consist of reference photos, visual inspection of channel and plant
49 survival analysis. Monitoring should be performed each year of the required 5-year monitoring
® period. All monitoring reports should be submitted to the Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory
Field Office Project Manager. The mitigation success criteria, and required remediation actions, will
® be generally based on Appendix II of the "Stream Mitigation Guidelines," dated April, 2003. A
® proper monitoring plan at a minimum should include the tasks outlined below.
ID 10.1 Reference Photographs
Photographs will be taken throughout the monitoring period to evaluate vegetative growth along the
® stream corridor of the restoration site. Locations of the photograph points will be established and
® marked with stakes. A map with notations of the photo reference points will be generated. This
aspect of monitoring will last for five years. Photo-monitoring will include lateral as well as
4D longitudinal photographs.
• 10.2 Visual Inspection of Channel Stability
is Visual inspections of the channel stability should be performed on all restored reaches.
49 Documentation will be made of any significant changes in the dimension, pattern, or profile that
ob indicates instability of the channel. Special attention should be given to structures and any
developing headcuts. Data will be collected at years 1, 3, and 5 following completion of restoration
® work.
® 10.3 Plant Survival Analysis
® In order to establish vegetation in restoration areas, such as bankfull benches and slopes, bareroot
do and containerized vegetation as well as live stakes will be planted as shown on the plans or required
® in the Special Provisions. Plant survival should also be assessed and plants replaced as necessary.
in
® Survival of vegetation will be evaluated using tree counts of 10 meter by 10 meter monitoring plots.
Survival of live stakes will be evaluated along the stream corridor of the restoration site. Bareroot
49
?I
® 7 =1 Kimley-Horn
®
I
=1
and Associates, Inc.

and containerized vegetation as well as live stake plantings will be monitored for five years before
success or failure is assessed.
11.0 Stream Success Criteria
11.1 Reference Photos
Photographs will be used to quantitatively evaluate channel aegradation or degradation, bank
erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal
photos should indicate the absences of developing mid-channel bars or excessive bed scour in riffles
or behind structures. Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation
of the bank over time. A series of photos over time should indicate successional maturation of
riparian vegetation.
11.2 Visual Inspection of Channel Stability
Judgments of success or failure of restoration activities using this data will be qualitative. Changes in
the channel dimension that may occur during the monitoring period will be evaluated to determine if
they represent a movement toward a more unstable condition (down-cutting, deposition, erosion) or
are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (settling, vegetative changes, decrease in
width/depth ratio). Unstable conditions that require remediation will indicate failure of restoration
activities.
11.3 Plant Survival Analysis
• Success of live stake plantings will require a 70% survival rate based on sample plots. (See
Appendix II, Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003)
¦ Success criteria for trees will be 320 trees/acre through year 3 and 260 trees per acre through
year 5.
¦ Success of herbaceous plants will be 75% ground cover.
11.4 Geomorphic Assessment
Generally, geomorphic assessment follows,the Monitoring Level I procedures described in the
Stream Mitigation Guidelines (April 2003). Two permanent riffle and two permanent pool cross-
sections will be established as shown in the Restoration Plan. Pebble counts also will be conducted
at the cross sections. A longitudinal profile also will be conducted. The monitoring will be
conducted each year for the 5-year monitoring period. In order to show success, the data should
show no significant aegradation or degradation and should show no unexpected changes in
morphology.
s E=Ipj Kimley-Horn
= and Associates, Inc.
12.0 References
Rosgen, David L. 1997. "A Geomorphologic Approach To Restoration Of Incised Rivers,"
Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel
Incision.
Rosgen, David L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs,
CO.
The Division of Land Resources (DLR) and The Division of Water Quality (DWQ), 2001 v.3.0.
"Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina."
United State Geological Survey. 1974. USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographical Maps "Grays
Chapel." US Geological Survey.
North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, "Rural-Piedmont Regional Curves."
w,,vNv5.b ae. ncsu. edu/pro grams/extension/wgg/sri/ruralpiedmont.htm
Hall, Karen. 2001. North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute NCSU, "Recommended Native
Plant Species for Stream Restoration in North Carolina."
US Army Corps of Engineers, December 24, 2002. "Regulatory Guidance Letter, No. 02-2."
US Army Corps of Engineers, April 2003. "Stream Mitigation Guidelines."
Rosgen, David L. "A Stream Channel Stability Assessment Methodology."
19 CMKimley-Horn
® and Associates, Inc.
1. ! 'I 11.1( 11
Qa Pleas t-Gar ®., Kimesv /le

aoa \ I
?
u
h C
a h4?oh,4 00 11

U) RAND( T i
I an Gray Chapel
0 Y 2.5 5 v

0, -As a oro R c Miles
i
E
f

d
N
c

l- n 1

Reference Reach . `

p ndreW tl caanchtctl?

Rising Meadows Farm ?a

a

?
y ?
-

o
E m
A

•
i
000 2,000
0 1
,
' Feet
Title Quad Map (USGS Quad Grays Chapel, North Carolina 1974)
Prepared For:

0b Project UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
11
11
?441
Randolph County, North Carolina
Date SCO Project Number Figure
,?Sllll 1/28/05 040611601 2
r" ?
u
E Mu-
ND

F
k

c
I
`.

r!?"
1 7. 4
M
t
l=

M
•
Title Site Aerial of Existing Vegetation - NCDOT 2003 Aerial
Prcpmvd For.
?OJT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Project Randolph County, North Carolina
? S -,? , Date
. fiE; 1/28/05

M
rti
I
_.#aF, ate?. .

F ti 9 Y

r. ?
u
Y

h '

Yr
4e IVs ?Y ++F l'?
f
V
?' eeImry Ic?l? u7bxF- d L,, ISM;
? 1 I
{ ve r
SCO Project Number
040611601

t?s
'W ?' Asa
,ye
u'4

Figure
3a

T Ra ?`?? ,

..
Monda fed
e
Loren
Reference Reach Watershed .
f
.
1.1 Square Miles -

i

Reach Two Watershed
4.2 Square Miles

genn
neb S ?_
?Or
2 -
i

J es

Reach One Watershed
0.8 Square Miles ;

Farm d a
.
Pond Tributary Watershed

0.05 Square Miles
I Legend

Property Boundary

R
?y. reek Church

Reach Two Watershed
C3
•$
e'.'.6 I
d William
W
t
h
R
h O
ers
•
eac
ne
a
e
W ay Rd...
:..• •.:
•?.. `,\gs
t• I• Pond Tributar
Watershed
y

0 1,500 3,
(WV
Reference Reach Watershed
1
1 t.
Feet
..i
Title Watershed Topo (USGS Quad Grays Chapel 1974)
Prepared For:

Project UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Randolph County, North Carolina

t Date SCO Project Number Figure
sys
eill
?+ 1 i r t l.
1/28/05
04061 1601
4

•
•
• � a �°it-
a
w_
•
Farm
I� W
µ� 4
• j
• � y
4
• Legend
• Property Boundary
I 4
• Randolph SSURGO Soils
E_
. Title Soils Map
• Prepared For:
Project UT to Sandy Creek — Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
•Randolph County, North Carolina
,� } Date SCO Project Number
t1 1
• +JVleill 1/28/05 040611601
11
rIRaOGR ttlt
oaxwrn
�1
Figure
5
Ki

Regional Curves: Cross Sectional Area vs Drainage Area
1000
d
V?
d
M
Cr
!C
d
a`
?o
c
0
d
a
N
O
v

E I L L l i 1

I f r?r t ?.
i l
-
-
A- t. 1
1. l

I . 1 f l

100

- -
-
r;
.i

Project Reference
Reach

10
I- J_ I
, --'
z t i ?t. i t
' I 1 1- t 1 . I I I
- I 1 1( I ' 1. l I
I- i I
?I I
1}
0.1

- 1 J-1,
i
- ,-r--

i ! ?I I I

I
I i i
I i f

1 1

1 10
Drainage Area (square miles)
100
1000
? Rural Piedmont
-Power (Rural Piedmont)
Y = lu. t u4X- -
R2 = 0.9546
Title North Carolina Rural Piedmont Regional Curve
Prepared for:
?- Project UT to Sandy Creek -Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Randolph County, North Carolina
!? Date SCO Project No. Figure
EcosysWill
' November, 2004 040611601 6
Proposed Upper Reach One - Riffle
'C' Type Stream
104
103
C 102
101
d
w 100
99 I
98
97
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (ft)
- - - - Existing Channel Proposed Channel
Title Proposed Typical Cross-Sections
Prepared for:
Project Williams Farm a - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Randolph County, North Carolina
Date SCO Project No. Figure
Ecosystem
November, 2004 040611601 7 A
rxuoxnm
i ! I f _ I I I I i I I I I ? I I I , I ? I I
-
I I
I I
I I
? I . I I
1 I I
y I
_?
? I ? 1_ T I I I I , I I 1 I I I
- i
. '. I
I I
1 I I I I
I 1 ! I I ?
I I I .I I
I 1? I
I I, I
?I I i I I
I I I I I
I I I

i. I I
I I

?
I I
I I I

?
I ? I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I
I I I I
I I-
I I? I
I IExlstmg 13
I I 'I -
I• I
I p?
nkfu I I I
I' ! 1 I
I I
I i I I
I I I
I I
i I
, ? I I
1
- I I
I J I ,
I I I ?
I I I I
I ? I I
-- ? I I I
I 1 I I
I I I I I I, I I
I I I
I C I I , I I
I
?I I I
I I I I I
I I -I
I I I I '. I I
I I I I
I I I
- '. I
-
' I . .. I
I . I I I I I
i I
' I I
I I I
? I I I I ,
I I ,. 1•
I I I - I
I ? I I I
I I I. I
I I I I I I I I -
I I I I.
I I I
Proposed Lower Reach One - Riffle
V Type Stream
100
99
0 98
> 97
m
w 96
L
95
Q 94
93
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (ft)
- - - - Existing Channel Proposed Channel
Title Proposed Typical Cross-Sections
Prepared For:
UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Project Randolph County, North Carolina
• Date SCO Project No. Figure
Ecosystem
November, 2004 040611601 7 B
1.1<IIL?..,?
i
II I I
' I _ I
? i I '.. I ?? I
I I i I I I
I I I I i
I ? I I ' I I ?
, I I I I I
I ?, I I I I I
? I I I
-
-
I I i. *
i I I 1 I I ?
?;, I I I
I I ?I I I I
I I , r i
? I I i I
I
I
I I I I - I I ?
I I ? I
? I I
I I I I
- ? I I I I ?• I
I i
' . I ,

East n I
? I,
Baf?k II I I I
' I I I
I I ?
I I I
i
I I I 1
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I ,I I I I
I? I I
I 1 I I I I I'
I I
I I I I? I I I
1 I 1 ?
I I I - 1
I I
I I I I I I
I - 1 I
I I I I I I I
I 1 i'
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I
I I I I?
1 I I I I I I ?
I I I I
I I I I J I I I ?
I•? I I,
I I C I I 1 I ?
I I I I
I I I i I ? I
I I I I
I I I I I I I
- -I I I
I I 1 I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I , I
I I I I I
I I i I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I ?. I I I I
I I I I 1 I
I -I I I

I I I I 11
I I

I I
•
•
I•
•
•
•
•
•
I•
•
• 97
• Proposed Reach Two - Riffle
• $ 9s
- c 95
• 94
- w 93
Z
•
92-
91-
90
'C' Type Stream
1 ,

-
-?-I-I ?

--1--1--
i -
-

-"'-I-
`- -I- -. r r-I-?

- --- ? ? -'I-?--I--1-- --,------? -1 I-I--I -- I-- I-- ?- - -,--r-?-r- -?- --I--1-- --I--I--1--I

I fing A M!!
I
I
I I
I-
- - i - 1 - r - ; - -."'I - -1 - - - - r - I- - - I t - _ - - , - -i - - - - - - - -I - -I - - -r - 1- - I- - - -
I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I ? I ? I I I I I ?
I I I I I 1 I ? 1 I? I I I I I I ? I ? I I I I I I I I

I I I I \I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I
I I I I I I ? I I I I I I I I I ? I I I I I I I I 1 1

I I I I I I ?I I I I i I I I I 1 I I I I I I
J _ 1 _ J _
• 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
• Station (ft)
• - - - - Existing Channel Roposed Channel
•
i
•
•
I. •
•
•
• Title Proposed Typical Cross-Sections
Prepared For:
•
Project UT to Sandy Creek- Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
• Randolph County, North Carolina
r4l?l '• FCOSyStelll Date SCO Project No.
November, 2004 040611601

•

Figure
7C
99
F 98
C 97
96
_m
W 95
L "I
! 94
Q 93
92
0
Proposed Pond Tributary - Riffle
'C' Type Stream

i • • -

- -
UsOng'Ba kfull ?
.L

10 20 30 40 50 f
Station (ft)
- - - - Existing Channel Proposed Channel
Title I Proposed Typical Cross-Sections
r4ll?f Project UT to Sandy Creek - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Randolph County, North Carolina
?S?St Date SCO Project No. Figure
FxMarch 8, 2004 040611601 7 D

i

J'
"
w,
r
(
? i4 ?; g r/j -'y;?
.i. ? i ? V 1 r
i I. -
?y•? i.r

x
2f k ? ? f

s t'. 4
tt
F; eY

+
3

Photo 1: Cross-section 5 along Reach 2, looking downstream Photo 2: Cows starting to cross stream Notice degradation of right bank
G L ''
,
' s ' I L`?': m

?' y<? ` yr9.-..•j y r Ali ?y !??
?
r wr
ai a.
r r ,
n

r
_AK

. . ?V
x ?. 6 L
w
.x .?r? uw•
..?. ? SSA
?,. I ; Y M ?t .R?
4 'P
? t ?Le?i..
R ?r
41

• { R t r, 4.
>
f `?°?
,x
Photo 3: Cross-section 4 along Lower Reach 1, looking downstream Photo 4: Looking downstream Notice degradation on right bank

Title
•

. Prepared For:
r_'
Project
UP to Sandy Creek - Randolph County, North Carolina
&oyystenl Date Project Number Figure
•?- 1128105 8A
40
• T:lpn1011795019 UT sandykonvert to EEP 10-20-2004\photoswihams_fmndoc Prepared by Daren Paft c m
i.

J uE ? l'N ?( Y" ? lF y? 'y rl ? YL
•
? ,?s.
i ~? R ?- w"°'??rk '? 'P S`R?Rt.
v,+. ?Y, d Y ?j,'t-1_ i .,,'?
j
' h
p ?, ? -
? v<. 'P? xr
? ?v.? ' ,CU,k..r- tv` ',?5 .
FE
r.
, r • WA
?

- F T. -
w
r
"
,
sf
"L:
i.
7
r; 1?

i F
A
r^. ; t 6kxe ,?« n ?. ??;
ro
Photo 1: Beginning of project, two 72" CMP 's under Williams Dairy Rd. Photo 2: Looking at channel from the left floodplain
Notice lack of riparian buffer

y
3 ,

v.? t
r
e? i
1

i
*l

s r;
a

if
7
,

s„ ? ]xF

Photo 3: Looking downstream at right bank. Notice bank scour Photo 4: Looking at seep wetland in right floodplain.
Title
Prepared For'.
r_?J Project tTP to Sandy Creek - Randolph County, North Carolina

em Date Project Number Figure
•?-µ 1/28/05 813
•
•
•
T:1pn1011795019 UT Saodykonven to EEP 10-20-20041plwtos_rising_meadows doc
Prepared by Daren Pait
C:II =
COE Data Form: Routine wetland delineation
Williams Farm/Rising Meadows Farm Restoration Project
Project Site: Date: April 29, 2003
_
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT - PD&EA County: Randolph
Investigator: Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site'? Yes* No Community ID: Wetland 1
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No* Transect ID: NA
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland 1
*Area is significantly disturbed from cattle intrusion and
downeutting of the adjacent stream channel
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum indicator
1. Juncus Effusus/Spp Herbaceous FACW+ 9.
2. Carex Spp. Herbaceous FACW - OBI, 10.
3. Polygonum Spp. Herbaceous OBL 11.
4. Eleocharis_Sppy Herbaceous OBI. 12.
5. Fescue 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) >50%
Remarks: Severe disturbance from cattle.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No recorded data available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks

Field Observations: Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators:
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 to 1 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The area appears to be groundwater-fed, but was observed during a period after significant rainfall.
SOILS

® Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Vance sand y loam Drainage Class: well drained
Field Observations
® Taxonomy (subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No

Profile Description:
® Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Depth (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc.

0-3 A 10 YR 3/2 Sandy loam
3-18 BI 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 4/4 30% Loam/Clayloam
®
18-22 Bz 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/8 30% Loamy sand

® 22-30 B3 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/8 30% Sandy clay loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Y Aquic Moisture Regime Y L isted in Hydric Soils List

® X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Glayed or Low-Chroma C olors Other (explain in remarks)

® Remarks:
®
The soil profile is very disturbed from the cattle intrusion; however, it is very similar in description to Wetland 1 (Chewalca
® Loam.

'
i•
7
P
S

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
I LTN?01103608U4ASTERS OEWULD DOC

COE Data Form: Routine wetland delineation
Project Site: Williams Farn?/Risin??Meadows Farm Restoration Project Date: April 29, 2003
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT - PD&EA County: Randolph
Investigator: Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. State: North Carolina

Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes* No Community ID: Wetland 2
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)`? Yes No* Transect ID: NA
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland 2
*Area is significantly disturbed from cattle intrusion and
downcutting of the adjacent stream channel
to
VnVr- 1A11UN
Dominant Plant Snecies
1. Juncus Effiisus/Snp
2. Carex S
3. Polygonum Snp.
4. Eleocharis Sm.
5.
6.
7.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: The area is groundwater-fed located in an abandoned floodplain currently used for cattle pasture. The fringe of the
wetland are has fescue mixed in with the species listed above, and the vegetation community is severely impacted by cattle
intrusion.
4

w

N? ?{ 11
` .t -

r,Lw q ? ` _ a v4 ?:.1

it -

® HYDROLOGY
Recorded data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No recorded data available
I49
Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
Herbaceous FACW+ 9.
Herbaceous FACW - OBL 10.
Herbaceous OBI, 11.
Herbaceous OBI, 12.
13.
14.
15.
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
•
e
Field Observations:
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators:
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 to 1 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)

Remarks:
The area appears to be groundwater-fed, but was observed during a period after significant rainfall.
SOILS

Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewalca Loam Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
® Field Observations
Taxonomy (subgroup): thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No

® Profile Description:

® Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Depth (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc.
0-3 A 10 YR 3/2 Sandy loam

® 3-18 B, 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 4/4 30% Loam/Clayloam
18-22 B2 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/8 30% Loamy sand
®
22-30 B3 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/8 30% Sandy clay loam

® Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed in Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Glayed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (explain in remarks)

® Remarks:

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
HAPNM01103608'WASTERSICOE WETLD. DOC
e
'e
m
m
e
COE Data Form: Routine wetland delineation
Project Site: Williams Farm/Rising Meadows Farm Restoration Project
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT - PD&EA
Investigator: Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes* No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No*
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No
*Area is significantly disturbed from cattle intrusion and
downeutting of the adjacent stream channel
Date: April 29, 2003
County: Randolph
State: North Carolina
Community ID: Wetland 3
Transect ID: NA
Plot ID: Wetland 3
I•
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus Effiisus/Snn Herbaceous FACW+ 9.
2. Carex Spp. Herbaceous FACW - OBL 10.
3. Polygonum Sppi Herbaceous OBL 11.
4. Eleocharis Snp. Herbaceous OBL 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: The area is groundwater-fed located in an abandoned floodplain currently used for cattle pasture. The fringe of the
wetland has fescue mixed in with the species listed above, and the vegetation community is severely impacted by cattle intrusion.

HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No recorded data available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks

Field Observations: Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators:
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 to 1 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
The area appears to be groundwater-fed, but was observed during a period after significant rainfall.

SOILS

® Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewalca Loam Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
® Field Observations
® Taxonomy (subgroup): thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
® Profile Description:
® Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle Texture, Concretions,
® Depth (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structures, etc.

® 0-8 A 10 YR 3/2 Sandy loam
® 8-34 B, 10 YR 511 Clay loam

®
Hydric Soil Indicators:
® Histosol Concretions
® Histic Epipedon High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X L isted in Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Glayed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (explain in remarks)

Remarks:
® Severe disturbance from cattle

40
M WETLAND DETERI`IINATION
® Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
® Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No

® Remarks: 11
® f AMM 103608MASTERSTOEWETLD. DOC
le
Summarv of Existing Cross Sectional Data
Cross Section" Area (BKF)
(W) Width
(ft) Width/Depth
Ratio Entrenchment
Ratio Bank Ht.
Ratio Stream
Type
XS1 12.3 8.7 6.2 2.8 1.5 E (going to G
XS2 20.5 14.8 10.6 8.8 1.2 E
XS3 17.5 12.4 8.7 14.6 1.3 E
XS4 21.2 18.6 16.3 2.4 1.7 C (going to F
XS5 33.1 14.4 14.4 9.7 1.6 E going to G
XS6 3.3 4.7 4.7 15.9 1.6 E
-bee t-figure j for cross section locations
XS 1
Upper Reach One
Rising Meadows Farm, Randolph County
Survev Data
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 6.32 102.36
8 7.31 101.37
13 7.46 101.22
21 7.13 101.55
32 7.13 101.55
39 7.4 101.28
42.5 7.69 100.99
LTOB 43.9 8.09 100.59
44.3 8.24 100.44
LEW 45.1 10.72 97.96
TW 45.6 11.11 97.57
47 11.11 97.57
49 10.95 97.73
REW 50.8 10.69 97.99
51.2 10.04 98.64
52.5 9.8 98.88
RBKF 53.3 9.18 99.5
RTOB 53.6 8.15 100.53
56 7.75 100.93
59 7.36 101.32
62 6.69 101.99
72 6.38 102.3

z

Photo of X S1 Looking Upstream
Bankfull Summary Data
Area BKF 12.3 Entrenchment 2.8
Width BKF 8.7 Stream Type E (going to G)
Max Depth 1.9 Bank Ht Ratio 1.5
Mean Depth 1.4 Width FPA 24
W/D 6.2 Slope (%) 0.41
XS1
103

102
-
F ood rone Elev Lion
V- 101
c
0
a
100
w
z

99

98

97

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (ft)
XS2
Upper Reach One
Rising Meadows Farm, Randolph County

Survev Data
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 5.43 101.92
7 6.15 101.2
14 6.5 100.85
17.5 7.06 100.29
19.5 7.4 99.95
22.5 7.79 99.56
23.8 8.14 99.21
LBKF 24.6 8.13 99.22
25.2 8.99 98.36
LEW 25.5 9.82 97.53
TW 26.3 10.19 97.16
28 10.12 97.23
REW 30.5 9.79 97.56
32 9.52 97.83
34.5 9.31 98.04
36.6 8.52 98.83
RBKF 37.7 7.91 99.44
RTOB 38.5 7.56 99.79
41 7.11 100.24
46 6.98 100.37
60, 6.79 100.56
70 7 100.35

F?

f
" , ??•tr f
....
x ,

Photo of XS2 looking downstream
Bankfull Summarv Data
Area BKF 20.5 Entrenchment 8.8
Width BKF 14.8 Stream Type E
Max Depth 2.3 Bank Ht Ratio 1.2
Mean Depth 1.4 Width FPA 130
W/D 10.6 Slope (%) 0.2
XS2
103
-

102

101

0
M 100
0 Bankfull
w
z 99
-
m
< 98
-

97

96

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (ft)
XS3
Upper Reach One
Rising Meadows Farm, Randolph County
Survev Data
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 5.39 97.01
10 5.64 96.76
20 5.76 96.64
LTOB 25 5.83 96.57
LBKF 27.2 6.64 95.76
27.5 7.25 95.15
28.5 7.66 94.74
28.6 7.74 94.66
29.4 8.07 94.33
30.1 8.16 94.24
30.5 8.38 94.02
LEW 30.8 8.6 93.8
31 8.96 93.44
TW 32.7 9.46 92.94
34 8.66 93.74
REW 34.7 8.54 93.86
36.3 7.98 94.42
36.8 7.45 94.95
38 6.89 95.51
40 6.57 95.83
RBKF 41.5 5.78 96.62
44 5.56 96.84
RTOB 48.5 4.94 97.46
52 4.52 97.88
58 4.32 98.08
62 3.96 98.44
Bankfull Summarv Data
Area BKF 17.5 Entrenchment 14.6
Width BKF 12.4 Stream Type E
Max Depth 2.8 Bank Ht Ratio 1.3
Mean Depth 1.4 Width FPA 180
W/D 8.7 Slope (%) 1.89
XS3
99-

98- Floodprone Ele vation

i 97 _

C
0
p

96 -

nnkfifll -
>
-
m
w
r 95
94 -
93
92
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (ft)
Photo of XS3 looking downstream
r
Survey Data
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 6.26 98.11
7 6.58 97.79
10 6.77 97.6
13 7.12 97.25
16 7.64 96.73
19 8.16 96.21
21 8.54 95.83
23 8.98 95.39
25 9.37 95
28 9.4 94.97
31 9.55 94.82
33 9.78 94.59
LEW 34.9 9.95 94.42
36 10.49 93.88
TW 37.5 10.68 93.69
38 10.63 93.74
REW 38.7 10.44 93.93
39.1 8.45 95.92
39.6 8.09 96.28
39.9 7.96 96.41
40.2 6.86 97.51
44 6.3 98.07
47 6.25 98.12
•
Bankfull Summary Data
Area KF 21.2 Entrenchment 2.4
BKF 18.6 Stream T e C oin to F
E
th 2.2 Bank Ht Ratio 1.7
e th 1.1 Width FPA 45
16.3 Slope (%) 0.45
XS4
XS4
Lower Reach One
Williams Farm, Randolph County
5 10 15 20 25
Station (ft)
30 35 40 45 50
•
•
•
•
Photo of XS4 looking downstream
Survey Data
XS5
Reach Two
Williams Farm, Randolph County
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 3.98 96.02
4 4.06 95.94
8 3.97 96.03
10 4.36 95.64
11 4.6 95.4
12 4.82 95.18
LTOB 13.5 5.47 94.53
LBKF 15 6.32 93.68
15.3 7.22 92.78
15.8 8 92
LEW 16.5 8.39 91.61
17.67 9.21 90.79
TW 19 9.37 90.63
21 9.26 90.74
24 9.09 90.91
26.8 8.41 91.59
28.4 7.12 92.88
29 6.78 93.22
RBKF 29.8 5.82 94.18
31 5.22 94.78
32.4 4.56 95.44
35 4.31 95.69
39 4.04 95.96
45 4.2 95.8

Bankfull Summary Data
Area BKF 33.1 Entrenchment 9.7
Width BKF 14.4 Stream Type E (going to G
Max Depth 3.1 Bank Ht Ratio 1.6
Mean Depth 2.3 Width FPA 140
W/D 6.3 Slope (%) 0.43
XS5
98
97 loodprone levation
9640
p 95 ---
cc
w 94
Z
93
a 92
004
91
90
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Station (ft)
J
I
Photo of XS5 looking downstream
XS6
Pond Tributary
Williams Farm, Randolph County
Survev Data
Notes Distance FS Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft)
0 2.62 97.38
4 2.95 97.05
8 3.15 96.85
12 3.52 96.48
18 3.62 96.38
LTOB 21.7 4.08 95.92
LBKF 23.3 4.81 95.19
23.6 5.24 94.76
24.4 5.57 94.43
LEW 24.9 6.66 93.34
TW 25.7 6.99 93.01
REW 26.1 6.64 93.36
26.3 5.75 94.25
27.4 5.49 94.51
RBKF 28.3 5.21 94.79
28.8 5.09 94.91
29.5 4.86 95.14
30.8 4.5 95.5
33 4.17 95.83
37 4.03 95.97
43 4.45 95.55
48 4.76 95.24
Bankfull Summary Data
Area BKF 3.3 Entrenchment 15.9
Width BKF 4.7 Stream Type E
Max Depth 1.8 Bank Ht Ratio 1.6
Mean Depth 0.7 Width FPA 75
W/D 6.7 Slope (%) 0.86
XS6
98-

97
5
.
97 -
loodprone Elevatio n
96.5
96
0
0
95
5
.
w 95
z
94
5
_
.
94
93
5
.
93
-
92
5
.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Photo of XS6 looking upstream

MORPHOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS
Restoration Site: Williams Farm and Rising Meadows Fans
Nearest USGS Station: USGS Station 0210166029, Rocky River at SR 1300, Crutchfield Crossroads. NC
Reference Reach: Tributary to Sandy Creek
Upper Reach One Upper Reach One Lower Reach One Lower Reach One Reach Two Reach Two
VARIABLES Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
1. Stream Type
I fRosoen) Incised E5 C4 C4 C4 Incised E5 C4
2. Drai a Area
I mile
(sti 0.8 0.8 0.80 0.8 4.20 42
3. .
Bankfull Width Mean: 14.8 Mean: 17.3 Mean:
R 18.6 Mean:
Ran
e: 17.6 Mean:
Range: 14.4 Mean:
e: 24.5
11
4. (W.)
Bankfull Mean Range: e:
Mean: 1.4 Range:
Mean: 12 ange :
Mean: 1.1 g
Mean: 1.2 Mean: 2.3 Mean: 1.6
depth (d,p) Ra e: Rang.. Range e: Ra e: Range : RaNe:
5. WidttJD hRatio Mean: 10.6 Mean: 15.0 Mean: 16.9 Mean: 14.9 Mean: 6.3 Mean: 15.0
(W?/dsu) Ra e: Ra e: e: Range: Range :
6. Bankfull cross-sectional Mean: 20.5 Mean: 20.0 Mean: 21.2 Mean: 20.7 Mean: 33.1 Mean: 40.0

7. Area Abk

Bankfuti Mean Velocity' R e:

Mean:

1.9 Range:

Mean:

3.6 Range:

3.1
Range-
Mean:

2.6
Range:
Mean:

3.6
Ra e:
Mean:

32
(Vya) Range: Range: Range: Range, Range.
8. Bankfull Discharge, ds Mean: 39.0 Mean: 72.0 65.7 Mean: 53.8 Mean: 119.2 Mean: 128.0

9. (Q,„)
Bankfull Mulmum De h

(d
) Range:
Me
an:

Ra e:

2.3 Range:

Mean:

Range:

1.6 q

2.2 R e:

Mean:

1.6 Ra e

Mean:

3.1 Range:

Mean:
Range:

2.3
10. _.
Max d,ldur Mean: 1.5 Mean: 1.4 2.0 Mean:
R 1.4 Mean:
Range: 1.3 Mean:
Range: 1.4

11.
ratio
Low Bank M ' M to max
Range:
Mean:
1.1
Range:
Mean:
1.0 Re
Mean:
1.7
ange:
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
R
1.5
Mean:
Ra e:
1.0
drwratb Ra e: Range: Range: Range:
: ange: 200
0
12. Width of Flood Prone Mean: 130.0 Mean: 130.0 Mean: 45.0 Mean 80.0 Mean: 140.0 Mean: .
Area (W
) e: Ra e: Ra e: Ra Range: Range:
13. ,,,
Emrerx]tmred Ratio Mean: 8.8 Mean: 7.5 Mean: 2.4 Mean: 4.5 Mean: 9.7 Mean:
R 82
(W_Mw) Re e: Range: Range: R e: Range: ange:
14. Meander Length Mean: 80.0 Mean: 190.0 Mean: 80.0 Mean: 194.0 Mean: 100.0 Mean; 270.0
(Lm) Range: Range: 156.0 242 R e: Range: 158.0 246 Ra e: e: 221.0 343
15. Ratio of Meander L to Mean: 5.4 Mean: 11.0 Mean: 4.3 Mean:
R
: 11.0 Mean:
Range: 6.9 Mean:
R e: 11.0
16. Bankfull Width (L,/Wey)
Radius of Curvature Range:
mean: 30.0 Range:
Mean: 51.9 Range:
Mean: 13.3 ange
Mean:
R 52.8 Mean:
Ran
e : 18.8 Mean:
Ra e: 73.5
17. (R,)
Ratio of Radius of Curvature Range:
Mean: 2.0 Range:
Mean: 3.0 Range:
Mean: 0.7 an e:
Mean: 3.0 g
Mean: 1.3 Mean:
Ran
e: 3.0
Ito Bankfull Width (R W.) Range:: Range: Range: Range: Ranoe: g 81
18. Belt Width Mean: 13.0 Mean: 57 Mean: 37.0 Mean: 58 Mean: 51.0 Mean:
(Wu) Range:: Range: Range: Range: Ra e: Range:
19. Meander Width Ratio Mean: 0.9 Mean: 3.3 Mean: 2.0 Mean: 3.3 Mean: 3.5 Mean: 3.3
20. (W.fW-)
Sinuo ' k Range::
Mean: 1.0 Range:
Mean: 1.3 Range:
Mean: 1.2 Range'
Mean: 1.3 Re e:
Mean: 1.1 1.2
21. Stream L / Vail L
Valley Sbpe (Sv ) e:
Mean: 0.0082 Range:
Mean: 0.0082 Range::
Mean: 0.0040 Range:
Mean: 0.0040 Ra e:
Mean: 0.0019 K 0.0019
Ra e:
Mean: 0.0020 Range:
Mean: 0.0063 Range:
Mean: 0.0045 Ra e:
Mean: 0.0031 Ra e
Mean: 0.0043 0.0016

fVft
R e:
Range:
Ra e:
Range
Ra e: Re
Riffle Sb Mean: 0.0114 Mean: 0.0084 Mean: 0.0114 Mean: 0.(11167 Mean: 0.0100 0.0021
24. (S,.)

Ratio of Riffle Slo to Av . Range.

Mean:

5.700 Range.

Mean

1.328 Range:

Mean:

2.533 Range:

Mean:
R e:

1.328 Range:

Mean:
Range:

2.326
Range:
Maan:

1.328
[ Slope (S„„/S
lope Pool S Ra e:
Mean: 0.0000 Range:
Mean: 0.0026 Ra e:
Mean: 0.0019 Mean:
R 0.0012 Mean:
Range: 0.0000
I Mean:
e 0.0006
(S„.)
Ratio of Pool Slo a to A . R e:
Mean: 0.0 Range
Mean: 0.4 Range:
Mean: 0.4 a e:
Mean: 0.4 .
Mean: 0.0 Mean: 0.4
Slope (S,,, S_) Ra e: nge Range: Ra e 4
9
Maximum Pool Mean: 3.5 Mean: 3.5 Mean: 4.1 Mean: 3.5 Mean: 3.7 Mean: .
. Depth (d,m,) Range: Range: 2.3 4.6 Range: Ra e: 2.4 4.7 Range : Ra e: 3.3 6.52
28. Ratio of Pool Depth to Av
Depth (d
dd ) Mean:
Range: 2.5 Mean:
Range: 3.0 Mean:
Rage: 3.7 Mean:
nge 3.0 Mean:

Range: 1.6 Mean:

Range: 3.0
29 ,,
Pool Width Mean: WA` Mean: 26.0 Mean: 15.4 26.4 Mean: 18.8 Mean: 36.8
. (W
xy) Range: Range Range:
9 29.9
Range:
Range:
30. „
Ratio of Pool Width to Mean: WA' Mean: 7.5 Mean: 0.8 1.5 Mean:
Range: 1.3 Mean:
Rang
Bankfull Witllh (W,,,/Wya)
Pool Area Range:
Mean: WA' Range:
Mean: 20.0 ange:
Mean: 35.0 r
20.7 Mean: 44.0 Mean: 40.0

31. (A,m)
Ratio 0Pool Area to Range:
Mean:
WA' Range:
Mean:
1.0 Range.
Mean:
1.7
1.0 a e
Mean:
1.3 Range:
Mean:
1.0
Bankfull r(A„fAya) Range: Ra e Range: 171 Range
Mean: 62
0 Mean: 154
32 . Pool to Pool S ad Mean: 65.0 Mean: 109 Mean: 62.0 Range: . Range:
33 . Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing nge
Ra
Mean: 4.4 Range
Mean: 6.3 Range.
Mean: 3.3 Mean: 6.3 Mean: 4.3 Mean: 6.3
[o Bankfull Witlih (pp/WbkQ Ra e: Ra e:
Rang,
Ra e: Range.
Ra e:
No oiscema0!e cnaractensncs ooserveo cunrg survey

MORPHOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS (cont.)
Restoration Site: Williams Farm and Rising Meadows Farts
Nearest USGS Station: USGS Station 0210166029, Rocky River at SR 1300, Crutchfield Crossroads. NC
Reference Reach: Tributary to Sandy Credo
VARIABLES Pond Tributary
Existing Pond Tributary
Proposed Tributary
Reference Ruch Creek
to Sa Creek Rural Piedmont Regional
Curves and Regime Equations
1. Stream T
Ro en Incised ES C4 E4 E
2. Drai a Area
. mile 0.05 0.05 0.97 0.80
3. Bankfull Width Mean: 4.7 Mean: 7.3 Mean: 12.1 Mean: 10.8
(War) Range: Range: Range: Range:
4. Bankfull Mean Mean: 0.7 Mean: 0.5 Mean: 1.4 Mean: 1.4
depth (de) Range: Range: F. e: Range-
5.. WidUgDepth Ratio Mean: 6.7 Mean: 152 Mean: 6.6 Mean: 7.7
(W„ /de.) Range: Rave- Range:
6. Bankfull cross-sectional Mean: 3.3 Mean: 3.5 Mean: 17.3 Mean: 18.4
Area Abk e: Range: e: Range:
7. l Me
Bankfulan V Mean: 2.2 Mean: 15 Mean: Mean: 4.1
(V-) Range: e: R e: Range:
8. Bankfull Discharge. ds Mean: 7.3 Mean: 12.3 Mean: 0.0 Mean: 75.8
(Qu) Ra e: Range: Re e: Range:
9. Bankfull Maximum Depth Mean: 1.8 Mean: 0.7 Mean: 2.1 Mean: WA
(d,,,) Ra e: Range: Range: Ra e:
10. Max d,/d_ Mean: 2.6 Mean: 1.4 Mean: 1.5 Mean: WA
ratio Ra e: Range: Ra e: Range:
11. Low Bank H M to max Mean: 1.6 Mean: 1.0 Mean: Mean: NIA
d„u ratio Range : Range: Range: Range:
12. Width of Flood Prone Mean: 75.0 Mean: 180.0 Mean: 80.0 Mean: N/A
Area (Wpd Range: Range: Range: Range:
U. Entrenchment Ratio Mean: 16.0 Mean: 24.7 Mean: 8.6 Mean: WA
wk.iw.) R e: R e: Range: Range:
14. Meander Length Mean: WA' Mean: 80.0 Mean: 77.0 Mean: 121.0
(L„) R e: Ra e: 88.0 102 Range: Ra e:
15. Ratio of Meander Lenath to Mean: WA' Mean: 11.0 Mean: 6.4 Mean: 11.2
Bankfull Width (L„/W_) Range: Re e: _ Range:
16. Radius of Curvature Mean: WA' Mean: 21.9 Mean: 26.0 Mean: 27.5
(Rd Range: Range: Range:
17. Ratio of Radius of Curvature Mean: WA' Mean: 3.0 Mean: 2.1 Mean: 2.5
to Bankfull Width (R?W,a) Range: Range: Range: Range:
18. Belt Width Mean: 8.0 Mean: 24.0 Mean: 40.0 Mean: WA
(Wen) Range: I- R e: I Range: Range:
19. Meander Width Ratio Mean: 1.7 Mean: 3.3 Mean: 3.3 Mean: WA
(We./Wea) Range: Ra e: Barge: Range:
20. Sinuos k Mean: 1.0 Mean: 1.3 Mean: 1.4 Mean: WA
Stream L th I Valle Lengl Range: Range: Range: Range:
21. Valley Slope (Sv. ) Mean: 0.0161 Mean: 0.0161 Mean: 0.0040 Mean: WA
fVft Range: Range: Range: Range :
22 Ave a Stream Slope Mean: 0.0086 Mean: 0.0124 Mean: 0.0058 Mean: WA
fUft Range: Range: Range:
23. . Riffle Slope Mean: 0.0086 Mean: 0.0165 Mean: 0.0077 Mean: WA
(S,.) Range: Ra e: Range: Range:
24. Ratio of Riffle Slope to Avg. Mean: 1.000 Mean: 1.328 Mean: 1.328 Mean: WA
Slope(5,.../S„) Range: Ra e: Range: Range:
25. Pool Slope Mean: WA' Mean: 0.0050 Mean: 0.0026 Mean: WA
(5?1 Range: Range: Ra e: Ra e:
26. Ratio of Pool Slope to Avg. Mean: WA' Mean: 0.4 Mean: 0.4 Mean: WA
Slope (S,./S4 Range: Range: Range: Range:
27. Maximum Pool Mean: WA' Mean: 1.4 Mean: 2.9 Mean: WA
Depth (d.) Range: Ra e: 1.0 1.9 f me: Range:
28. Ratio of Poo( Depth to Av . Mean: WA' Mean: 3.0 Mean: 2.1 Mean: WA
Depth (d,_Jd ) Range: Range: Ra e: Range:
29. Pool Width Mean: WA' Mean: 11.0 Mean: 9.6 Mean: WA
(W-) Range: Range: 9.5 12.4 Rae. Range:
30. Ratio of Pool Width to Mean: WA' Mean: 1.5 Mean: 0.8 Mean: NIA
Bankfull Width (Wv /Ww) Range: Range: Range: Range:
Pont Area Mean: WA' Mean: 3.5 Mean: Mean: WA
(Ap.d Range: Range: Range: Range:
31. Ratio of Pool Area to Mean: WA' Mean: 1.0 Mean: 0.0 Mean: WA
Bankfull Area (A_/Aee) Range: Range: Range: Range:
32. Pool to Pool S .a Mean: WA' Mean: 46.0 Mean: 75.0 Mean: N/A
Range: Range: Range: Range:
33. Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing Mean: WA' Mean: 6.3 Mean: 6.2 Mean: NIA
to Bankfull Witlth (p-p/Wbkf) Range: Ran e: R e: Ra e:
- rvo oiscemaune cnara ensecs coserveo ounng survey
w
•
i •
III •
I•
•
I•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
II •
•
I?
1
I,
•
•
•
•
•
•
Memorandum of Meeting Minutes
etland Mitigation for the Unnamed Tributary to Sandy Creek
Stream and W
(Williams Farm T P#U-2524WM Meadows Farm Tracts)
Agency Field Review Meeting
Memorandum
To: Gene Nocerino - NCDOT
From: Daren Pait - Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Date: May 22, 2003
Subject: Williams Property, Notes from May 21, 2003 meeting
A meeting was held on site today with Mrs. Williams and her two sons to
discuss the size of the proposed conservation easement. Those in attendance
were: Jeanette Williams, Rick Williams, Greg Williams, Gene Nocerino - NC
Department of Transportation, Barton Roberson - Randolph County Soil and
Water Conservation, Will Wilhelm - Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA), and
Daren Pait - KHA. The following topics were discussed:
• The size of the proposed conservation easement was discussed. After
viewing a conceptual plan of the proposed restored channel and easement
the Williams agreed that the proposed easement was acceptable.
• Rick had concerns over access to the remaining pasture from the
neighboring properties. He wanted to make sure that the pasture could
be accessed from both the Faye and Henry properties to ensure the
remaining pasture was not isolated if the property was sold in the future.
Access from the Henry property to the Williams pasture was discussed.
Rick stated that any access roads or crossings should be at least 25 ft
wide. It was discussed that there needs to be enough room between the
easement and Old Liberty Rd. to provide access to the pasture from the
Henry property. A ford crossing to provide access to the Faye property
was also discussed. Greg stated that the preferable location for the
crossing is where the old crossing was located (immediately downstream
of the confluence of the pond tributary with the channel).
• Gene asked Mrs. Williams if they were ready to proceed with the project
and Rick stated that it now depends on the amount of compensation for
the easement. The next step is for Right-of-Way to contact the Williams
to negotiate the easement purchase price. Barton Roberson mentioned
combining "Continuous Conservation Reserve Program" funds with
NCDOT's funds to reach an agreeable amount of compensation. Mr.
Roberson said he will determine if that is possible and will contact Gene
to let him know.
At the end of the meeting the Williams stated they were ready to continue with the
project providing they reach an agreeable price for the easement with NCDOT.
II
Some attendees expressed concern over tl
Farm that is just downstream of the Rising
of stream (125 ft. +/-) has several large trc
appear relatively stable although slightly i
appear stable, based on a Rosgen stream c
over-widened C channel (almost F chann(
incised C channel with bank height ratios
also unstable as a result of the steeper slol
is confirmed by sediment transport calcu.1
the channel bed is degrading and will con
discussing this portion of the stream it wa
the stream or removing the trees from one
restoration design for the stream system o
this will be considered during the design l
the channel bed up to reconnect the strear,
without relocating the channel. This will
keeping the majority of trees that line this
upper portion of this reach immediately d
channel reshaping which should be kept b
area is not recommended due to the overa
e reach of channel on the Williams
Meadows Farm fence line. This reach
es along its bank and some portions
icised. While the banks in this area
lassification this reach is an incised and
1) transitioning downstream to an
Df 1.7. The stream bed in this reach is
e combined with the high banks. This
tions for this reach. This indicates that
inue to degrade if left alone. While
reiterated that relocating a portion of
bank may be necessary to complete
i the Williams Farm. Alternatives to
hase. A possible alternative is to bring
with its floodplain within this reach
•esult in priority I restoration while
section of the channel in place. The
)wnstream of the fence line will require
a minimum. Doing nothing in this
1 stream profile and the proposed
priority 1 restoration approach.
Mr. Jordan discussed adding information to the mitigation plan regarding site
preparation for planting and more details on tilling, herbicide use, etc. The plan
should ensure the eradication of fescue within the conservation easement.
Mr. Thomas requested that the existing wetland boundaries be defined using soils
data collected during field evaluations. This should be done to ensure proper
credits are given for proposed wetland restoration vs. wetland creation. Wetland
delineation forms are included as Appendi
There was some confusion among attende
describing the wetland restoration areas.
"rehabilitation" describe the two types of
Corps of Engineers "Regulatory Guidance
2002. The following excerpt from page 4
terminology.
x C in the document.
es as to the terminology used in
The terms "re-establishment" and
restoration as presented in the US Army
Letter" No. 02-2 dated December 24,
of that document describes the
2. Restoration: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or
biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural or
historic functions to a former or degraded wetland. For the purpose of
tracking net gains in wetland acres, restoration is divided into:
a.) Re-establishment: The manipulation of the physical,
chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of
returning natural or historic functions to a former wetland. Re-
establishment results in rebuilding a former wetland and results
in a gain in wetland acres.
b.) Rehabilitation: The manipulation of the physical, chemical,
or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing
natural or historic functions of a degraded wetland.
Rehabilitation results in a gain in wetland function but does not
result in a gain in wetland acres.
• Mr. Nocerino was given an extra copy of the mitigation plan to deliver to Travis
Wilson. Mr. Nocerino will also send a copy of the mussel survey report
completed for this site by NCDOT to all attendees who requested it.
• It was requested by Mr. Nocerino that the agencies provide comments on the
mitigation plan document to him within 30 days.
These minutes of the on-site meeting represent KHA's understanding of the issues
discussed. Please review these minutes carefully, and advise of any corrections or
additions within 30 days of the date below.
Daren Pait, EI
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
November 19, 2003
T:\pn\0 1 1 700022\O1_admin\Cotrespondence\2003-11-19 Meeting Minutes for On-Site Agency Visit.doc
os stem
. e? elit
PROGRAM
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Cyndi Karoly RE @ 11 0df p
FROM: Jeff Jurek FEB 1 7 2005
DENR -WATER QUAL
SUBJECT: Permit Application- East Tarboro Canal WTI.ANOSAND3TORMWA?ERITYhCH
DATE: February 16, 2005
Attached for your review are 2 restoration plans (1 sent to Winston-Salem Regional Office) for
East Tarboro stream restoration project in Edgecombe County. Please feel free to call me with
any questions regarding this plan (715-1157).
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Attachment: Restoration Plan (2 originals)
'LS' QYG ... 'k ! 4J Yl?0?lKg 0 halo N D
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 /

STA 10+00 TO STA 32+17 (MAIN CHANNEL)
STA 110+00 TO STA 113+57 (POND TRIBUTARY)
RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE CONSTRUCTION NO.: 040611601
NC-EEP CONTACT: JEFF JUREK [phone]
D
FEB 1 7 2005
DENR - WATER DUALITY
WETLANDS AND SToRmwATt-R BRANck
INDEX OF SHEETS
SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION
a
co
0
N
0
M
'i
3
v
d
w
O
U
(7
0
ti
O
Ln
rn
n
C:
WILLIAMS FARM & RISING MEADOWS FARM TRACTS
STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT
SURVEY PREPARED Br
ESP Associates, PA
981 TIUNffY ROAD
RALEIGH, NC SAO,
Y
LOCATION MAP
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUC20N
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF. CUEHE -- PROJECT:
Kimley-Horn NC-EEP
UT TO SANDY (;REEK
? and Associates, Inc. TITLE.
lld! eoam-l togelhv .IU fhe c-nPlf -d F'n-td h.di. - - bW-t of emu. b M-ded W) ra the yedRC - -a cg t covey sHE
tr
t
a .nVS n w a Re d - .tip, - ma doom-t ita-t wRt- wth iro -e WOPtati- by rm?rR- -a A-octa P.O. BOX 33088 - PALE 01K NORTH CAROLM 2763E-1088 .rncm aona na 114=95019
inc. ? .e?-°PPnr m' d A9oaota m? ?P c KMy x- -a n -.:oa PHOPE- NO 877-2000 FAX: [phone]
CL
1 COVER SHEET
2 KEY SHEET
3 EASEMENT AND BUFFER WIDTHS
4 VEGETATION NOTES
5 TYPICAL SECTIONS
6A-6D DETAILS
S1-S3 SITE PLAN
P1 STREAM PROFILES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
WAi ":?•
0 S41-
G
a
00
M
00
rl
3
v
W
2
}N
W
Y
N
i
(0
0
O
to
ON
n
0
r-
a
lhh
fo
PREPARED IN NE OMCE OF.
Kimley-Horn
- a-R and Associates, Inc.
,d l ao?t.a n..in, o, an ?-t of ..?... is Mama my fa th =y
PaP?. and dot
aoa.oa r .inmt .dna a mwoim and adaptation ny a ? and A-dotn P.O. BOX 93088 - RALHGK NORTH CAROLINA V636-30M
7004 PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
NC-?
KEY SHEET

70
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
UT TO SANDY CREEK
011795019
a
N
O
O1
O
O
N
O
M
r-1
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF:
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
rtly for th. �.eifk q.pma -d dist
rt.tion ey +.r-�r. me Awodata P.O. BOX 33068 — RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLNA 27636-3068
PHONE [phone] FAX- [phone]
TITLE:
EASEMENT AND BUFFER WIDTHS
FEBQUALM
17 2005
DEN A STER BRw
GRAPHIC SCALE
100 0 50 100 200
IN FUT> PRELIMINARY
[NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
iiPot/ru IPROJECT:
JK
UT TO SANDY CREEK
0l1 �t 3
011795019

Buffer zones
Riparian Buffer- Planted easement area with bare root vegetation. Little or no maintenance except for hazard reduction to
dicroscd or dying treas and shrubs.
Grass Filter Strip-Areas adjacent to fence to be maintained in herbaceous cover.
BARE ROOT VEGETATION:
I.Gatenl: in order to establish vegetation in restoration areas, such m
banttull benches and slopes, baraoot and herbaceous vegetation will be
planted w shown on the plans or required in the Special Conditions.
2Maoermh
a) Initial vegetation material will be provided bythe contractor. The contractor -
is responsible for correctly trundling; and ma ntmnmg vegetation meterbL
b) Vegetation material will consist ofbare motttec andlor shrubs. Vegelatimto be inelelkd in area, sbowmon
the plan labeled 'Riparian Buffer" includes, but is run limited to the following:
RIPARIAN BUFFER TREESISHRUBS
Treesl
Betula nigm (river bath)'
Ca<yn co d fo m (bittemmhctmy)
Cmye owm (shagbark hickory)
CaM laevigma (mgarbeay)
J)ioapyrw svguafmm (P-aa)
Fo¢inurpanryl-io. (groenaah)a
Achuss rug- (black -alard)
L:mdeaeron,WiWina (yeBwwpoplar)
A5- *,l- (bbes)
Plaanr ucademalu (ryemae)-
Prwanroaa (blert cherry)
!?mss alba (wbia oak)
Qaafalamn.er./drum (Sombantedaak)
Quermajalmm ver.pggada*W- (chanybaakak)*
Qaeoa nyma (gyp wake
Quemar.tidrasom (swamp cbemmawk)*
Q.- afgm (water ark)'
Quertwphellm (willow oak)*
Queau rubs (Norman rd oak)
Qaemaa rraaamdn (Mustard ak)*
Sdx nfgrn (blecir willow)
.Use in wetted enhancement, amacor mention
area
Shrubal
Acajk-k run (aatthm suger mssple)
Aerahur06 lea Osimedbnakeye)
Abuse serrumm (tag eIda)-
Antdamhierarbmm (sefvtcebary)
Amain arb.4blia (red chakellary)*
Ammon oddoha (comma pawpaw)
Ca Pnsur arelcdma (im6NOd)
Com fawfgam (mgarbeay)
Cvha&xduar oaidmewhr (roa)*
CwmadsmujoBa (alternate leaf dogwood)
Cmaaa,m..ar (silky dogwood)*
Cornett (swamp dogwood)*
Cory4m aaa@am (hazel-nut)
Hawmaadm vmglram (w96-6ad)
Hi6fmtFawuIermr (mad s m aUuw)*
Bader (deciduous bony)
Baveadlam (winter be")
ton vwgr.im (Vbgmm wi0mr)
farodnfaidmfr (dogaobble)
Lkdaa baanw (spiabudr)
MageoBa agxrala (umbrella reo)
fforur ratan (red mabary)
Alpia mrJen (was myrtle)
Bladda.mwpafdJwmmidw (wild axles)
RMdad-&tse vieaaf (swamp ad m)*
Roes pahrmm (fwanp rote)'
Sa.baaaammdarrir (eldabary)-
SWA)des difolia (baddamm)
Sloe0ocaa daaar a (:ones leap
Ouse in evethad enaanraomt, restoration, or aation too
Welland TREES/SHRURS
Wetlands which-h,M ahmcemmyrmNamoa, c?r i areawiflbepbnWwhhabovespecimmdaredrmgoltd
fawehduaa Thme willbepkmdinthessmem umerowimI M areas.
3.Co poutim:
The coopoudoo of&e r4- a Wffa uemhhmbwa be 70 %treaad 30%>laaba from Bd ebose of
riprtimboffiaueahhoba Atleadaevan d'M tree: Can is withmmoaethan25 %mdmtknd=5%
of any me species.
At knteight differm shrub species with no more than 25 % and not lea than 5% ofany one q=im.
4Ympmtioar
a) planning shall take place in winter (November -March). Immediately fiohawugdelivery to the projax she,
all pkma with ban roots, if notpromptly planed, shell be henkGin in constantly moist soil a sawdust in an
acceptable m®a mmaipmdkg to geoerany accepted horticultural praclsoiss.
b) While plena with here roots are being transported to and from bedmg-
in beds, ware being distributed m planting beds, or are awaiting planting
after distribution, the contractor shall protect me plants from drying out by
maw of wet canvas, burlap, or straw, or by otbameans acceptable to
Engmem?roject Manager and eppapum to weather condmome and the
length of time the mots will remain out ofthe ground.
5.in mlladan:
a) Soil in the area of shrub and tree plantings shall be loosened to a depth of at )east 5 inches.
b)Bare root vegetation may be planted in hole made by a mattock, dibble, planting bar, or other means
approved by Engineer/Project Manager. Rootstock shall be plaid in a vertical position with the
root collar approximately Yes inch below the soil surface. The planting trench or bole shall be deep
and wide enough to permit the roots to spread out and down without J-rooting. The plant stem shall
remain upright.
c) Soil shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation and tamped around the shrub or tree firmly
to eliminate air pockets.
d) The space guidelines of rated shrubs and tree will be 10 feet bmreen rows an ti-font caters within rows.
Shrub and Tree Transplants
I.GeoaaL Vegetation to be aanplemed will be identified by the EagmeedPmjem Manager. Shrub and need line
tam 3 inches in diameter shall be salvaged onshe in area designated for construction, access area, and
other art= that will necessarily be disturbed.
2.Ima0atkm
a) Transplanted vegetation shall carefully be excavated with rootballs and surrounding soil remaining
intact. Care shall be given not to rip limbs or bark from the shrub and tree transplants, Vegetation
should be transplanted immediately, if possible. Otherwise, cmWlar td vegetation shall be
carefully transported to designated stockpile areas and heeled in in constantly moist soil or sawdust
in an acceptable mama appropriate to weather or seasonal conditions. The solidity oftheplaota
shall be carefully preserved
b)lnstallation of shrub and tree transplants shall be located in designated areas along the sttearn bank
above banldull elevation or in Roodplain restoration areas as directed by EoginemTrojea Manager.
Soil m the area of vegetation transplants shall be loosened to a depth of at least I fo(1. ]bill is only
necessary on compacted aril. Transplants shall be replanted to the same depth as they were
orignallygrowing. The planting trench or hole shall be deep and wide enough to pamat the roots
to spread out and down without J-rooting The plant stem shall remain upright
c) Soil shall be replaced around the transplanted vegetation and tamped around the shrub or tree firmly
to eliminate air pockets.
d) Spacing of vegetation transplants will be determined once by the Engineer/ Project Manager.
PERMANENT SEEDING SPECIFICATIONS
Permanent siding will be used in combination with woody plantings an the sip--slope fide oflhe riparne area ad down
to the baoNull elevation. Permanent feeding will occ rut conjunction with temporary ceding whaeappdicable. This
mixture will also be used in any tasiuid (neat not immdad)riparian same. that has been disturbed by coosmxbadl, is
designated as aedand andlm riparian enhancement, m as directed by FngmaalPmjed Manage. This mdaaae shall be
planted in late fall in combination with the temporary feeding operation and woody pleat installations, Seeding should be
done evenly ova the area using a mechanical or hand seed'. A drag should be used to cmathe feed with an mete than %
inch of soils. Where a drag amot safety beuhliud, the Ncdaha tai be covacd by badnking.
On site where equipment em be operated safely, the seedbed shall beadegadely lowered Dietin g maybeorodedin
arena where andts completed Steep banks my regmm roughening, either by hand scadifying or by equipment depending
on site conditions. Enginced/Pmject Manager will determine condition needs coma If feeding a don: immediately
following construction. seedbed prep-ors maynotbe Taloned cacept on compacted, polished car freshly cut areal. If
permanent seeding is performed in conjunction with temporary sending, seedbed preparation only needs to be executed
eta.
Seeding
Argwian mood mix at the ran of % to per 1,000 sq ft or 10 Its per acedoll be used faseeding. The foumviog labkBsb
herbaceous, permanent sad mixture labeled "riparian teed mu"
Common NamegaentiBe Name%Rim cm c.asstaasia oryfodassoft RwhAaaa dffia,w Ialeatmgueaniaa
rlmdadrmrdOSwitchgassPamrsum sugana.501mawaadvawaia eoueborammusswamp SmmBawaHelimrlra
anguedjaheirMoe Pye WeadErpruoroam faldcnonS
GRASS FILTER SIREP
Grass;Blter strip will be in planted easement areas 4seceotto eaaammtIn- Gress filter strip will be planted within test
fact of h fenam allowfamainenma.
Pa.faa vmga.. (3W-lag-)
T,v.--docryloWer (E- gnawgma)
Aadropogoaag---& (big blue dm)
Sorghum-mamar Qwth•w glue)
Apply lomsrmeusing same seedbed preparmanand seeain gmdhaasestbel aemsend ma.Usethmeofftlaw
species with an mete ma 40% of my area of the thmezleadspecies.
L Recommended Native Plan Spain for Strom Restoration in North Carolina, Farm Hall, NC Stream Restoration
Immune, NCSU January 2001
L1AT STAKES
Live -kes asmbewalled-enpmed mean banks m bankfua ek-ionofine&. ,ed
stream. The ranks artmbe wtalkd atadedry of2m41is rules pvsgmrcywd The
specs m k rued fa live saki,gme liswd in the following Spain Cat. The Supe-.g
Erer.er,merva me np),tm rejatam'smka" tlw ? rotmas me ahoee memiondadtda.
The Comxta sal mplace rejected work m no addiwal-n to die
oatw.
Live stakes am, to be dmmmd(em fall orwiwe), and efther gathend billy or purchased teem a
moor-mi.1 supplier.
CdkeaionNre-li
• stokes-beevesdycut with side branches mmmegbut with bark in tat
(emure testae bank m, wiped dmugte mrar& preparation, es imuWam of the
sate).
• C-3. an m be collectdauvgasn (ea max1
One end must be au dangle for ime men into the soil, and the other must
• be cursquamfertamping.
• Cmin must be kept kcsh and moil prior m immllztia
Cuump must be prepared (wan 0.5 m 2-inch dimeterswct.d appmAmately
2 m 3 fed in erigh
Insisted
• aimll sakes the same dry they as prepared
Start the inaawtimaneaasmthe meam edwoA w the mnrmoupl• n.
• Cuing:muubeimulledriWdside upwith the buds poinLu* upward
Csmrilp mddbet=pdumhWound scright angles iothes1cpead
nglddormaom.
They are in be tamped nmh gmmd for apprmama lly 415 of mek angta
• CamuW this split esbecm,e"musheed' must be replaced
Stem rem be spaced atsuch en ?h- we l m 4aska par sL- yard
stem should be eWlled m aradom confgusmm m prevent gullies adpmaote a axe
.lad a ffat in the re.egened area
Species Iiat and Composition
M gaka Parremc paddom
a ky deg-d) 25
P dleadessm nod au
Solis n' bhekwiil.w' S0
S-b-a-.d,-s elder barry)
au
V3.nm„d- arm.w 0-25

rev UWE an11m (mmawn
Sawing enieswe
A• uch - .oral RW? /m.)
(s
5.1 w I n.,h
Fallae namn.gltlma at will teals ar wpfy 7.000 w/eoa waud
avmb.al an,aa. and Tao d/e• 10-10-10 auto..
add,
Apply 4,000 e/awa des. nd,a.a• by mtmw ar a need,
schism tan. A dies ft Madee set Neal, slimlo can be
used se . -Wh .m." teal.
hang q-tJ h -nat My Wen . dreg. rwtm. aw mss,
red. Ground - shed be .mrna l - a-ad sew- don, 30 ..sea dap lnaeamp
aeaddbe d any peso. d.saws
r
F C.
D'gaEwMN?,
r
duo
01? T
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCT10N
PREPARED IN 1W OMCE OR Well l: 11 404 PROJECT:
Kimley-Horn er 1 at UT TO SANDY CREEK
JK
waawsaa arm onus as mmm ell
and Associates, Inc. „TLE:
R
The docnent together ith the contest. and dealgw ,-led hnen, as i Mnt d waits e, 1" my for as :pack parpoea and dkeit
tar hla it in af?wad, Reuse d and mpr,Qar fallen- - real dcmnent :Itha,t .,tt_ anmedmtlen cod adptatd by KM•y-Hwn ed associates. P.O. BOX 33088 - RAI 31 K NORTH CAROLM 27638-3088 A NOTES DMP uwe® eaaa net a seams cost wawa
ac, .ion bet dMoul liohiity to Kkd•y-Horn -d A-.it•a Nc
Cspydght rmaay-Hon, and Associota Ina.. ma _ PFK*E- [phone] FAX- [phone] spy 11VA 011795019 Q
LIVE 8TH EARM

POOL
PoFFLE?
RIFFLE
?? ^`? POOL \
RIFFLE
NTS
NOTES:
- POND TRIBUTARY
RFFLE SECTION
STA 110+00 -113+57
TYPICAL SECTIONS ARE PROVIDED TO GIVE THE GENERAL
DIMENSIONS OF THE CHANNEL FINAL GRADING WILL GIVE
THE CHANNEL A MORE 'NATURAL' APPEARANCE AND ALLOW
A SMOOTH TRANSITION FROM EXISTING CHANNEL TO
NEW CHANNEL
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
x I (? n Qom-- AS RI
?OUIRFS,s ._. lA+?`
R i9X- SECTION
STA 10+00 - 28+86
10.4'
PoFFLE SECTION
STA 28+86 - 32+17
4.0' 37.0'
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-- I
OUTSIDE OF
MEANDER
BEND
POOL SECTION
STA 10+00 - 28+86
"NOTE:
POOL DEPTH SHOULD BE OVER DUG BY 1-2' TO ACCOUNT FOR SEDIMENT.
AS REWIRED AS REWIRED
` _
- - - -- AS REWIRED 4.0' 120' AS REWIRED
- _ ---- -
B0
__-____ -
7. 70
OR 7UT1ER 047 0 }? OR ?TTER Z y o
7:1
in 27 c 7:7 ?AT1FR
c ?
POND TRBUTARY
POOL SECTION
STA 100+00 - W+57
NOTE:
POOL DEPTH SHOULD BE OVER DUG BY 1' TO ACCOUNT FOR SEDIMENT.
--------r------------------------------
OUTSIDE OF
MEANDER
BEND
POOL SECTION
STA 28+86 - 32+17
'NOTE
POOL DEPTH SHOULD BE OVER DUG BY 1-2' TO ACCOUNT FOR SEDIMENT.
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCT N
PREPARED N THE OFFICE OR CLIENT: --
? PRDJEGT:
Kimley-Horn Nc-?
TITLE.
and Associates) 1 1 r N Inc. ur TO SANDY cc
?/p?/'? ?f?/? y???1
This el-enC toogetther ith the -Vts -a ae?s preeented. n.,M, as on ,?b-t or +.Wsk a hte?,aa wy ra me > r wrv,,. and aiht A? r,7GbTMF7 mss ?e
for In. 3idl'ho ei 'p IltbiityRle NiNe1-l meA =Z- mn aoo?-t without eriR- a,c+o?cau- a,w oa>ptou- by Ir W -x- me Associates, P.0 BOX 33088 - RALE MK NORTH CAROILM 27836-3088 Amain eet?n ne a lots .re
Copyist kwaley-Hon and Amoaiate; Tee. 2004 PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
SEAL- 011795019
75
AS REQUIRED
C% % %
110
FE8 ?
w
I AS REO'JIREC I
11 2005
BAOOEL V/ YdS DEEP FEB
OIWAlY1N OF CLASS L A EN
B WANDBRDl4M WM?"
L Tp Pr"-
BEMLI BOOAJq B?06K? B M' eanma ..MIBYI?
Y IAx i / .J w Vim' S?I?UTNg1?1?V°b ,'
*Tula
ER ROCK
BOULDERS
STREAM TLOM
n
n
Q
v
a
C
C
C
C"
C
3
-C
U
PLAN
. Slaw
VEGETATION
(]O' MIL)
Fl'N BANKFIILL
ammo LOS
t `` CHANNEL
r LOS (1/2 w
CHANNEL MD TERN N MAX)
BLIND, L,,
SECTION
LOG DIAMETER 15'+
LOG VANE 3TAUCTl1RE
Mrs
i
PLAN
V OF SECTION
STREAM FIDE Y WL ..?.
OS INC Y FMS® SIRVW
111 Mutt
OEEP
I7d
OF SWAM
ro r? YxAI?-- TOP VEW
T TOP OF BEB
STTRETIMAL
5WNW ccmilm SRiE ICIA9 q
SIDE (OR on
p?? I?
VflAJA77 SECW\ SIRAY GED 1'-B?' QMyTaF{ ??py
FRO VEW
TEMPORARY ROCK 8LT CHECK
HIS
YMIIOIMR W 10MORARY ROCK SILT ONECK
PER SEC" 1EID & IBM OF CDOT STANDARD
SPE1i1CAUM JAEA RY OWE
DIMIR
GEA
ONIE1Flf BEIp
ALlA11111V %SW GRADE
ROOT WAD NSrALLATKNI
NIB
J+X)OK VANE
NIS
PRELIMINARY
PREPARM W THE OMM OF CUNT NI PROJECT
Kimley-Horn NC-EEP
and Associates Inc. ur TO SAIDY CHEEK
PLY. «d IE`.9M GlL MIAMI RV: DEOOD Bf: PT1.E:
JIK
Thu a.o--t Mg.th- wlh M. OOIwOb -d aui7M Tr--tM h-n. w m i..t -t N NIMw, Y Fl-dtl aNT,- thy. yNF pupur A. Ent p ?® K
N rNm l .wpwO?Id, R-: c1 -a Maw. D U - me aRDNA-t .Ta -t wR - wmo m M -a Adw ..n Br KYFy NNA wa AwMUA P.O. BOX 33086 - RAl E3Cf (NORTH CAfiOLNA 27638 3088 ?/ UW rMP
Ye, IT ti. d.'wl IioOM?y tR KEx,y-x,- -a AAwaotn nG -- e:.,ac AwmAZ ETa .? SAC. ?-
:Wght Nm.r-N-I -a AIIx,d- Ix. ma PHOPE? (86) 677-2000 FAX' [phone]
Top BOULDERS IN THE
SNOAD w w l
TO 1/3 N-N
ENDER BOADE4
9WC NOT NAM CMS
9WLR IIOE
ROOD N THE VAR ARM
SNOUID ROT NAM WA
COVER IIPSIAE/N FILE OF
SINICTM NM FLIER FA
1

FTM SEMEN -HOOTS N A
A ORES. iNE TO' R THE IERT
J-NGEM sIADRD GE nALm BB
OF THE BASE O THE WSTNCA
SRMML NUHR OF
J-HOCKS IN SERIES MAY BE
FRNI-5
ORER UPSTREAM FACE OF
SBCICRIE NM BIER FANOC
B
AY*1
PLAN
Mrs
EBBING STRAY BOTTOM
STREAM NDM
35' MIN.
BOLXDERS
--- VANES
,Ir I RWALL FODIFA
SC" 14011- J _-.?..
uRE FAR n
sTAIRTAE WITH NR FILTER fANBL
SECTKIN
i
-A%t4'
SECI ]yJB `CMR LFSNEAM FACE OF
SIINCBRE NTH FILTER FANN:
FlLL W/ 7'x25' DEEP
ATION OF CUSS 1, CLASS 8 RIP RAP,
NATURAL COBBLE MATERIAL
\AND?
OVEN GEOTEXTILE TO BE USED
EEN BOULDERS AND B
AC(FlLL NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE
J
BOULDERS MIN
COVER UPSTREAM FACE O MIN DO'
BNNDULL WIDTH
(SEE TYPICALS)

.,, RID AND
PER
MULCH
NEW
CHANNEL NOTE
VEGETATION NOTE
AND SPECIFICATIONS
CN GOIR FIBER MATTING INSTALLED PER
MATTING MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS WIN
ND UVE STAIONG, PERMANENT AND
IC TEMPCURY SEEDING PER PLANS AND
NATURAL. CHANNEL SPECiICATKKii (TYPICAL 901H SKIES)
(NO MATTING) A
A7GN I M\
NTS
L
-
? ??
pLM
E
W-7S
1
SECTION B-B
=/DL (SEE PLAN HEW ABOVE)
T01+ GF RDnc
STREAM ROW 3' MN (Flow ROC() NONWOVEN
GEOTEXTIUE
r
BACwW1 MTH
B I'{O1EyOlE

T
CUSS I t
RP-RAP FOO
ER
ROCK
SRASN
/
PAD. ROCK
SHOULD BE
RACED TO PREVENT
TOP ROC( FROM
SANG FORWARD
SECTION A-A
SCOUR HOLE
PREDUG 1.0' DEEP
RIFFLE
COMI FIBER MATTING INSTALLED PER
MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS NTH
LIVE STAIWG, PERFANENT AND
TEMPORARY SEEDING PER PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS (TYPICAL BOTH SDES)
SEED AND MULCH ONLY
NO COIR FIBER MATTING
RIFFLE /
O Post1E
POOL „?.
PLAN
NTS
?6%od%%
-0p5
Fig 110-1
POOL
RIFFLE
MATIM WTALLATION CUOE
A-VANE
NTS
NOTE 6A4 B RIP RIP SHALL BE NAND RACED 10 FILL PRELIMINARY
V=S BETWEEN LARGER BOULDERS. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PREPARED N THE OFFICE OF.
PROJECT:
Kimley-Horn NC-EEP
UT TO SANDY CF EEK
'z JlK
Nv. ra ALWWaIA w.re mAW, eW oEt1ID n:
xrMa. htndAd oMy M tlN xpACiflc wupoa aM dint and Associates) Inc. .i4 ?'?f.,=F BEEF'.AWv ®oh
Th4 doomnt togeus dth BM cmcapI' ®d deign. wonted Isms, w m ind nt oy I.
Iw eNla n .es aced RnAe of o,d mwoP> rWlwce n u
and Amadat4 Me, 2001 M daxmnI .lust .Mtn wlncA adm nd mtptmtlon By Ic Iey= sM A d dMq P.O. BOX 33088 - RAIMOK NORTH CAHOLM 27638-3088 DE I /'11L17 /, ??,• Aro loeoc w a..sL war lNa
?G. soE eA .uaP emTey a d=F17 nd Aennmlu Mo. PHONE [phone] FAX (M) 677-2050 a
H Q19
Copyn¢t Xinley-Nsn SEAL "? ni?u??" ?•
011795019 6B j

NOTES
1. A STABILIZED ENTRANCE PAD OF R WASHED STONE OR RAIL ROAD BALLAST SHALL BE LOCATED WHERE
TRAFFIC WILL ENTER OR LEAVE THE CONSTRUCTION STE ONTO A PUBLIC STREET.
2 FILTER FABRIC OR COMPACTED CRUSER RUN STONE SHALL BE USED AS A BASE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
3. THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED N A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLAWING OF SEDIMENT
ONTO PUBLIC STREETS OR EXISTING PAVEMENT. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL
STILE AS CONDITIONS WARRANT AND REPAR OR CLEW W T O ANY MEASURES USED TO TRW SEDIMENT.
4. ANY SEDIMENT SPILLED. DROPPED. WASHED. OR TRACKED ONTO PUBLIC STREETS MUST BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY.
S WHEN APPROPRIATE WHEELS MUST BE CLEANED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT PRIOR TO ENTERING A PUBLIC STREET. THEN
.111. IS REWIRED , IT SHALL BE GONE IN AN AREA STAB. WITH CRUSHED STONE WIICN GRAINS INTO AN
APPROVED SEDIMENT BASIN SEE STD. N0. 76119.
S MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS PER SECTION 6.06 OF NCOENL'S EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING
AND DESIGN MANUAL
Max SfAFFT
"'{ ?:• Tf#lMA110R FANG
1"
MWOt P WAWfD SIQE
w
TEMPORARY CONgnaxam
XTs
Xis
STMDAIlp 79PORNi1Y SLT FENCE
m
a
M
all
,-i
CD
O
O
N
O
M
A`•I
C11
J
M
U
n
i
(7
0
m
ri
O
Ln
rn
r-1
O
c
a
i
Y MAA
VNWABIF M O'KCRO BY THE ENGe?ffA
W T 0 W
LeE WINS
ROL:
•4N aT FDrtF NAT IRON DRA MIE MCA
ORS NOTE 1/<WE MO W"N
AIENS OF MNOD,MTEO FLAN
a.< rrc lru, < icruc ucawe ai?mNl
w, R2-Rn w
WTDaOIAW
?. /X Y11ES
?En????? ? aAa
fl
STEEL PW
WNWII WILE I-
aT FDKC FANG
Nl 2XFE
• M IEP/rt RE aT
Faa FAILURES.
Ns dT OSsM
G
va AxawW rONaT
' uAx iTNEE S FROTECMRF
Glp SAWN
r MN CWMIR
IaR WWrt
`AKIgp 9mi u
SIDE 41EW
• MAINTENANCE PER SECTION 6.62 OF NCDENR EROSION AND
SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL
W8
svl%,Vg
DEB 1 ? 2905
NO. 57 STONE COVERED VAIN WITH FL1FA FABRI H A D COVERED RUN ONE
ON n I I
DRU9 N STONE J \ `?Vp
ON APPROACH
IAN
FLIER FABRIC COVER FEED MTN
CRUSH AND RUN 5101E
ON APPROACH 1- CABLE
\ POST 1 'nl
CUSS A RRRAP
PRECAST CONCRETE BOX CULVERT
WITH SLAB TOR
r CLASS A RRRW
'ABLE
FENCE M BE INSTALLED
BY OTHERS (MRCS)
CLASS A RRRAP
PRECAST CONCRETE
STABBOX CULVERT WITH
TOP
FENCE TO BE INSTALLED
BY OTHERS (N CS)
12• BELOW
:AM BED
SECTION
CATTLE CROSSM
xTs
NOTE: DIMENSIONS D & W VARY WITH LOCATION.
SEE PLANS FOR SZE SPECIFICATIONS
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PREPARED N THE OFFICE OF Laim I: •PPwuuH, PRO.ECL-
Mal
Kimley-Horner UT TO SANDY cFEEc
Tae r;
and Associates, Inc. Time
rTh.,-a mnta?WIaytRM eNWhe cmleom B premmtedchens, w - WeSTen-t f SN'Aca a Minded Ndy Nor NN dNel ) n be " cR d krd4m thM doaenMt ,th-t itt- mlhNlmUm end eemLeDN+ P.O. BOX 33088 RMMGK NORTH CAROLNA 27838-3088 DG I A? b. WHhau liobiilt-F1t Korey-H,n and Aaoa.ta I- 2Dw PHONE (9M) 677-2000 FAX [phone] ''•,,? ? ? ,? m? ?? ? l I a? ?
SFAI: 011795019

z
PLAN
PAP
o AROUND
HOSE
ter`,
Y' q
4 SY FILTER FABRIC
SECTION A-A
ENERGY DOWATOR FOR PUMP AROUND HOSE
(IF CLEAN WATER
NTS
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
(SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS)
DEWATERING PUMP
- IMPERVIOUS OUT
(SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROWSONS)
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TYPICAL WORK AREA
1. INSTALL SPECIAL STILLING BASIN(S)..
2 INSTALL UPSTREAM PUMP AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE
3. PLACE UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4. PLACE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING
APPARATUS. DEWATER ENTRAPPED AREA AREA TO BE DEWATERED SHALL
BE EQUAL TO ONE DAYS WORK.
5. PERFORM STREAM RESTORATION WORK IN ACCORDANCE NTH THE PLANS.
6. EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE REMOVAL
OF IMPERVIOUS DIKES. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS. AND
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE. (DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKES FIRST).
7. ALL GRADING AND STABILIZATION MUST BE COMPLETED IN ONE DAY WITHIN
THE PUMP AROUND AREAS BETWEEN THE IMPERVIOUS DIKES.
THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET ONLY SHOW THE
UPPER AND LOWER EXTENT OF WORK FOR EACH STREAM SEGMENT. THE
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING THE LOCATION
OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE(S) FOR EACH DAYS WORK.
B. REL40VE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN(S) AND BACKFILL STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA
WITH SEED AND MULCH.
NOTES:
1) ALL EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ONLY DRY OR ISOLATED
SECTIONS OF CHANNEL
2) IMPERVIOUS DIKES ARE TO BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK FROM
STREAM FLOW WHEN NECESSARY.
3) ALL GRADED AREAS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS.
4) MAINTENANCE OF STREAM FLOW OPERATIONS SHALL BE INCIDENTAL
TO THE WORK. THIS INCLUDES POLYETHYLENE
SHEETING, DIVERSION PIPES, PUMPS AND HOSES.
5) PUMPS AND HOSES SHALL BE OF SUFFICICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER
THE WORK AREA
SPECIAL STILLING BASH
F FIILSTING lE1iRAW
I'?- 15.0 -10.0 R. 7MM)OF PUP ARpAq R+UYPIDE
FLIER FABRIC BAN( FEB 1 7 2005
SPECI?LL STUNG BASH EXAMPLE OF FUME-AROUND OPERATION
WITH ROCK PAD VOLVO NO
NTS
NOTE PROMOE STABILIZED OUTLET TO SIREAMBANK
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF CLIETIT: nuu,,, PROJECT.
Kimley-Horn NC-EEF ;ofEfj
- UT TO SANDY CFEEBC
?x pR? and Associates Inc. „TLE
Th: dad t tope0i- "th M. -pta and deignpPI prgented xM dhrwl.
M m - xaWmnt d ?'Ma 1- xlwded aNy ra Ih. Pocik papaw an d d dint ) D?An [S '• ?I I ILfE''2S IDim R
ror .nla R .- ? R-- or P g" fWt_-t tIth.t dtt. oulnWlm1-m .M adaptaBm PT KMe?Hom Pa Ad dotq P.O. BOX 33088 - 1IL ' t
xc. >tioIL be .mpal°P powlcy m KLPIey-N,P ma Arta RK.?'l NORTH CAROLINA 27838-3088 '••,t4p B, wT?,•?'J
DIMP
..aIL Jar I.IIa
ATaao mma na a 011795
wp7d t Kt-14- one A-.ta Ma, ma PROW- (90) 677-2000 FAX, [phone]
019
g1L "
WRW
A SPEPA SOLIING BASIN
(SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROWSONS)
ULUE A STABKIZFD OURET NSLAO ff
A SPEGIAL STILLING BASN IF PUMPING
CLEAN WATER
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
(SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROWSONS)
r
%
i!I
585
l A
585/?
!r / ) N/ a : I t l 1 1 ? I I I 1.1 1? \ ? f; ; r ? / ? ? 1 ?t L 1 ! 1 ? ?
? t 1 I ,
i i /r r ? ? 1 I I I i t 1 I ? I I? Jnl t? \ ' ) I
r t I l I l \ ,\ \'
' ? a i I I I t I t I 1 1 I? k 1 t `
I h 1 1 1 vl
f it
1 A' i t 1 I I I I I 1 i \
I i f ? t I! i y 1 I 1? \ ' \ II
I ? ? I a a I. a 1 1? I I 'I i??? , t I 1 ,
I a ? I M1 1 1 1 I I I I I
;' ? ^ I .? RP I I I? 1 1 1 I I I ? .
FDRDLIZEO . Stot • 1 1 i ! I I \ I
I I
I 1 1 '.
pn ? 1 I I I ?
590
It I
i ?
/ I' a a i a \
it ? ? ; hee ?
`eo ' a
BEGIN o < <? t 18?? ?? -?
PROJECT -
?g...... 41
/ It Cl ? f-f3+00 j ?--
i ! ?SgC x ` X575
O - y Rr • Ate, R[?S "tph `<39 1/,
r c, ,_ P r (? q
A?l
I / a
a N
N ENERGY l AIN BRANCI??
W
D ATE FU)
e \
ni CLASS / Sgs `vy
RIP-RAP i
N N
Irfi/p - I
x
FEB 17 2005 ?<
20' GATED
3 S L'\\ ` , J r l CATTLE DEAR • WATER pUALITY?
_q CROSSING
LESBEdQ; YYE4MAlgS1CXMMERBR40'
\ 1
g ROCK CROSS VANE ®CHANNEL BLOCKi GRAPffiC SCALE
a + PROPOSED WETLAND QYUNCEIIpIf I
I 0 / I I ! / 30 0 6 A
W Nn
A-VANE PROPOSED WETLAND RUTORATNN
® PROPOSED WETLAND CREATION /
y YNDDK WANE ------ EJOSTNG LANOR CONTOUR ; / / (¦ 11? )
!N -, _._ E1O511NG YA.IOR CONTOUR W (n I / /
BOULDER CLUSTER PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
TREE REMOVAL -f FENCED EASEMENT
Q PROPOSED CREEK 41
two -
ROCT SILT CHECK ROOT WAD
PRELIMINARY
OT / NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
14 IIII? EOG VANE V r %
C)
PREPARED N THE OMCE OF. CLIENT:
1-4
Kimley-Horn NC-?
?
5 Ur TO SANDY CFEEK
RV. Ns: RE\®nk ERR mAYN BY, p(LO? IY.
and Associates, Inc. ,,,LE
C& 1hN Eeamnt, IageMr dN Wr rncgh and ddgN 4z: MS.hrMl m m iahumrt of ?nIR M FlrM?d EDIT Ivyr.quilk pupo- and dirt
s .Me R R mrepr mr t .Rnmt it? m MHmtlm rM ?mem N Nm.r HER ma A-Wt- ?
P.O. BOX 33088 PLAN AmoNm owc na s..w u?.
F t K 2004 PE (919) 671 NORTH CAI O 27838
C.pyiONr-Hrn_ -d A-t- 1- FAX- (98) SEAL• 011795019
585': G/
%
\ \ / STABILIZED
? /._ E r FORD Z20' GATED
t
? PROPERTY UNE CATTLE C,
r CROSSING t/ 1
? 8 // ry0x -~i ?/ r t t? r
? t
FjJ \
2
? / / ^\ 23+00
t \ ? p0? 1
? I 19+00 _ - \- r
• W
? W
l 575\ ' ` •? ' / IN
w
1
LLJ
? ? ` ro\ ,'
W
?5 Sm a \ I :3
? p` 1 I /
<Sl
Ito,
%
1
1 /
tx /
0 / -
m 1 / - 1
o ? /
N \ )? ? II ? / M
%
ul? B117
a
VA ONO,
LEGEND %
? /o
RDGx aExs VANE ® aANNa aoa
g i-NDON VANE PROPOSED WETLAND ENHANCENEHT / -(
PROPOSED \
TI ? J `i.J I ' GRAPHIC
PROPOSED NE SCALE
® RAND CREATION
CLI •S? BOULDER CLUSTER ------ E1GSTNG W40R CONTOUR \ !58 l s o o z •
LJ - - E=TNG MAJOR cONTODR /
/ (Q? r? I
TREE IEEYOVK PR
PROPOSED OPOSED MA-NOR
JOR CONTOUR
t 1
N ROCIE SILT CHECK -E- FENCED FASEG41i -
--? t. PROPOSED CREEK
?ZROOT WAD ?? LOG VANE r 1
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
0
N
ON1 PREPARED IN THE OMCE OF. CUENT, Kimley-Horn NC-? PRO?E?T.
CD
UT TO SANDY C EEK
a£-°rm and Associates Inc.
lliP dae,mm4 togeMr .iM Ne ceneeph and dedgm punted heeii, m m neWmnl of n
rice, ntnded Wy h tlN apec?fic puryme ma dint ) SUE PLAN ,1
M m a °u"a° ° N°Rt° D ?Pre°"A pia U? ° aoo nit . uat . . aumaaP ma ma°tm ey E ay Hem ,Pa Amite; PA. BOX 37088 - RAL9C?1 NORTH CAPIMM 27838-3068 r L Amaa owo xn a..w NAa
CePygm Kmiey-Ham and A-i tee m-, 2OD4 PHOrEX (96) 877-2000 FAX' [phone] gy 011795019
G
a
0
a
a
C
C
N
C
M
.ti
.1
C
E"
f
f

PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF. CLIENT: PROJECT,
Kimley-Horn NC-E *
and Associates, Inc. nTu- UT TO SANDY CREEK
m x. u.aax. wre ww er nm® er.
Ih6 dawnml, togeMer wU Ne emtepb and dagn arm-led_ h= m m hetnanml of eerJce, a il:.d only fa the yacif pugme and dimt
w ht t .m R e o and mpapr efmro m the dean"mt r,th-t •Rtm auth.-b n me m pmr? ny Kme Nf ma ?fdotm, PA. BOX 33088 - HALB(lFi NO" CAPPOUNA 27x35-3088 ^,u?
td a .final bmi m Kme-Nem and Aaoaata E?? _ AnYafo lvma na use lfrx 'oar ?uu SffE FILM
f n tmf PHOtE (91D) 677-2000 FAX (918) 877
?PrN wa.y Ham ono arAem am,t
x. sh-2050 _ 011795719 j
H,Giwy Aq uopugd
'und 9-ft oW'N AM
:18 xxnq 1Y0
hpR
Z.
sp pi

O
F+
r
oo+
sz as+az ao+az os+cz oa+rz as+zz o0 C0
G
I. L
i
+ sss ?
--------------
-?
1- -- z9s u:l
l t E , O
O
m n m ?_^ g
?InOU mpD ?? ?9
°m a m< N <N' IV
VD } N? W
> u
mm 3
-r-+? --
os+ZL w+ZL 09+1t OO+u 09-01 OO+Ot
1
M PD 0 p o
c 0 I{
1
......6.._.... ? ......... ...... ...? ?i